Comparative Education

After reading the articles for this week I was struck by one big unifying factor of all of the areas where students seem to be flourishing in their educational systems...the trust placed in teachers in developing local assessments to meet local, state, and national standards. In the U.S., teachers seem to be placed further and further down the totem pole in their value to the system. Canned curricula that tell you what to say and how to say it with a string of assessments are the norm. We can't be trusted to make our own local assessments and to evaluate our own students' learning. We are merely the speaking box and manager of behavior. We aren't supposed to have to think. And with NCLB and high-stakes testing, our roll has been reduced further to some degree to a person preparing students to take a multiple-choice test that will supposedly indicate their level of learning. (Sorry for my rant.)

The Zhao interivew article, "Playing 'Catch-Up' with Developing Nations Makes No Sense for U.S." had many statements that just jumped right out at me and made perfect sense. One statement was the idea that when learning is tied too strictly to one criterion people will always try to game the system. We see this with NCLB. Some states set their requirements so low they appear to be doing wonderfully, while others who set them high are apparently failing miserably, but still could be performing better. Secondly, that narrowing to one criterion will drive the system and that doesn't drive equity. That, "equity is ensured more by teachers, by the classroom than by standards." To me this is one of the major failings of the NCLB legislation. It failed to realize this important bit of information. That it wasn't and isn't the diversity of standards across the country that are failing our children, but the equity in the quality of teachers and schools.

I particularly liked from the article "What Would it Mean to Be Internationally Competitive" by Linda Darling-Hammond and Laura McCloskey the information about how these countries who are succeeding are not using their assessments to punish and sanction schools. They use the assessments as information for curriculum improvement and because of this can set higher standards. They work with schools, not against them.

The main threads of all of these articles was that assessment was tied to performance-standards more than paper-and-pencil tests. That standards and learning were geared around higher-level thinking skills: creating, analyzing, synthesizing, evaluating, etc. Skills that are the most sought after and most needed in today's world. Teachers are trusted and important to the designing of assessment and education. That learning also was geared toward the areas strengths. Their niches. What they do well. When will we finally catch on?

What Curriculum Should Be...Hmmm

Well I can't say that I have a solid answer even after reading the 3 articles. A common message that seemed to underlie all 3 articles is curriculum should be student centered. The Alvin Toffer article on edutopia.org had this to say: "you need to find out what each student loves. If you want kids to really learn, they've got to love something." The weblogg-ed article had this to say: "I think I’m finally getting to the root of my continued frustration with my kids’ education which is the system’s inability to help them find and nurture the areas they truly have passion for. It would be nice if the institution were the place that connected my kids to the experts they desired and needed to support their learning, wouldn’t it?" Finally the edutopia.org article about the virtual classroom had this to say: "Some form of blended learning -- online and in the classroom -- will likely become the norm, as students take one or two online courses to supplement their traditional schedule."

The idea of blended learning, with some learning occurring in the classroom and supplemental learning occurring online seemed an intriguing idea to me. I think this could be a solution to some budgetary problems when it comes to funding education. If I am not mistaken, Maine spends the most per pupil of any state in the nation. Where is all of this money going? I think a huge cost in Maine is the fact that we have vast rural areas requiring us to run schools with few students, but having the same heating and busing costs. Blended learning to complete online learning seems like an alternative worth looking at. Of course, just like the articles state, you have to make sure you TRAIN your teachers to do this kind of teaching. That this is important. I really don't have enough information from these articles to really give full support of this idea as a model that would work in Maine. My big question is how do you get around NCLB or integrate NCLB into this kind of model? How do you convince the "system" in Washington to change? Many of the people who lead us nationally and locally succeeded in the traditional curriculum because their very nature allowed them to. They often don't see or understand why it fails so many. Is this really as big an obstacle as I see it to be?

What Do They Mean by Curriculum?

