Synthesis: Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

In my final synthesis of Theme 2 I want to answer some questions that I was asked about my original post.  

Q: Do you feel that depending on the student’s culture, background, or environment in which they live is a factor or should determine what style of teaching or which theory should be implemented to assure student success?

A:  Absolutely!  Prior to this year I was teaching in a smaller school that was partial rural and suburban.  Now I am teaching in a inner city school with 1500 students.  I have had to change my approach and teaching style and it has been a big culture shift for me.  I still firmly believe that the best approach is the social behaviorist and experimental and that is the approach I tried to enter my new setting with.  Unfortunately students did not have the background to make those approaches successful enough so I have had to resort to being an intellectual traditionalist more than I like.  So yes I think the background and culture plays a big role in determining which teaching style can be used and will be successful.

Q: Or do you feel that all students no matter their background need the different levels of education that was introduced in “Perspectives on four curriculum traditions” by William Schubert?

A: Despite what I said above I still think students need the different levels for a well rounded education.  Even with the students I have this year I feel it is vital to provide them with all approaches to curriculum so that they get a variety of experiences.  So even though I may have to be an intellectual traditionalist until I have given them a solid knowledge base I will try to incorporate other styles as well.  

Theme 2: The History of Curriculum in the United States

I found this weeks readings to be very thought provoking.  I was initially only going to write about the History of Curriculum by Thomas Popkewitz but then I could just not comment on Perspectives of Four Curriculum Traditions by William Schubert as well and felt that they actually went well together.  Instantly a quote from Popkewitz jumped out at me.  “Schooling is designed to act on the spirit and the body of the children and the young.”  This quote spoke to me because I believe this is so much what school should be about but what has been lost somewhere about the time school being taught by subjects came to be. Take this in the context of the four curriculum traditions.  Intellectual traditionalist have sucked the ability to ignite the spark and spirit in children.  By focusing so much on reading, lecture and memorization of facts the ability of students to pursue their own interests, to experience things and develop lifelong skills they need has been taken away.    When I look at the 4 curriculum traditions I firmly believe they all have a place but some should take center stage more than others.  Social Behaviorist and Experimental Traditionalist need to be on that center stage.  The social behaviorist are needed to teach the behaviors that help students become more successful like problem solving.  To ignite a passion for learning students need to have some say in what they want to learn and this is why experimental traditionalist are important.  If students can have a say in what they want to learn and to actually gain experiences rather than be lectured at or memorizing facts they are more likely to retain and gain knowledge.  This is where teachers are instituting a genius hour component into their classrooms.  During genius hour students get to select a topic they want to study, explore it and design a project based upon those interests.  I do think there are times when the intellectual traditionalist is necessary but for many teachers this is their method of teaching which leads to low levels of rigor and disengaged students.  Critical re-constructionist is needed but not exactly like that mentioned.  All students in today's times need to go on for further education so education is not sorting them for that purpose but rather by ability and knowledge so that we can make sure they are prepared for the next level of educations and for also finding out their passions so the next step in their education journey is in the right directions.  Therefore I believe that all four traditions have a place in education.

Read about Genuis Hour - Click Here

Synthesis Theme 1: Conflicting Notions on the Purposes of Schooling

I do not believe that the purpose of education can be one thing or the other. If we are truly doing our job as educators then we have to produce citizens, human beings and workers. I also firmly don't believe there is anything wrong with pushing students to climb the so called "social ladder". We need to push students to strive for better paying jobs that require college education and beyond. We need to push them to want to go to college and get the education that can open more doors for them. There is not a future for those who don't go to college or at least get a trade school education in a specialty. I don't believe that one purpose is more important than the other, they are all equally important and for education to be successful it must serve more than one purpose. And while my statement below about single parent homes might have been a little stereotypical I was trying to make a point. Kids today due need character education at school, as they are not coming with it from home, whether it is a single parent home or two parents. That is the purpose of many programs like Character Counts and PBIS.  Schools must serve multiple purposes from feeding kids at least two meals a day to building character, to preparing workers and citizens.  

Theme 1: Conflicting Notions on the Purposes of Schooling

The readings for this theme are centered around What is the Purpose of American Education? and that is a question that has many answers.  The truth is the purpose of education has changed over the years as the economics of the country have changed.  In the 1950’s and 60’s the purpose of education were different.  Two parents home provided for the character education needed to produce the “right citizens”.  Schools didn’t need to focus on teaching respect and responsibility and citizenship those things were taught at home.  But that was then and this is now.  The family structure at home is different and for many, many students if they are not taught it at school they will not learn it.  Part of the education students receive at school has to be teaching students what it means to be the “right citizens” and the “right human beings”.  A few years ago our school tackled behavioral and discipline referrals by becoming a PBIS school.  Through the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports program  we adopted through school wide expectations - Respect, Responsibility and Caring.  The issue we ran into was students didn’t know what respect looked like. We had to actually teach students what respect was and how it would look in their everyday lives. Since the implementation of this program and the actually teaching of expectations the amount of discipline referrals dropped drastically and the culture and climate of our school changed as well.  So decades ago it might have not been the purpose of the school to create the “right citizens” and the “right human beings” but it has to be now because of how our country has changed.  The ultimate goal of schools should be “social efficiency” or preparing the “right workers”.  I see nothing wrong with this being the purpose of education.  In the 1950’s and 60’s the country needed factory workers and it was acceptable that students were tracked and prepared differently as that is what our country needed we needed all different types of workers for a multitude of different jobs.  Again that was then, this is now.  There is a small percentage of factory worker jobs left.  Decades ago if you didn’t succeed in school, there was a factory job waiting for you, but that is not the case anymore. (See graph below)  I can use my good friends as examples.  Neither wanted to go to college so upon high school graduation they got married and went to work at the local factory making refrigerators, washers and dryers.  Five years ago after working with the company for almost 30 years the company closed and moved to Mexico leaving them with no jobs and only a high school education.  Today's students have to succeed now more than ever and we have to prepare them so they can succeed.  It is educations #1 priority.  Therefor I do not believe there is any problem engraving in students that the paths they chose in education will determine where they go to college, what career they will pursue, what their income will be and thus what their lives will be like.  I would imagine if my friends had a crystal ball when they were 18 they might have chose a different path - rather than going back to school in their mid-40’s so they could get a job.  

So in education we do have to do it all.  We have to prepare, citizens, human beings and workers.  It is a tall order and that is why it takes special people to be educators.  

I recommend checking out the following resources.

PBS - The Story of American Public Education

Forbes Magazine - What is the Purpose of Education?