Curriculum vs Instruction (2) Relationships

5. Relationships between curriculum & instruction
Curriculum - what (that which is taught); a program, a plan, content, and learning experiences
Instruction - how (the means used to teach the above); methods, the teaching act, implementation, and presentation

• Models of the curri.-ins. relationship
  
  • Dualistic model: separated; a gulf between classroom practice and the master plan. The planner and instructors ignore each other - bad
    
  • Interlocking model: integrated; but different focus/priorities - good
    
  • Concentric model: hierarchical; one is superordinate while the other is subordinate - bad
    
  • Cyclical model: continuous adaptations and improvements of both entities; instructional decisions are made after curricular decisions, which in tern are modified after instructional decisions are implemented and evaluated - very good
    
• Common beliefs - curri. & ins.
  
  • are related but different
  • are interlocking & interdependent
  • may be studied and analyzed as separate entities but cannot function in mutual isolation

6. Curriculum as a discipline

• The characteristics of a dicipline
  
  • Principles: an organized set of theoretical constructs or principles; can be generalized and applied in more than one situation; Curr. itself is a construct or concept, a verbalization of an extremely complex idea or set of ideas
    
  • Knowledge and skills
    
    • Selection of content: sociology, psychology, subject areas
    • Organization/administration: organizational theory, management
    • Curr. development: supervision, systems theory, technology, communication theory
    • Child-centered: psychology and biology (learning, growth, development), philosophy (progressivism), sociology
    • Essentialist curr.: philosophy, psychology, sociology, the academic disciplines
    • Others: cooperative learning, computer literacy, character education
    • "a curr. changes only when the people affected have changed": social psychology (e.g., Western Electric research; the Hawthorne Effect)
    • Cyclical interaction: curr. - subject areas; learning theories; admin. & supervisory techniques; philosophical positions
  • Theoreticians and practitioners: planners, consultants, coordinators, directors, professors of curriculum - curriculum worker/specialist
    e.g. core curriculum concept from the 1930s & 1940s - the adolescent-needs base followed in some core prog. came from student-centered, progressive learning theories, as did the problem-solving approach used in instruction
    

7. Curriculum practitioners (workers in the curr.-ins. continuum)

• Curriculum specialists: must be a philosopher, psychologist, sociologist, human relations expert, theoretician, historian, scholar in one or more disciplines, evaluator, researcher, instructor, systems analyst, technology expert
  
• Teachers
• Supervisors: works in three domains
  
  • instructional development
  • curriculum development
  • staff (teacher) development
    
• Role variations: no firm lines
  

8. Summary

Curriculum vs Instruction (1) Definitions

Oliva, P. F. (2004). Developing the curriculum (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Part I. The curriculum: Theoretical dimensions

Chapter 1. Curriculum and instruction defined

1. Conceptions of curriculum
A discipline of study and a field of practice, elusive, esoteric, lacking clean boundaries, not action-oriented (like supervision, administration, instruction). Not a real, total, tangible, visible entity.

2. Certification & curriculum
There is not a certifiable field labeled curriculum (seems that curr. can't exist by itself. It has to be with a subject area or one of more fields)

3. Interpretations of curriculum
A "field of utter confusion" (Grumet, 1988). Can be conceived in a narrow way (as subjects taught) or in a broad way (as all the experiences of learners, both in school and out, directed by school).

• "...that series of things which children and youth must do and experience by way of developing abilities to do the things well that make up the affairs of adult life; and to be in all respects what adults should be. " (Bobbit, 1918)
• "all the experiences children have under the guidance of teachers." (Caswell & Campbell, 1935)
• "...a plan for providing sets of learning opportunities for persons to be educated." (Saylor, Alexander, & Lewis, 1981)
• "...a plan for learning." (Taba, 1962) - it contains
  
  • a statement of aims and of specific objectives
  • selection and organization of content
  • patterns of learning and teaching
  • a programs of evalution
    
• "...the formal and informal content and progress by which learners gain knowledge and understanding, develop skills, and alter attitudes, appreciations, and value under the auspices of that school." (Doll, 1996)
• "...that reconstruction of knowledge and experience that enables the learner to grow in exercising intelligent control of subsequent knowledge and experience." (Taner & Taner, 1995)
• Oliver's (1977) four basic elements
  
  • The program of studies
  • The program of experiences
  • The program of services
  • The hidden curriculum (school values, teacher emphases, enthusiasm, physical & social climate, etc)
    