Gosh, there are certainly many things to find when searching for the definition of curriculum. The definitions I've found tend to be very broad and don't really give me much more than I already knew about what a curriculum was. Wikipedia gives curriculum this definition - In formal education or schooling (cf. education), a curriculum is the set of courses, course work, and content offered at a school or university. The Webster-Merriam Dictionary gives curriculum this definition - 1 : the courses offered by an educational institution; 2 : a set of courses constituting an area of specialization. John Kerr gives it a slightly different, and to me, a slightly more useful definition - All the learning which is planned and guided by the school, whether it is carried on in groups or individually, inside or outside the school. Then as I dug deeper I found that people have even broken down the definition of curriculum into 4 or more parts, types or approaches. This link had a very lengthy list to define curriculum - http://www.uwsp.edu/Education/lwilson/curric/curtyp.htm. Whoa. My head is spinning now.

I guess if I could pick a definition that spoke to me the most personally and one I would use to guide my own thinking at this point would be the definition given by John Kerr that I referenced above and italicized for easy finding. Of course, I could be completely off base in my newer thinking on curriculum after my research into just the definition. I reserve the right to change my preference and definition with newer thinking.

I think for the course I am finding that my biggest question I want answered is, "What should the curriculum include?" I think knowing 'what' a curriculum should include, although I fear that there is no easy answer there either, will help me better in determining what a good working definition of curriculum is. I work as a grade 1 teacher and plan on staying in the elementary arena at this point (but who knows where the winds will take me next year). Due to the area I work in, I think my inquiry project question will be, "What should an elementary school curriculum include?" I am borrowing this from Ed's list, but I think this is the best way to direct my own learning.

Is My School Regular?

Certainly my schooling was regular. I have taken a few courses and done some reading and my view on "regular" schooling has definitely changed with new information. I had the opportunity to take a course titled Students At-Risk and Their Families and I was lucky enough to have 2 alternative education teachers in the course. The class took on many discussions about traditional or "regular" schools versus "alternative" education. We discussed why "alternative" education seems to help those students who are most at-risk. What is the "regular" system failing to do?

There are certainly better ways to organize many schools. I believe the regular system does severely hinder higher level learning. We seem to put students through fact factories instead of engaged, meaningful, learning zones. I teach at an elementary school and I could think of a few ways to help the learning experience. First, interruptions to the day are always interrupting learning. We constantly have a stream of announcements and dismissals coming over our PA system. What is the necessity of this? Couldn't announcements be better saved for the daily bulletin or e-mail if they are non-emergencies? Couldn't student dismissals be called directly into the classroom instead of to the whole school? These constant interruptions disrupt the flow of learning within the classroom. Then there are the specials that occur at random times that you stop learning for no matter how meaningful or wonderful. It also changes the routine of each school day. This makes consistency difficult. Make the specials at the same time everyday or at the beginning or end of the day, not randomly scattered through the middle.

Then there are the separate subjects. Writing and reading are pretty well mixed and flow as one big block with a snack break somewhere in the middle to refuel their brains. It's connected and meaningful. Reading and writing is student directed with student's choosing what they want to do with each of these. After that it is a mess. I have a math program and science units to teach with a limited time to do each and it is just a conveyor belt of information so I can get them done and get the assessments done. I'd love for them to become more meaningful, more project based, more higher-level thinking. I think this is a productive change. Learning information doesn't have to be an unconnected array of small bits of information to say that you taught those things. Make long-term meaningful projects that teach those same skills in a real-world way.

The school I teach in is definitely "regular." I think it strives to be different, but finds the task of changing overwhelmingly large. I also think the task is daunting in the face of NCLB as well. I think many schools may face this same problem, and in the face of these problems, would rather leave it as is for now. Save the headache for someone new.

I personally would like to know more about curriculum development and such. With that knowledge I am sure these things will change above with my new knowledge. I hope this wasn't a rambling mess and it answered some questions. With the start of the course my mind is always a jumbled mess of thoughts that slowly organizes itself to some degree by the end into more coherent thoughts.