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.
Christopher,
ReplyDeleteI thought you made a good point when you compared the changes in technology today to the Texas Board of Education’s control over what is published in the textbook. In the past Texas has had a lot of impact on textbook printing but like you have mentioned with the Common Core Standards Initiative being supported by so many states, Texas will loose that control.
As I read through your entire post I found it so interesting that you were able to connect the Common Core Standards with our course readings. I went back to our readings and did a bit more connecting to the CCSS. Similar to CCSS, Tyler stressed the importance that there will be greater depth of learning when experiences build upon other experiences, across grade levels. (page 84). This is something that CCSS are all about. At my district we have been working very hard as a K-12 staff to make sure that we have the curriculum aligned. We are also stressing the importance of continuity, where the standards are continuously being reiterated across grade levels. Also, the CCSS is aligned in a sequential manner, across grade levels. This does not provide when to teach particular standards. At our school we decided on a sequence, which would help allow our students to continue to build and make connections with their learning. Tyler stated that sequence is part of the criteria for effective instruction. He shared that curriculum designed in a sequential order allowed students to dig deeper into their learning as they build upon each successive experience.
Tyler also stated “Every teacher needs to participate in curriculum planning at least to the extent of gaining an understanding of these ends and means.” (Tyler, 126). I believe that the CCSS is allowing teachers to be able to do a better job at this. Like you mentioned the CCSS “does not tell teachers how to teach; instead it articulates what students should know and be able to do. “ This means that teachers do have the flexibility to present information in a way that best fits their student’s needs and district needs. It is important that all teachers understand where their students came from, what their students need to learn, and where the students need to be able to get (academically). The CCSS are aligned in a way that teachers can have this outline. In fact there are actual CCSS K-12 alignment flip charts that are an AWESOME way to look at a particular standard and reference other grades.
I personally really like where the CCSS are going but also understand that this there is no clear cut answer for how curriculum is to be created. I understand that MANY things could change and alter these standards. Being a young teacher, I am very excited about this new curriculum but there are a few other teachers in my district that are reluctant or believe that it is only a matter of time before they change the curriculum on them again. These teachers are more of the seasoned teachers that have witnessed lots of change to curriculum. This makes me wonder how many new changes we will see in our teaching careers.
Thanks for sharing, Caitlin
Christopher,
ReplyDeleteI thought your response was extremely interesting to read and most certainly a position that I had not considered in my response. As you mentioned, education and curriculum now does extend so far beyond the classroom due to the ever growing connectivity of the world through technology and social media, that no one message has complete control or influence in the market. Even to a stronger point in reference to the Texas Board of Education, is the fact that through technology cases such as this can be brought to the attention of the country and then be rallied against, hindering the long-term success of those slanted efforts.
However, I do feel like the foundation for their case in attacking education and your belief in the power of technology are at conflict. For Mr. McLeory, the effort is not only about changing how curriculum is presented, but about shaping a world view that reflects that of his own, and world views are hard to reshape, for technology is most often used to only reinforce one’s world view as evidenced by the Reinforcement Theory. This theory, promoted by Joesphy Klapper, states that people generally seek out and remember information that supports their pre-existing beliefs and attitudes, beliefs and attitudes which are founded in their education, family, religion and community.
If this is to be accepted, then the foundational knowledge provided to students through their education cannot easily be undone by technology, but only reinforced. Regardless, we can never know now what long term affects either path way will have as we are still too early in the ever-evolving process of technology and education. Perhaps due to the 24/7 nature of technology this theory doesn’t completely hold true, but on the other hand if it didn’t we wouldn’t have extreme view points…
With that said, I love the tie in you had with CCSS and refocusing the conversation on the movement towards standardization and professionalization of curriculum development. While each of us as educators has our own preference with systems such as this and curriculum that is heavily dependent on measurements via testing, I think you are right to highlight the connection between bringing awareness to issues like Texas through technological growth help then grow the response.
Overall, great posting that really takes the core issues highlighted in the articles and in the modern day to reflect on the progress of curriculum development!
Thanks!
Heather
Hi Chris,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your post! Loved the title, and like your other respondents, loved how you took this issue up and gave it an interesting and contemporary spin.
First off, as I was reading, it did strike my mind that not only the Texas State Board of Education is in trouble, but the whole notion of schooling itself. Why go to school when you can do Khan Academy and Youtube? Why read textbooks and learn to write when there are iPads?
That last question is partly in jest, because if I remember cycle two correctly, you have some issues with that view . . .
But I am serious about schooling becoming redundant if we don't adapt.
I think I am less sanguine than you about CCSS and their ability to move us in the right direction. I have no problem with them. I just feel like the whole issue is getting teachers involved in adapting, improving and modifying existing curriculum--not writing new ones. If teachers feel like the CCSS has done most of the heavy lifting in the area of curriculum, I worry they will not undertake the types of inquiry into their students and their communities that Tyler calls for. You see what I mean?
My reading of Tyler is that he views teaching as a practical and eclectic art, and that curriculum needs to be flexible enough to make space for that. He is also not a linear thinker, despite how the book is laid out. I worry that if the CCSS name all the goals, teachers will stop asking "why" questions and just set about getting to the most efficient means or "how" questions. That is a danger.
I say that because the CCSS, despite talking about the future, doesn't really require that we keep asking "why"--why do this? Why do we need this? How does this create a happier, healthier and wiser child?
Of course, at bottom, I am pretty pleased with the potential of the CCSS. I just think we need to view it as an overlay to the extremely important work of local curriculum development. A framework for scope and sequence that leaves all the details up to teachers and school leaders.
I hope you see my point--not disagreeing with you, just throwing out a few concerns that have been bubbling up.
Take care!
Kyle