• Gagne's (1967) four elements
  
  • Subject matter (content)
  • The statement of ends (terminal objectives)
  • Sequencing of content
  • Preassessment of entry skills required of students
    
• a "structured series of intended learning outcomes." "the output of a 'curriculum development system' and as an input into an 'instructional system'." (Johnson, 1967)
• "If we are to achieve equally, we must broaden our conception to include the entire culture of the school - not just subject matter content." (Gay, 1990)
• "what is taught to students, both intended and unintended information, skills, and attitudes." (Sowell, 1996)
• "an assemblage of competing doctrines and practices." (Kliebard, 1998)
• "a desired goal or set of values that can be activated through a development process culminating in experiences for students." (Wiles & Bondi, 2002)
• "a course of life" led by teachers as curriculum makers (Clandinin & Connelly, 1992)
• "Curriculum understood as symbolic representation refers to those institutional and discursive practices, structures, images, and experiences that can be identified and analyzed in various ways, i.e., politically, racially, autobiographically, phenomenologically, theologically, internationally, and in terms of gender and deconstruction." (Pinar, Reynolds, Slattery, & Taubman, 1996)

4. Definitions by purposes, contexts and strategies

• Purposes: a statement of what the curriculum is meant to achieve does little to help us sharpen a definition of what curriculum is
• Contexts:
  
  • Essentialistic: transmit the cultural heritage, prepare pupils for the future
  • Progressive: child-centered, the development of the individual learner
  • Reconstructionist: educate youth to solve social problems and change society for better
  • Feminist: curriculum as a "project of transcendence, our attempt while immersed in biology and ideology to transcend biology and ideology." (Grumet, 1988)
    
• Strategies: misconceptions when the theorist equates curriculum with instructional strategies, for example --
  
  • the curriculum as a problem-sovling process: define curriculum in terms of an instructional process (problem-solving techniques, the scientific methods, or reflective thinking
  • the curriculum as group living: define curriculum around ins. techniques providing opportunities for group living
  • the curriculum as individualized learning/programmed ins. - specifications of systems by which learners encounter curricular content through the process of ins.

Overall, neither purpose, context, nor strategy provides a clear basis for defining curriculum.
Curriculum - ends
Instruction - means

Knowledge vs information

For questions or discussion over the March 22 presentation. Possibilities: Did the presentation make you think about anything you hadn't thought about before? What is its significance now that we live in a "knowledge society" or, as some put it, the "information age"? Is there a difference between "knowledge" and "information"?

Karen:
Did the presentation make you think about anything you hadn't thought about before? The day after the presentation, I realized that there were connections to what we've been discussing about curriculum theory in class. The true journalism is losing it's "boots to the ground" style of reporting and the authentic, researched news is losing out to paparazzi-style news and quick bits. Reporters and sources are being questioned and what they report or what information they give is being- or not-critiqued. I feel curriculum theory has taken the same route, as we've discussed, where other disciplines have taken over what theorists have long researched and it seems as though there are several "overnight theorists" with interests in curriculum areas like classroom management, diversity issues, technology and formats for curriculum. Even companies for curriculum formats and training seem to be more well-known than the theorists themselves. In both cases, I hope this will change for future success in each area.What is its significance now that we live in a "knowledge society" or "information age"? Is there a difference between "knowledge" and "information"? I feel like information is all around and is difficult to organize and sift thorugh now with the Internet and quick news running across the bottom of the TV screen or at the end of an hour on the radio. Even elevators and digital billboards offer information. Knowledge is different in that what information we take in and keep, we then try to use it, apply it and evaluate it. After all of that, I then think it is knowledge. Anyone can repeat information, but not all are knowledgeable. In the NewsWars presentation, I noticed the desire, from the panel, to see true knowledgeable reporting applied to news outlets as opposed to the following of sources to quick print. I really enjoyed the lady in NY and, of course, our local experts.

