Tuesday, October 2, 2007
"They" write it but we teach it
I kind of liked the fact that we did not pin down the definition of curriculum. To me (and perhaps many of us?), it sort of has always been the "list of things to cover in English I." It was eye-opening to think about how many things are part of curriculum. Indeed, we are "teaching" all the time we are in the building. Of course we all know about the hidden curriculum or the evaded curriculum but for many of us it never had a name or an identifier. One other blogger lamented the lack of of curriculum training as part of teacher ed. (sorry I don't remember who it was; I read a bunch of them). I suppose the assumption is that teachers will not be writing curriculum. While it's true that many of us never do write curriculum, and that when we do it just means lining up courses with state standards, this new expanded definition suggests how important it is for teachers to be involved. An understanding of this, it seems to me, helps focus the mission of the school more broadly.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Ya know, it’s funny. You comment that the curriculum has been the "list of things to cover in English I" for you. I also teach English and in my school, especially in the English department, the curriculum is at best a mild suggestion. For the courses that have an actual curriculum, about half the teachers even try to adhere to “the list,” and those that want to have a hard time because there aren’t enough of the required books to actually cover them with all of the students. Furthermore, I taught a variation (every year I either had a different level or the school change the format---to block or not to block?--) of HSPA prep for 6 years (starting as a brand new teacher) without a curriculum or books or guidance for that matter. No one ever asked me to develop an official curriculum for the department, and although I would basically develop one for myself, the following year it was fairly obsolete because of the changes. In this situation, the teachers are forced to become more involved in developing a (unofficial) curriculum because they are left floundering by the administration…A bit more support would be nice. How can we strike a happy medium?
It's so funny, I totally agree. I actually wasn't all that "upset" with our discussion-- i really like open-ended discussions where we don't necessarily have to have an answer at the end of class (but I don't like that when I see a movie). Such discussions really make me think.
Is curriculum what the kids (opps- child!) experiences in the hallway?? During recess? On the lunch line? I never really considered that before but I find it so intriguing.
I agree with you, I also like the fact that she did not define curriculum for us but rather left it open for us to interpret for ourselves. Only through this type of analysis and introspection will we be able to truly define curriculum.
I think, after attending the class and reading the postings, no one can really identify curriculum. It is such a dynamic variable. Every one is involved in it weather formally or not. Most of us are creating our own curriculum, using the district's as a guideline.
I think any one that accepts a static definition of curriculum, limiting it to a bunch of papers in a binder somewhere in the storage room, is missing the target. he or she may be lecturing or reciting the book but definitely not teaching.
Post a Comment