Technology is a beast that grows bigger by the day. It feeds on media conglomerates, big businesses, and political agendas - and it is changing the way we create curriculum. Not long ago, the information we consumed was largely controlled by what the media decided to feed us; what the newspaper decided to print, the TV and radio stations decided to broadcast, the agencies decided to publicize, and so on. The media has proven its ability to influence the public. Many credit it for the public's anti-war sentiment during the Vietnam War and for John F. Kennedy's popularity during the 1960 debates against Richard Nixon. It might also be criticized for creating fear by disproportionately reporting on crime or pushing political agendas with partisan broadcasts. Nowadays, however, big businesses and media corporations are losing their strongholds on the distribution of information. Individuals have taken media and information sharing into their own hands with social media sites, blogs, wikis, podcasts, and more.
The Texas Board of Education's control over what is published in textbooks is disgusting and embarrassing; but it won't last. Just like the media is losing its grip on what the public reads, views, or hears, so too will Texas's Board of Education. Technology has infiltrated the classroom and students and teachers are no longer restricted to what is in their textbooks. Students learn lessons from Khan Academy and YouTube, they communicate with students in other states or countries, they are encouraged to research using the internet, and they complete classes online.
Texas's decisions have impacted what students learn in other states. That, too, is on the verge of changing. The "new sheriff in town" is the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, which has already been adopted by 45 states, 4 territories, the District of Columbia, and the Department of Defense Education Activity. The CCSS now dictate what is to be published and adopted by schools. Arguments can be made both supporting and rejecting these standards, but at least the initiative is backed by educators and researchers whose motives are to increase rigor and depth of students' knowledge (rather than being backed by a panel of policy-makers with no experience in a classroom whose motives are to integrate religion into the curriculum to shape the political beliefs of future voters).
It seems as though Ralph W. Tyler might have supported the CCSS Initiative. In his book, Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, he says, “As long as the educational experiences meet the
various criteria for effective learning, they are useful in attaining the
desired objectives. There are probably
an uncertain number of experiences that could be thought of and worked out to
attain particular objectives. This means
that the teacher has a wide range of creative possibility in planning
particular work.” (p. 67) The Common Core does not tell teachers how to teach; instead it articulates what students should know and be able to do. It the teacher's responsibility to provide the student with experiences that allow him to meet the objectives. Tyler continues by stating, “It is not necessary that the curriculum provide
for a certain limited or prescribed set of learning experiences in order to
assure that the desired objectives are attained.” (p. 67)
As if we have taken Tyler's notion of building a local curriculum and superimposed it over a map of the United States, states have come together to decide upon our country's instructional objectives for K-12 mathematics, English language arts, and social studies education. Instruction in these content areas will likely be driven by assessment. The CCSS will be assessed by either the Smarter Balanced Assessment or the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). The assessments will first take place in the 2014-2015 school year. Tyler's view of standardized testing is unclear, as he contributed to writing many standardized tests, yet he supported performance-based assessments.
There is no clear-cut answer for how curriculum is to be created. Tyler wrote, “Shifts in attitudes grow out of the students’
change in view and this comes from either a new insight and new knowledge about
the situation or from the satisfaction or dissatisfaction he has obtained from
particular views or a combination of these procedures.” (p. 79) Our country's shift in attitude about curriculum development has grown out of dissatisfaction of Texas's views of curriculum and how they affect our students' learning. Only time will tell if the new initiative, the Common Core State Standards Initiative, is an effective way to create curriculum.