Wei:
Karen raised a good question of the significance about "knowledge society" or "information age." It's not only a question for the present, but also a question for the future.
First, I'd like to share my point of view on the difference between knowledge and information. Having been working with media for many years, I see information as a set of data that answers questions of "who," "where," "when," and "what." However, knowledge refers to application of information as it more likely answers questions of "how" and "why." For instance, Wei Ma, a former TV reporter from a communist country, was not surprised at all by the information of government manipulating the media because he has certain knowledge of why and how it happens. Politicians always want to control the media because they have the knowledge that information can be filtered and disseminated by the power of mass media and then effectively influence the public opinion, which is also a kind of knowledge, in a directed or channelled way.
From a taxonomic perspective, knowledge holds a higher standing than information. Information carries knowledge and knowledge processes information. I used to see a monument in Alberquerque, New Mexico, saying "in memory of the heroes who bravely fought the savages." I read similar information when I visited the historical Alamo in San Antonio, Texas yesterday. These information, obviously, delivered biased and racist knowledge. However, it is not as clear when the political and corporate value get involved. It raised a sharp question for "knowledge society" and "information age" -- if information is manipulated by politicians and industrial monopolies, even in this democratic system of the United States, can we still say we live in a "knowledge society?" When the knowledge of the privileged is becoming hegemonic and information becoming their tools and propaganda, "knowledge society" is "moribund." Tragically, the public are not even aware of that. And for those who are, it seems there's not much they can do to change the status quo. Well, we can still say we live in an "information age," which only means people will snack on with a sea of information produced by media, in particular, those who own them. And unfortunately, that's the nutrition for generations to come.
As "teaching is essentially social, moral, and political," it's high time for us to rethink how education and curriculum can serve as a critical role in constructing a real free and democratic "knowledge society." If the illness of today's "knowledge society" is that "we do not have too much intellect and too little soul, but too little intellect in matters of soul," it is educators and media's responsibility to work things out before the information age leads us towards a more chaotic future.

Conceptualizing curriculum and understanding curriculum as culture

The contemporary notion of curriculum lacks a manner of critical inquiry due to its narrow understanding. In an effort to explore curricular meaning with multiple means of theories, frameworks, and images, Joseph et al. bring forward six distinctive classroom cultures that carry unique hopes, visions, challenges, and faults. They are named a) Training for Work and Survival; b) Connecting to the Canon; c) Developing Self and Spirit; d) Constructing Understanding; e) Deliberating Democracy; f) Confronting the Dominant Order.

To understand curriculum as culture, first we need to review multiple curricular conceptualization as grounds, such as Eisner’s conception of “three curricula that all schools teach” (explicit, implicit and null curriculum) and Cuban’s four categories of official, taught, learned and tested curriculum. These diverse meanings help us develop lenses to see curriculum as “multiple layers of phenomena.”

Second, we need to have an essential grasp of the nature of culture thus to become aware of it. Culture can be interpreted as sense-making, symbols, rituals, or “a continuing dialogue that revolves around pivotal areas of concern in a given community.” Because it appears as normal and natural as usual life, we usually are unaware of the culture that surrounds us. So effective ways to see our culture is to experience culture shock by living in another culture and/or to systematically analyze how social activities are interrelated in various ways.

When we apply the above analytical process and cultural lens on curriculum, we learn to see classrooms and schools as cultures – “a series of interwoven dynamics.” The authors also provide a very helpful framework for understanding cultures of curriculum, which consists of essential variables and questions about history, students, teachers, content, context, planning, and evaluation. Eager to know “how educators try to put visions into practice” within a cultural framework, I look forward to reading the rest of the book.

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.

Curriculum design

After the standard-based curriculum has been created, the assessment-based units will need to be developed. The purpose is to prepare students for and engage them in performance assessments so that they might achieve authentic learning. Glatthorn provided a 4-step unit planning process, among which I think that step 2 is the most important one. Analyzing the performance task with task analysis, which is more systematic, and/or knowledge analysis, which is more specific, helps facilitate authentic learning.

Backward design stemmed from the philosophy that “to begin with the end in mind means to start with a clear understanding of your destination … so that you better understand where you are now so that the steps you take are always in the right direction.” It advocates the operationalization of the goals or standards in terms of assessment evidence at the beginning of unit planning, which leads to better student performance. An example of the application of this design in a 5th grade class vividly illustrated the 3-stage process: 1) identify desired results by setting intelligent priorities (3 knowledge categories), 2) determine acceptable evidence of understanding through a variety of formal and informal assessment, and 3) plan learning experiences and instruction (a means to an end).

By collecting data about the operational curriculum in a school and in a district, curriculum mapping provides an active tool to give people better access to the truth about what’s happening in classrooms. Today many curriculums need to change in terms of their outdated content and standards in areas such as social studies, science, math and language arts. The great potential to help educators reexamine and renegotiate content standards with immediate and powerful control makes curriculum mapping an ideal tool to create a timely curriculum.

