Running Head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPY



Running head: CURRICULUM IDEOLOGY

[pic]

Curriculum Ideology for a Changing Society

Sophia Epitropoulos

EDU660/Unit 1 IP Assignment/American Intercontinental University Online

Practitioner- Dr. Rick Bragg

July 18, 2005

Abstract

The following paper will attempt to address the study of curriculum history and its importance to our country's educators. It will address the relationship between culture and curriculum and the ideological components of this nation's curriculum development, as well as the changes that occur based on an ever-changing society. It will provide research on the country of Greece, the early founders of education and its current state of education. Finally, an insight into what the future will hold for curriculum expansion both for Greece and here in the United States.

Introduction

While it is virtually impossible to define the term curriculum, rather it is best to understand the importance of education in society, allowing each individual to create their own definition based on experience and application. "Historically, curriculum has focused on three main areas: subject matter, society and the individual" (AIU, 2005). While subject matter may not constantly change in content that is to be learned, what is important to know is that society is ever changing and requires educators to constantly be changing and evolving the curriculum to meet society's needs and changes.

There is no way that a curriculum can be a one size fits all, "Experience is individual, ongoing and unpredictable" (Marsh & Willis, 2003). It is necessary for an educator to understand their students, learning environments as well as goals and objectives that need to be met before a curriculum can be effectively developed.

While one may think of curriculum as a whole or entire program of study, the curriculum may be a unit, a course or a sequence of courses - and may take place outside of the classroom or school (Oliva, 1988, pg 9-10). Attention should be paid to a single unit as much as the entire program. Each thread plays a vital part in the weave of the fabric. An educator should be educated in the past, present and future of curriculum development. To create a plan for the future it is important to look at where education has been, how curriculum has evolved and the factors that have contributed to the evolvement and change in how children of today's society are educated.

Looking at the History of Curriculum

The history of the curricula of American schools has been based on the three major focal points around which decisions about curricula have been made. Educators of today need understand these three very valuable points and "At various times in the history of American Education, each of these points have prevailed over the other two in capturing the attention or imagination of educators and citizens" (Marsh & Willis, 2003).

• The nature of the subject matter- The way the subject matter has been organized and taught to reflect inherent logic and reality of the surrounding world.

• The nature of society- The way a curriculum reaches across to the cultural, political and economical differences of the learners.

• The nature of the individual- The way the curriculum takes into account the individual needs of the learners, their interests and learning styles.

The Early Beginnings of Curriculum in the United States

During the Colonial Era and the early years of American education, mass education was still unheard of. Throughout Europe where citizens were divided into classes, formal education was only afforded to the upper class. For Colonial America, an education was a lesson in living, providing food and shelter and the necessary skills for survival. The first structure of formal education to appear was in 1647, where the colony of Massachusetts created the law to "require every township of fifty or more households to appoint a teacher of reading and writing and every township of one hundred or more households to establish a Latin grammar school, but enforcement of this law was uneven" (Marsh & Willis, 2003). Throughout the colonies though, there still lacked formal education for most children.

The development of the Harvard curriculum in 1642 provided a first glimpse into higher education and where the results of elementary and secondary education would lead up to. This standard rule of thinking should be prevalent today in an educator's thinking and planning. And belief is the same today as it was then that to truly prepare students for higher education; the process should begin at the elementary level. The Harvard Curriculum, while heavy in the emphasis on ancient languages, had a humanistic and rational side (Marsh & Willis, 2003).

Reflecting upon the religious dominance of the times, the curriculum was a foundation for educating students to world history and the early beginnings of man's thinking and philosophy. This foundation has slowly broken down with the introduction of technology and the emphasis that society's children will only advance if they possess technological skills. While it is an important fact that the world's advancement in technology requires US students to be proficient in technology, the price of eliminating the arts and sciences to accommodate this growth has been high.

The Nineteenth Century

The NEA (National Teachers Association) was founded in 1870 and began the re-evaluation of the educational system in the United States. While small and run by administrators not teachers, "it achieved a powerful voice" (Marsh & Willis, 2003). New ideas were formed during the last three decades of the century and distinguished educator William Torrey Harris suggested a "...single, unified curriculum linking elementary, secondary, and higher education" be created, and that "the curriculum should reflect the unified nature of knowledge" (Marsh and Willis, 2003, pg.33). This unification was built from the Harvard curriculum premise mentioned earlier in that the results of elementary and secondary education should lead to the door steps of higher education.

