Module 2: Philosophical Foundations, Conceptions of Curriculum, Practical Curricular Designs
Module 2 Collaborative Visual
Please feel free to explore our Slideshow, there you will find the link to our 'Popplet' mind map.
Right away, what stuck out for me with this task was how it built upon our understanding of curriculum conceptions from Module 1. I admit, I felt a little overwhelmed by all of the information, but we eventually managed to create a map in our minds that helped.
It is my understanding that the 'bedrock' or foundation of curriculum conceptions is Philosophy. In other words, we group our curriculums based on our worldviews. In some cases, these could be beliefs of what the world and education should be. The curriculum conceptions I view as heads of families. The practical designs are the children and/or cousins. The offspring, if you will.
As my partner, Mark K. and I have discovered throughout this process, much like anything in life, there are many nuances and trial and error involved when dealing with belief systems.
Traditionally there has been a lot of debate about the different philosophies which surround curriculum design and development. The Ornstein and Hunkins article teaches us that it is, “Central, when considering curriculum design, to include learner development in the curriculum algorithm” (1991). Thus we see many of the curricular designs having a student-centered focus. One of the biggest issues facing modern aspects of curriculum design in a country such as Canada is the multitude of regions and the various cultural backgrounds of our ever-changing society. Where do we find a balance? Our curricular designs should reflect diverse voices, meanings, and points of view. The scope of this diversity is one of the largest challenges we see from this activity for curriculum designers going forward. Which types of diversity are to be included and which to be left out? We see an interesting shift in how we organize schooling for our students. Elementary schools take a student-centered design whereas in high school the approach shifts to a more subject-centered focus pushed upon by prerequisites from the post-secondary level.
I would take this a step further and ask, how does higher education contribute to this shift? Historically, Academia served to enlighten the privileged in society. A truly liberal education involved developing awareness in Philosophy, Social Sciences, the Arts. Many of these programs have fallen out of favor because of limited job prospects come graduation. People still choose to study what they are passionate about (no doubt a product of this tradition and our education system) while many others focus on technical learning as it pertains to work opportunities (e.g, Business Admin., Engineering, Computer Science). Given that higher education is in essence, a business; how does this trickle down to the Elementary and Secondary schools? Politics and philosophy aside, an educator, as Ornstein and Hunkins state, "Imparts essential understandings, attitudes, and skills" (1991). As eluded to above, who determines these essential understandings, and what are they? It is my hope that they be sufficient to carry my students throughout their lives, in whatever capacity they choose.
Lastly, it seems to me that moving away from subject-centered curriculums and a heavier focus on student-centered learning would be beneficial. Not that we don't do this now; I would argue that we could do more. I believe that the shift from Elementary to Secondary and Post-Secondary robs the students of, "individual expression and imposition from authority" (Ornstein, 1991) as the reconstructionists would say. Moreover, education is stifled and is no longer a, "creative self-learning; active process in which the leaner re-constructs knowledge" (1991), and society for that matter, according to the Progressives and Reconstructionists.
Ornstein, A. C. (1990/1991). Philosophy as a basis for curriculum decisions. The High School Journal, 74, 102-109.
Right away, what stuck out for me with this task was how it built upon our understanding of curriculum conceptions from Module 1. I admit, I felt a little overwhelmed by all of the information, but we eventually managed to create a map in our minds that helped.
It is my understanding that the 'bedrock' or foundation of curriculum conceptions is Philosophy. In other words, we group our curriculums based on our worldviews. In some cases, these could be beliefs of what the world and education should be. The curriculum conceptions I view as heads of families. The practical designs are the children and/or cousins. The offspring, if you will.
As my partner, Mark K. and I have discovered throughout this process, much like anything in life, there are many nuances and trial and error involved when dealing with belief systems.
Traditionally there has been a lot of debate about the different philosophies which surround curriculum design and development. The Ornstein and Hunkins article teaches us that it is, “Central, when considering curriculum design, to include learner development in the curriculum algorithm” (1991). Thus we see many of the curricular designs having a student-centered focus. One of the biggest issues facing modern aspects of curriculum design in a country such as Canada is the multitude of regions and the various cultural backgrounds of our ever-changing society. Where do we find a balance? Our curricular designs should reflect diverse voices, meanings, and points of view. The scope of this diversity is one of the largest challenges we see from this activity for curriculum designers going forward. Which types of diversity are to be included and which to be left out? We see an interesting shift in how we organize schooling for our students. Elementary schools take a student-centered design whereas in high school the approach shifts to a more subject-centered focus pushed upon by prerequisites from the post-secondary level.
I would take this a step further and ask, how does higher education contribute to this shift? Historically, Academia served to enlighten the privileged in society. A truly liberal education involved developing awareness in Philosophy, Social Sciences, the Arts. Many of these programs have fallen out of favor because of limited job prospects come graduation. People still choose to study what they are passionate about (no doubt a product of this tradition and our education system) while many others focus on technical learning as it pertains to work opportunities (e.g, Business Admin., Engineering, Computer Science). Given that higher education is in essence, a business; how does this trickle down to the Elementary and Secondary schools? Politics and philosophy aside, an educator, as Ornstein and Hunkins state, "Imparts essential understandings, attitudes, and skills" (1991). As eluded to above, who determines these essential understandings, and what are they? It is my hope that they be sufficient to carry my students throughout their lives, in whatever capacity they choose.
Lastly, it seems to me that moving away from subject-centered curriculums and a heavier focus on student-centered learning would be beneficial. Not that we don't do this now; I would argue that we could do more. I believe that the shift from Elementary to Secondary and Post-Secondary robs the students of, "individual expression and imposition from authority" (Ornstein, 1991) as the reconstructionists would say. Moreover, education is stifled and is no longer a, "creative self-learning; active process in which the leaner re-constructs knowledge" (1991), and society for that matter, according to the Progressives and Reconstructionists.
Ornstein, A. C. (1990/1991). Philosophy as a basis for curriculum decisions. The High School Journal, 74, 102-109.
Comments
Post a Comment