Curriculum alignment is like a two-edged sword – it can be used to damage or to strengthen the curriculum. In order to construct a learning-centered curriculum, educators will need to align the written, the taught, and the tested curricula with good judgment and professionalism. Based on the understanding of the interactions of the 8 curriculum types, alignments of the most important types, especially the taught/learned alignment, should be given priorities in consideration.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1999, Fall). Curriculum alignment revisited. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 15 (1), 26-34.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Perkins-Gough, D. (2003, December). Creating a timely curriculum: A conversation with Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Educational Leadership, 61 (4).

Glatthorn, A. A. (?). Using assessment driven instruction. ?

Standards

The readings for this week delineated a holistic picture of the standards and assessment for American education.

First, I was astounded by “a sea of standards” in this nation – 200 separate standards with 3,093 benchmarks (McREL, 1998) – way too many standards became a growing problem facing American educators. Apparently, there are two primary options for educators to meet the requirements of the various standards documents— increase the amount of instructional time or decrease the number of standards that must be addressed.

Speaking of decreasing the number, a key to narrowing the focus of standards and thereby adding value to them is to develop power standards that feature endurance, leverage, and readiness for the next level of learning. These three criteria enable power standards to give students skills or knowledge that have broad applicability and remains with them long, and help them get ready for the next learning level. Moreover, as perfect curriculum coverage never happens, power standards help educators to choose coverage by default or by design wisely. In order to establish power standards, the leaders must make time for teachers to collaborate within and among grade levels to identify these standards, and create a framework that includes the most important standards along with clear definitions which encourage and value teacher creativity.

When standards are established, the performance task and assessment should be developed in the following process— Reflect about the students and the standard, consider the purposes of the assessment, brainstorm the performance tasks that might be used then make a preliminary evaluation of the result, develop a scenario for the performance task and the assessment-driven instruction, evaluate the first draft of the performance task and revise accordingly, develop criteria and rubrics for evaluating student performance, systematize all these decisions using a standard format, and finally, have the materials evaluated by other professionals and other students.

I also noticed that one important requirement for educators to accomplish the evaluating task is a thorough understanding of the three key terms—Criteria, standard, and rubric. Based on this understanding, educators develop criteria and rubrics that facilitate quality student performance and valid evaluation process.

Readings:

Marzano, R. J., & Kendal, J. S. (1998). Awash in a sea of standards. McREL.

Reeves, D. R. (2002). The leader's guide to standards. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Multiculturalism and diversity in curriculum development

Today’s educators are responsible for providing all students with a quality, equitable education. This task has become more challenging as the cultural and demographic diversity continues to grow.

In order for education to be preparation for life in multicultural America, individuals must be educated on three levels: as members of the larger society, as members of a particular culture group, and as individual free to explore their potentialities beyond any group membership (Haberman & Post, 1994, p. 108). Each of these three levels, however, could be exclusive to one another when in the extreme.

In order to avoid the negative effect of the learning levels divide and let individual needs interface with various culture groups and societal demands, educators may need to make school curricula more accurately reflect our cultural diversity by understanding multiculturalism as: (a) a culture war; (b) personal values, human differences, and life choices; (c) a nation of diverse culture groups; (d) social justice and equity; (e) a process of making teaching and learning more relevant; (f) total school climate; (g) worldwide environment cooperation; and (h) learning to compete in a worldwide economy (Haberman & Post, 1994).

In terms of developing a quality curriculum at the school level, the following elements such as cultural, leadership, time, technical and material support for curriculum work; evaluation functions; and school goals and vision, are playing pivotal roles (Glatthorn, 1994, pp. 67-69). With all the support required, an ideal environment is created for the planners to start the curriculum work. When evaluating a program of studies, variables such as “goal-oriented”, “balanced”, “integrated”, “skills-reinforced”, “open-ended” and “responsive” should be taken into account as criteria (pp. 74-84).

Developing the school’s vision and goals provides a unifying focus for the faculty and gives a clear sense of direction for curriculum work. Generally speaking, a quality curriculum should be meaningful, technological, socially responsible, multicultural, reflective, holistic, global, open-ended, and outcomes based (Glatthorn, 2000, p. 50). Only when the educational goals are identified and then aligned with programs and subjects, a curriculum that makes the school unique and meets today’s basic needs can be developed successfully.

Readings:

Haberman, M., & Post, L. (1994). Multicultural schooling: Developing a curriculum for the real world. In Our Evolving Curriculum, Part I. Peabody Journal of Education, 69 (3), 101-115.