Why is the study of curriculum history important to educators?

As suggested by historical researchers, founding educators placed a strong emphasis on world history, ancient languages and mostly a position that the right educational path was to take students at the elementary level and with each step lead to the door steps of higher education. This dream was one of merit and value. The focus was that higher education was not just an "optional" step but an expected step in a young American's growth process.

Somewhere along the line, our educational system has failed to continue the great work of the founding educational system which set up a strong curriculum to build worldly individuals with high aspirations. Instead it has taken the foundation handed down to modern educators and mutated it to encourage mediocrity and a "just get by" attitude. Today's students see education as a right they are entitled to rather than a right they are honored to have. When education hit the masses, it was an honor and privilege that brought respect into the classroom. Educators were respected and revered.

Educators today would do well to re-evaluate those early steps and understand the methodologies behind the decisions these early educators made to create curricula that would and could stand the test of time. With only modification to accommodate a changing society, these ideologies could still be of value today.

Ideological Components of Today's Culture and Curriculum

Each individual reacts differently to society. Therefore to accurately understand the individual learner, one must understand the place the learner resides within the society structure. The cultural beliefs, demographic placement, economic structure of the individual and the family surrounding them as well as the style of life they choose. This style can culminate from their choices in music, clothing and how they entertain themselves.

While it would be nearly impossible for the educator to create a curriculum that would take into account these variables for each and every student, they can create sub-categories for students which have learning similarities. For example: Students who are more visual learners may learn better by demonstration then non-visual learners. A class will consist of both; therefore a curriculum should accommodate both styles of learning. Students are bi-lingual or where English is not their first language should be accommodated or help offered to accelerate their English comprehension skills.

The increase in cultural diversity and a society which encourages acceptance of differences has created the need for curriculum diversity. Today's classroom is a melting pot of cultures and lifestyles and today's students are accepting not their own personal choices and differences, but those of others. The increase of bi-lingual and bi-cultural programs and the recognition that students should be able to hold on to their cultural history and beliefs while integrating into the mainstream American curriculum has promoted hidden learning not only for these children but for American children who learn and are exposed to cultural differences.

This can foster a learning environment which promotes more variety in careers and encourages career preparation from secondary and higher education. This open environment can " tend to bring about an end to the depreciation of local culture elements and values by the schools in solving educational problems, effect a positive student self-image, allow genuine options for all students in choosing a way of life, and facilitate more harmonious relationships between the student's culture and the mainstream of society." Fostering positive self-student image can occur by instilling the possibility of greatness in each and every student. Students have always had the option to choose a way of life however; many do not choose the right path. A bad educational experience, the lack of a mentor or just low self esteem has plagued this country to rob the youth of greatness.

As Reigeluth (1983) acknowledges, "...curriculum and instruction cannot be completely separated. There is a tendency among many institutions to give lip service to higher-order outcomes while maintaining teaching methods that specifically suppress such outcomes". This suppression comes from the attempts to standardize curricula across a school system and ignoring the various differences that exist from program to program, course to course, even learner to learner. Ignoring these cultural and societal differences and attempts to "standardize" curricula only lead to a stagnate educational system.

The Future of the Curriculum

Perkins believes that "given reasonably sound methods, the most powerful choice we can make concerns not method but curriculum-not how we teach but what we choose to try to teach" (p. 44). To create a curriculum that is balanced with today's cultural and societal differences, a trained educator must be willing to step out of the box of comfort and re-assess and re-evaluate instruction on a regular basis. Understanding how the learned material will impact the learner and what role it plays in the long term goals and objectives of the curriculum is a must. Also, they must research and assess what methodology of instruction is best to reach the most learners possible.

At its base, the constructivist movement in education involves curriculum reform, a rethinking of what it means to know something (Hannifin, 1992). The constructivist theory involves the learner and their own construction of reality and learning and for constructivist, this construction of learning must be constantly evolving. Thus, if a commitment is made toward rethinking curriculum to expand the roles of knowledge construction and learning communities, then a corresponding commitment needs to be made in rethinking learning activities. "Deciding upon a teaching strategy is not a value-neutral activity" (Wilson, 2005) and a strategy is only as good as its effect on the outcomes of learning and whether it accomplishes the instructor's goal of reaching curriculum and course objectives.

