The context of our current curriculum condition,

From historical perspectives, evolutionary theory had a strong impact on the curriculum reconstruction. The past interpretations of the implications of evolution for an industrial society by Spencer, Sumner, Ward, and Dewey indicate that significant social change may “give rise to multiple interpretations of social and educational policy.” The turn of the 20th century has seen 3 streams of curricular reform: a) Social-efficiency reform, which considers education as social predestination; b) Activity-curriculum reform, which focuses on the process of learning (i.e. the idea of “leaning how to learn”); c) Social reconstructionism, which advocates the interaction between curriculum and general social political, and economic conditions. Each of these theories developed against the backdrop of a humanist approach to knowledge that ignored a consideration of ideology and power relations.

In the past decades curriculum reforms moved towards 3 directions: a) excellence movement which link education and the economy by setting goals and demanding more academics in the K-12 curriculum; b) Restructuring schools to foster collaborative learning; c) systemic reform with an emphasis on quantitative/measurable results of the students’ performance. However, policies of accountability contradict with teacher education in terms of their different focused outcomes. This leads to the choice of two distinct approaches to teaching – the traditional didactic approach or the inquiry approach.

While the notion that education is the key to a nation’s or an individual’s economic security became a belief stronger than the evidence, Gerald Bracey sarcastically attacks this voice trumpeted in "A Nation at Risk", despite all of the hype and support it has received over the last 2 decades. The major critique fell on the connection between education and competitiveness which is defined by Bracey as a false proposition.

However, the Business Roundtable holds a strong belief that all students can and must learn higher levels to be prepared for success in school as well as in the workplace. Transforming Education Policy, which serves as an assessment of the past school reform progress, examines the achievements gained as well as the lessons learned from the past 10 years. Candidly, it points out the disproportionate transforming development on different dimensions and shows the backlash in the transformation practice.

Readings

Kliebard, H. M. (1998). The effort to reconstruct the modern American curriculum. In L. E. Beyer, & M. W. Apple The curriculum: Problems, politics, and possibilities. (2nd Ed.). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

McNeil, J. S. (2003). Curriculum: The teacher's initiatives (3rd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Bracey, G. W. (2003, April). April foolishness: The 20th anniversary of A Nation at Risk. Phi Delta Kappa, 84 (8), 616-621.

The Business Roundtable. (1999, June). Transforming education policy: Assessing 10 years of progress in the states.