Townsend, B. L. (2000). Standards-based school reform and culturally diverse learners: Implications for effective leadership when the stakes are even higher. In Including special needs students in standards-based reform: A report on McREL's Diversity Roundtable III.

Ornstein, A. C., Behar-Idocenstein, L. S., & Pajak, E. F. (2003). Contemporary issues in curriculum (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Glatthorn, A. A. (2000). Developing vision and goals. In The principal as curriculum leader: Shaping what is taught and tested. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 47-55.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1994). Developing the school curriculum. In Developing a quality curriculum . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 66-89.

constructivism vs constructionism

Ackermann, E. (n.d.). Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference? Retrieved June 4, 2008 from http://learning.media.mit.edu/content/publications/EA.Piaget%20_%20Papert.pdf

What is the difference between Piaget's constructivism and Papert’s “constructionism”? Beyond the mere play on the words, I think the distinction holds, and that integrating both views can enrich our understanding of how people learn and grow.

Piaget’s constructivism offers a window into what children are interested in, and able to achieve, at different stages of their development. The theory describes how children’s ways of doing and thinking evolve over time, and under which circumstance children are more likely to let go of—or hold onto— their currently held views. Piaget suggests that children have very good reasons not to abandon their worldviews just because someone else, be it an expert, tells them they’re wrong.

Papert’s constructionism, in contrast, focuses more on the art of learning, or ‘learning to learn’, and on the significance of making things in learning. Papert is interested in how learners engage in a conversation with [their own or other people’s] artifacts, and how these conversations boost self-directed learning, and ultimately facilitate the construction of new knowledge. He stresses the importance of tools, media, and context in human development. Integrating both perspectives illuminates the processes by which individuals come to make sense of their experience, gradually optimizing their interactions with the world.

For more>>>

Big Names in Curriculum Theory

John Dewey

Technorationality (behaviorist discourse that focuses on learning outcomes, criticized by MacDonald)

Ralph W. Tyler (the father of curriculum reform)
Tyler (1949): framework for deliberately designing and evaluating curriculum (Tyler rationale)
1. What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?
2. What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these purpose?
3. How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?
4. How can we determine whether these purpose are being attained (evaluation)?

Paulo Freire
A combination of existentialism & neo-Marxism

1947 Chicago Curriculum Conference (hosted by Ralph Tyler) - birthplace of curriculum theory.

Social Efficiency Educators
Ross, Bobbitt, Gilbreth, Taylor, Thorndike

Reconceptualists: in opposition to the Tylerian satus quo. The decade of 1960s marks a critical moment of reconceptualization impacted by the 1957 launching of Sputnik and social unrest (the civil rights movements & the Vietnam War protest). 1969 as begining of the "decade of the Reconceptualization" (Pinar, Reynolds, Slattery, and Taubman)

William Pinar
Creator of the word "Reconceptualists"
Use "post-critical" to describe the existential/phenomenological work

James MacDonald (reconceptualist) (Teacher of Steve Mann, who mentored William Doll and George Willis): from scientism - person-centered humanism - sociopolitical humanism - transcendentalism. Curricularists could construct discourses and structures to allow for an environment more conducive to personal freedom.

Dwayne Huebner (reconceptualist) (Teacher of Michael Apple at Teachers College)
Curriculum as an educative environment. Rejecting technorationality. The purpose of education is "transcendence" - teachers are to help students grow in their capacity for personal evolution and change. Objected to learning theory because it conceived of education as "doing sth. to an individual", which is in opposition to his Heideggerean notion of a person as "being-in-the-world". Power/knowledge connections.

Paul Klohr (reconceptualist)
Teacher of Pinar and Greene at OSU

Maxine Greene (reconceptualist)


Joseph J. Schwab
“The field is moribund. It is unable, by its present methods and principles, to continue and contribute significantly to the advancement of education” (1970).