A basic lesson learned from observing schools is that two teachers may be covering the same ostensive curriculum while what really is taught differs radically between them (Wilson, 2005). Two sections of a similar course utilizing the exact same syllabus and course materials will result in differences based on the teacher's style and preference, self-efficacy, class composition and delivery methods. Even the same teacher will notice a difference from one class of learners to the next in the same course, even within the same day. The chemistry is very delicate and an experienced instructor will adjust the curriculum accordingly. These differences will increase as cultural diversity and changes in society increase. The learner of the future will change as society changes. Educators will need to keep assessing their learners.

The future of education depends on realistically evaluating, "where we are, and where we are going" in our educational system. State departments of education have increasingly become involved in these issues during the past few decades. The following is a list of several trends that seem to be emerging at the state level:

• Standards/Assessment -- Most states are attempting to use assessment and evaluation criteria to measure how schools and students meet their standards.

• Promotion -- In many states, how students fare when taking state-mandated assessments determines promotion from grade to grade. These scores are also a major factor in high school graduation requirements.

• Funds -- Funding, in many states, is tied to student achievement.

• Publicity -- Schools' report cards frequently include a record of how each school's students scored compared with other scores from across the state.

(Thirteen Ed Online, 2005)

While these are valid issues, the idea of holding educators responsible for the results of standardized testing is not one of merit. Standardized testing does not represent well where students are at academically. Too many variables exist; one could be the student's ability to take the test. This simple point has been in debate in educational circles. Can we accurately measure a student's knowledge by how he fares on a test of which he may be totally academically prepared for, yet at the time he/she took the test could have had difficulty perhaps in concentrating or had environmental or emotional distractions? Do we take this into account when the numbers are generated and schools are held accountable? One possible solution would be to introduce the portfolio method of assessment into the educational system. Showing physical proof of a student's knowledge and capabilities, this modest assessment tool has been a valuable resource in assessing students in fine arts. Why could it not exist in all aspects of education?

The curriculum of the future will have to be re-evaluated. Somewhere along the course of the history of education, the system has failed society's youth. It is more evident as research of other countries shows that education is a priority in the framework of society. Tying funds into student achievement will only result in "throwing the baby out with the bath water." All students will suffer in that results of standardized testing and student achievement have yet to be proven accurate. Shortage of funds and poor working conditions for instructors will not foster educational excellence. Perhaps looking back into the history of education and reawakening the honor and prestige of education and educators would be a good start.

A Look at the Greek Educational System

The founding educators who created the Harvard Curriculum knew the value and influence that the ancient Greek civilization had over the thinking process of modern man. The early Greek philosophers utilized practical and logic thinking patterns to make sense out of life and their accomplishments and achievements have led to the great advances in sciences and medicine. While they are not immune to the changes in society which have plagued all countries across the globe, they have managed to carry on the great works of the early philosophers, instilling a strong educational foundation in their country's youth.

At the forty-seventh session of The International Conference of Education in Geneva (2004), the National Plan of Greece was released and outlined the state of the educational system. Education in Greece is compulsory from ages 6-15. Post- secondary education is divided into two parts, Gymnasio (lower secondary as compared to US middle school) and Lykeio (upper secondary as compared to US high school). Special education classes are available to upper secondary students who have special educational needs. Special vocational training schools are available as an upper secondary option but are considered "formal but unclassified" education. College or Panepestemio is optional but highly encouraged in both Lykeio and Gymnasio levels of study (ICE, 2004).

Educational policies and practices are guided on the state level and the Ministry of Education is the governing body of the educational system of Greece. Funds are readily available to encourage growth and expansion within the school system and families are given allowances and scholarships to help fund educational costs. To encourage students who have either for personal reasons or otherwise, not completed their education, "second-chance" schools are made available to students over 18 who want to complete their levels of education. An 18 month program is in place to bring students to the same levels as students who complete the mainstream programs and such a program in place "to fight social exclusion for those who do not have the necessary qualifications and skills to meet the needs of contemporary labor market" (ICE, 2004).

