* Kelly Chapter (in particular, The politics of knowledge)
* Parkay & Hass's social context article
* The last two chapters of New Literacies (Digital Epistemologies & New Ways of Knowing)
* The Oliva article (curriculum vs instruction)
Thomas Robert Malthus's Principle of Population: "The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction; and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague, advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and tens of thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world. "
Other readings:
Computers as Mindtools (Johnassen)
The Medium is the Massage (McLuhan)
Digital Immigrants vs Digital Natives (Prensky)
The additional comments from Dr. NJB:
1. The Glatthorn article on curriculum alignment, Curriculum Alignment Revisited , is a good article because it provides a clear process for planning and or improving the curriculum for any course or discipline area. It draws very much on constructivist principles. However, at the end Glatthorn suggests several other alignment possibilities and some of those would be more likely to be employed by other theoretical perspectives
2. Because you have an affinity for Glatthorn, who bases most of his work on constructivism, I'd suggest that you thoroughly familiarize yourself with the constructivist approach. No problem, as it is nicely summarized in Joseph's "Constructing Understanding" chapter. Keep in mind, however, that Joseph and her co-authors have basically done a lit review in this book. While it's fine to reference them a little bit, it's better to be able to talk about the scholars they have cited and, of course, any other constructivist scholarship (as I believe Jonassen's work is- the Computer as Mind Tool author that you've mentioned).
3. Of course, as a scholar you need to be able to approach any curriculum project from more than one orientation or "theoretical perspective" (more oft-used terms than "curriculum culture') While you should know some basics of the various perspectives, you don't need to know everything about all of them (e.g., Joseph's six or Kliebard's four), but you should be able to use at least a couple more (in addition to constructivism) to analyze curriculum plans/processes. By the way, as you may have noticed in our Curriculum Theory class, the names of Kliebard's strands are more commonly used than are Joseph's. (e.g., Apple is referred to as a Social Reconstructionist)
4. Remember - you don't have to show that you know everything there is to know about curriculum - just that you are familiar with major scholars in the field and that you can synthesize and apply the knowledge you have gained from your studies. For your curriculum question, it's is fine to synthesize knowledge from your foundations and technology tracks with your curriculum knowledge, as long as you don't do that to the extent that you neglect curriculum scholarship. (In fact some theorists are to be found in more than one track, like Michael Apple)
Dr. Brooks
No comments:
Post a Comment