Janet Miller
Vice-president of AERA Division B (1997-1999)
Managing Editor, JCT (the offical journal of the "Reconceptualists") (1978-1998)
Emphasizes the importance of a diverse curriculum field, advocating controversy, but with mutual respect

Elliot Eisner
Three curricula that all schools teach (1985)
1. Explicit curriculum: The learning and interaction that occurs that is explicitly announced in schools programs
2. Implicit (hidden) curriculum: The learning and interaction that occurs that is not explicitly announced in schools programs
3. Null (non-existing) curriculum: systematically excluded, neglected, or not considered

Adler

Larry Cuban
Four categories of curricula (1993)
1. Official: in curriculum guide and conform with state-mandated assessment
2. Taught: individual teachers focus on and choose to emphasize (teacher’s knowledge)
3. Learned: all that students learn
4. Tested: tests represent only part of what is taught or learned

Michael Apple
Neo-Marxism & critical pedagogy
Refuses the notion of reconceptualization

Kliebard

Tanner and Tanner

Reynolds

Taubman

Doll

Gadamer
All understanding is essentially dialogue (Truth is not method but simply what happens in dialogue). What we must never forget is that we are always part of what it is we seek to understand. Truth as experience (without method). Being that can be understood is language. Language is about negotiating and making sense of a human world largely of our own construction.
Hermeneutics is a more general procedure for understanding itself. Gadamer is not usually thought of a "postmodern" but he has this in common with postmodern theorists - questioning the foundations of philosophical modernism. Against Descartes' man as a thinking machine capable of arriving at the kind of certainty to be found in geometry.

Giroux

Heidegger
Interpretation of the world is impossible without pre-understanding. Language is the house of being.

Sears

Postmodern curricularists

Michel Foucault
Triple root of power, knowledge and self.

Deleuze

Lyotard
the overarching view of history is one more metannarrative, even thought it is dominant.

Lather
not dissolving differences may be a good thing

Patrick Slattery (student of Pinar)

Modernism VS Postmodernism

Modernism

Assumptions

1. Life & the world are mechanical
2. There exists a stable-state universe
3. Curriculum development can be compartmentalized and decontextualized "norm"
4. Goals can be separated from the experience designed to address them

Leading proponents

1. Bobbitt (The Curriculum, 1918): first consider curriculum as a science; curriculum development is precise and predictable, resulting in a tangible product; still the mainstream view in today's schools
   
2. Tyler (Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, 1949): four basic questions (modernist, linear, cause-effect framework
   
   • What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?
   • What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these purpose?
   • How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?
   • How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?
3. Taba (Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice, 1962): There was a definite order to curriculum development; all curricula are composed of certain elements; seven-step model:
   
   • Diagnosis of needs
   • Formulation of objective
   • Selection of content
   • Organization of content
   • Selection of learning experiences
   • Organization of learning experience
   • Evaluation and means of evaluation
     

Postmodernism

Assumptions

1. Life is organic, not mechanical
2. The universe is dynamic, not stable
3. Curriculum development is not passive acceptance of steps, but evolves from action with the system in particular contexts
4. Goals emerge oftentimes from the very experiences in which people engage

Leading proponents

1. Giroux (1991): encourage the achievement and employment of multiple awareness
   
2. Lyotard (1992): play the game without rules, and from the very playing, to invent new rules; our challenge is not that of supplying a clear reality, but inventing allusions to the conceivable and engaging ourselves in the dynamics of the system
   
3. Doll: four criteria (1993, 4 Rs)
   
   • Richness: players include teachers, students, and interested parties from the wider community; curricula must have some disturbing qualities
     
   • Recursion: stability + change; reflective interaction; no fixed beginning or ending; the curriculum is designed to allow for continually going back to and then incorporating previous points and insights into a growing sense of understanding
     
   • Relations: dialogue between students and teachers; social activity full of surprises
     
   • Rigor: critique validity; cultivate new ideas
     
4. Slattery (?)
5. Pinar (?)
   

Present and future

Hunkins, F. P., & Hammill, P. A. (1994). Beyond Tyler and Taba: Reconceptualizing the curriculum process. Peabody Journal of Education, 69 (3), 4-18.
Keywords: Tyler rationale, Taba, Bobbit, Modernism, Technocrat, postmodernism

Parkay, F. W., & Hass, G. (2005). Curriculum planning: A contemporary approach (7th Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (Chapter 2. Social forces: Present and future, pp. 45-58)
Keywords: social forces, developmental tasks, future planning

Cetron, M, & Cetron, K. (2003). A forecast for schools. Educational Leadership, 61 (4).
Keywords: funding, diversity, technology, lifelong learning.

These three articles provide some basic ideas about “where we are” and “where we are headed.”

In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to increasing life complexity and psychological displacement, the educators have to rethink what modern education is and how curricula should be reformed to suit the future needs.