Intercultural schools in Attica and Thessalonica provide opportunities to students with "social, cultural and learning particularities" and school curricula have been adapted to "facilitate the students' particular needs" (ICE, 2004). All day schools are established in order to cover social and "promote creative work." These additional hours accommodate parents and their work schedules and keep kids in school, productive and learning while the parents are at work. An additional curriculum is available to the instructors to choose from a list of 15 cognitive fields of study outside of the normal daily curriculum to utilize the three extra hours of curriculum time. Activities include:

• Study preparation

• Art

• Musical- Kinetic Education

• Environmental Education

• Drama

• Traditional Dances

• Sports

• Object and activities of traditional art and local traditional activities

• Communicative social relations

• Mythology- fairytales

• New technologies

• Foreign language

• Health education

• Traffic education

What is the ideology of the Greek education system?

It is evident in the National Report released at the Geneva conference in 2004 on the current state of Greece's educational system that their continued success stems from the value they place on educators and education. In keeping with the tradition of the ancient Greek civilization, to be educated is a privilege not a right. One major strength that Greece possesses over other European nations is its emphasis on "teaching the teachers," an ideology that brings strength and encourages growth within their educational system. They have realized that there exists cultural diversity even within a nation that has boasted of predominately similar culture and pure tradition and they have laid the foundation for future Inter-cultural schools.

They have held tight to the proud accomplishments of their ancient Greek Fathers and proudly educate their children using the treasure of knowledge which has been laid out for them. The tight bond between the education and cultural ministries encourages the promotion of pride of culture and nation to each and every student in the Greek school system. How can they escape this rich past? For they are surrounded by the ruins and reminders of a rich past where their ancestor's contributions have created monumental changes globally in the way we live as a society and as a world.

Comparing Greece and the United States

Both in the United States and in Greece there exists a common thread of curriculum reform. One of the most important steps that have been taken in the Greek education system is the emphasis on teaching the teachers, renewing teaching skills and training teachers to understand the new breed of learners and the changes that society imposes on education (ICE, 2004). While the United States is also moving in that direction with the attempts at implementation of in-service and professional development growth in elementary, secondary and post-secondary education, there is one very huge element of difference that exists between the two countries.

Unlike here in the US, in Greece, there is a constant high supply of teachers in all sectors of education. In part because teachers are civil servants and thus enjoy the benefits such as tenure, automatic promotion, educational leaves, health insurance and good overall working conditions. These benefits create an environment where teachers feel valued and are recharged each day they enter the classroom. This abundance of teachers also creates a smaller teacher student ratio of an average of 13 to1 (ICE, 2004). Unlike the American classrooms which are over-crowded and under-funded, Greece has managed to keep their educational system manageable and have addressed and will continue addressing problems in a pro-active way rather than a reactive way.

For the United States educational system, relief is not on the horizon. While there was great fear instilled in the American public when the Nation at Risk report was released in1983, those fears still exist today that the American school system will not educate America's youth to meet global standards. It is evident after researching other countries that America is certainly lagging behind still.

Conclusion

Much of today's education is a product of past reforms and patterns of beliefs. Educators are now faced with more challenges and changes than before and trying to adhere to old practices and policies only results in society's failure to give its children a quality education based and will not adequately prepare them for what society expects from them. Parents and educators must work as a team as learning does not end when the final bell rings. It continues at home and it is up to the parents to create a curriculum of sorts for their own children and home learning environment.

References

American InterContinental University Online, Classroom Materials, Unit 1. Retrieved July 22, 2005 from: ssid=61402&tid=47&LetterCode=

Hannafin, M. J. (1992). Emerging technologies, ISD, and learning environments: Critical perspectives. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40 (1), 49-63.

ICE, 2004. International Conference of Education in Geneva. National Report on Greece. Retrieved online July 22, 2005 from:

Marsh, Colin J., Willis, George (2003) Curriculum Alternative Approaches, On Going Issues. 3rd Edition. Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey

Oliva, (1988). The CIPP Model, Curriculum Development and Evaluation. Retrieved July 21, 2005 from:

Perkins, D. N. (1993). Person plus: A distributed view of thinking and learning. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.). (1983). Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005, 3rd Edition). Instructional Design. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

ThirteenED Online (2005). Concept to Classroom. Retrieved online July 19, 2005 from:



Wilson, B. G. (1995). Situated instructional design: Blurring the distinctions between theory and practice, design and implementation, curriculum and instruction.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download