For decades, the modernism-scientistic tradition has been dominating curriculum and curriculum development. Even today, Bobbitt’s curriculum foundation, Ralph Tyler’s four-question rationale, and Hilda Taba’s seven-step model are still the mainstream views regarding curriculum development. However, the newly-emerged challenges, transitions and transformations, as in a post-modernism point of view, have announced that “there is no structure or master narrative in which we can wrap ourselves for comfort.” Education will be at risk if our educators continue to rely on a positivistic certainty in the procedures that Tyler and Taba advocated.

Examining contemporary social forces that influence the curriculum helps curriculum planners to understand the role education can play in shaping a desired future and thus incorporate an unknown future into their work. Among those ten major trends, I think we would draw special attentions to “increasing ethnic and cultural diversity”, “changing values and morality” and “microelectronics revolution”. Based on the understanding of these three fundamental issues, we should be able to deploy futures planning with considering three levels of social forces.

A forecast for schools projected from futurists provided directions for schools by yielding an understanding of societal and economic trends to help schools implement reforms that prepare students more effectively for the changing world. With all those concerns on funding, student population and diversity, technological transformation in the workplace, and needs in lifelong learning, our schools should make early preparations and careful countermeasures in response to the modern, high-tech world with cautious optimism.

Branches of philosophy

Webb, L. D. (2006). The history of American Education. Columbus, OH: Pearson. pp. 4-17.

Three Branches of Philosophy

1. Metaphysics: What is the nature of reality (most difficult to answer)?

• Ontology: meaning of existence (key concept in understanding any philosophy)
  
• Cosmology: origin & organization of the universe

2. Epistemology: What is the nature of knowledge (ways of knowing)?

• Scientific inquiry
• Intuition
• Senses and feelings
• Logic (making inferences, reasoning, or arguing in a rational manner)
  
  • Deductive: reasoning from a general statement or principle to a specific point or example
    
  • Inductive: reasoning from the specific to a more general conclusion
    

3. Axiology: What is the nature of values?

• Ethics: human conduct and moral values (right, wrong, good, bad)
  
• Aesthetics: values in beauty, nature, and the "aesthetic experience"

Traditional Philosophies and Their Educational Implications

1. Idealism (oldest philosophy of Western culture, dating back to Greece and Plato)

• Metaphysics: Mind over matter (the Universal Mind)
• Epistemology: the science of logic (deductive in particular); moving closer to Ultimate Truth
• Axiology: Absolute values
• Leading proponents
  
  • Plato (Greek): the father of idealism
  • Judaism & Christianity (St. Augustine): influenced by Plato, religious idealism
  • Descartes (French): as humans we may doubt everything except our own existence; influenced a number of fields of inquiry, including the sciences
    
  • Kant (German): universal moral laws guide our actions or behaviors; "above all things, obedience is an essential feature in the character of a child" - a primary basis for moral training or character development in education
    
  • Hegel (German): reality as a "contest of opposites" - each idea (thesis) has its own opposite (antithesis) - the confrontation results in a more comprehensive idea (synthesis)
    
• Educational implications
  
  • Purpose of schooling: promote spiritual and intellectual development, produce competent & self-actualized adults who will become useful citizens of the state
  • Curriculum and instruction: stresses the eternal ideas of the past (great works of literature, philosophy, politics, history, & the arts); Preferred methods of instruction: lecture, discussion, reflection, & the Socratic method (dialogue)
  • Nature of the learner: every student has a mind, soul, and spirit capable of emulating the Absolute Mind, absorbing ideas from books & teachers
  • Role of the teacher: role model with logical thinking and reasoning; authority with extensive knowledge about the Great Books

2. Realism (one of the oldest Western philosophies, dating to ancient Greece & Aristotle, antithesis of idealism)

• Metaphysics: The world of things is superior to the world of ideas; reality is external and can be verified
• Epistemology: perception, rational thinking, sensing; Aristotle: deduction (the establishment of a first or major premise, followed by a second or minor premise, and the drawing of a conclusion (syllogism) from them; the scientific method (the systematic reporting and analysis of what is observed and the testing of hypotheses formulated from the observations
• Axiology: natural law and moral law are the major determinants of what is good
• Leading proponents
  
  • Aristotle: the father of realism; reality, knowledge, & value exist independent of the mind
  • Bacon (English): inductive inquiry (scientific form of realism)
  • Locke (English): mind as a blank slate; knowledge is acquired through sensory perception
  • Comenius (Czech): educator and theologian; universal education
    
  • Rousseau (French) (political & educational theories; Natural Man: The social contract) & Pestalozzi (Swiss) (child-centered; training of the whole man): influential on progressive education
    
• Educational implications
  
  • Purpose of schooling: teach moral and intellectual value; develop students' power of reasoning and master the principles of scientific inquiry
  • Curriculum and instruction: focuses on the natural laws; theoretical subjects such as math & the sciences has a higher priority than the "practical arts"; instructional methods: deductive logic; observation, classification, and categorization; the scientific method; curriculum determined by authority figures or experts
  • Nature of the learner: the students as an orderly, sensing, and rational being capable of understanding the world of things; both the teacher and the student are considered learners, and teaching and learning are considered an unending interactive process
  • Role of the teacher: to emphasize and model reasoning, observation, and experimentation. To teach student how to think clearly and understand the material world

Contemporary Philosophies and Their Educational Implications

1. Pragmatism (experimentalism or instrumentalism, focuses on experience)

• Metaphysics: reality as an event, a process, a verb, subject to constant change and lacks absolutes; Meaning is derived from experience
  
• Epistemology: truth is determined by function or consequences (only tentative truth); Knowledge is arrived at by scientific inquiry, testing, questioning, and retesting, never conclusive
  
• Axiology (prgamatism's focus): values are tentative; whatever works is ethically or morally good; democracy (Dewey);
  
• Learning proponents
  
  • Comte (French): science could solve social problems
    
  • Charles Darwin (English): natural selection - reality is subject to change (development)
    
  • Charles Sanders Peirce (American): true knowledge depends on verification of ideas through experience; learning, believing, and knowing as an intimate part of doing and feeling
    
  • William James (American): no absolutes or universals, only an ever-changing universe
    
  • John Dewey (American): influential on American pragmatism; experience, thought, and consequence were interralated
    
• Educational implications
  
  • Purpose of schooling: to model a progressive democratic society; education is to stress function or experience through problem solving and the scientific method
    
  • Curriculum and instruction: integrates several subjects (history, geography, the sciences); instructional methods: learning by doing, problem solving, experimentation, hands-on activities, collaborative learning, deductive thinking, social interaction, group activities
  • Nature of the learner: evolving and active beings capable of interacting with their environment, setting objectives for their own learning, capable of working together to solve common problems, establishing the rules for governing the classrooms, and testing and evaluating ideas fro the improvement of learning and classroom life
  • Role of the teacher: to model the most authentic type of knowledge (i.e., experimental knowledge); research or project director; stresses the application of the scientific method

2. Existentialism

• Metaphysics: existence precedes essence; no meaning or purpose to the physical universe; we must create our own meaning; By our choice we determine reality; cannot escape responsibility to choose, including the choice of how we view our past
• Epistemology: knowing by choice; no absolutes, authorities, single or correct way to the truth; the self is the only authority
• Axiology: determining value by choice; choice is frustrating and exasperating at times
• Leading proponents
  
  • Soren Kierkegaard (Danish): father of existentialism; the reality of God and individual existence
  • Martin Buber (Jewish): both the divine and the human are related
  • Edmund Husserl (German): father of phenomenology (referring to objects, events, or things we perceive or experience)
    
  • Martin Heidegger (German): father of hermeneutics (interpretation of lived experience); Phenomenology had a major influence on the critical theory and postmodern movements that followed
  • Jean-Paul Sartre (French): free choice implies total responsibility for one's own existence; humanity exists without any meaning until we construct our own
  • John Holt, Charles Silberman, Jonathan Kozol: open schools, free schools, and alternative schools that flourished druing the mid-1960s
  • A. S. Neill: founder of Summerhill School that offered an educational experience built on the principle of learning by discovery in an atmosphere of unrestrained freedom
  • Nel Noddings: challenge to care
    
• Educational implications
  
  • Purpose of schooling: prepare students to take responsibility for, and to deal with, the results of their actions; to foster self-discovery and explain the importance of the freedom of choice and the responsibility for making choices
  • Curriculum and instruction: individual and personal learning; student centered; humanities is the preferred subject matter; "personal truth"; instructional methods: nondirective humanistic values education; cognitive discussions along with affective experiences along with the Socratic dialogue
    
  • Nature of the learner: a free individual capable of authentic and responsible choice, of self-discipline and self-discovery and can be responsible for their own learning
  • Role of the teacher: an example of authenticity for students; help students achieve their potential while striving for self-autualization; personal and interactive student-teacher relationship; introspective and reflective; imagination and insight