To give readers insight about the challenges
attached in developing a responsible curriculum, this blog has referred to William
Schubert’s commonplaces of curriculum.[1]
In that endeavor, the blog has reviewed
all of the commonplaces and how they relate to any suggested curricular changes
one might promote for civics education. It
still has some commentary on the last of the commonplaces, milieu, to share. The last posting commented on the social
expectations of schools and this one will address schools’ socio-economic
concerns which undergird their base.
As
explained earlier in this blog, Jean Anyon found the types of instruction and
curriculum that schools offered were highly associated with the economic status
of the children and adolescents who attended those individual schools.[2] In “working class schools” the tendency was
for students to be exposed to instruction relying on rote work with little or
no explanation, which leads to mechanistic learning.[3]
“Affluent professional schools” or “executive
elite schools,” on the other hand, were much more apt to utilize instruction
that had students engage in creative activities and independent work. This latter type of work is what is being
proposed in this blog’s promotion of the liberated federalism mental construct. Such instruction allows students to develop
analytical skills useful in adult life.
The consequence of this difference is that
through the schools’ hidden curricula, they tend to reinforce the social and
economic inequalities that already exist.
Workers’ children are taught the skills and disciplinary dispositions
expected of them at the workplace and managers’ and problem-solvers’ children
and adolescents are expected to learn the skills they need to take the
employment positions of their parents.
This includes such positions as management and consulting work.
Jere
E. Brophy, in the latter years of the past century, argued that the dichotomy
of experience is not only one experienced in school, but further experienced in
the home. The reviewed sources of this
century do not reveal improvement[4]
but describe how upper income parents, who usually hold more intellectually demanding
employment, fill their households with discussion and conversation that have a
more abstract quality. Brophy wrote:
I take the term “disadvantaged” to imply two
things about a child’s background: (1)
poverty and (2) gaps and limitations …
so it should not be taken to imply limited potential, sensory or motor
deficits, or learning disabilities … Disadvantaged backgrounds limit students’
readiness for school activities in both quantitative and qualitative ways. …
In addition to … quantitative limitations in
disadvantaged students’ background experience, there are gaps and qualitative
limitations in their development of cognitive and metacognitive tools for
processing and making sense of their experience, transforming and storing this
information in a form of codified knowledge, and assessing and applying it in
relevant future situations.[5]
Of course, this condition of treating different
socio-economic groups differently in terms of the educational advantages
provided is an affront to the nation’s stated political value of equality.
This
blogger, in a published article, argued that the educational product presented
to lower income students should be different in terms of the level of
abstraction in which the material is presented.[6] This is not to avoid abstraction but to
recognize the exposure these students have had.
This demands curricular constructs of content that are flexible enough
to meet the different levels of abstraction that are of potential utilization. The judgment of this account is that its
proposed model, the liberated federalism model, offers such flexibility.
The model is open-ended in terms of the
specific conditions which might be portrayed under its use. Challenging political situations can vary
from relatively simple concerns to highly complex ones. The portrayal of the compact-al, federated
union can also vary in complexity. But
its basic components are easy to understand and amply demonstrable by the
experiences of any youngster.
Bonds formed among young friends in primary
groups, for example, often exhibit the characteristics described under the
concept, fraternal ethos.[7] Therefore, the judgment of this account is
that the use of the liberated federalism model can meet the demands of the
different income groups by allowing teachers or material developers to gear the
material to appropriate levels of abstraction and therefore, provide the
pathway to more meaningful and insightful understanding of governance and
politics.
[1] William H. Schubert, Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm, and Possibility
(New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing
Company, 1986). The commonplaces can be
defined as follows:
·
The subject matter refers to the academic
content presented in the curriculum.
·
The teacher is the professional instructor
authorized to present and supervise curricular activities within the classroom
setting.
·
Learners are defined as those individuals
attending school for the purpose of acquiring the education entailed in a
particular curriculum.
·
Milieu refers to the general cultural setting
and ambiance within the varied social settings found at the school site.
Upon reflection, these
commonplaces prove to be helpful in asking insightful questions.
[2] Jean Anyon, “Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum
of Work,” in Curriculum: An
Introduction to the Field, 2nd Edition, edited by James R. Gregg
(Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1988), 366-389
AND for a more general overview on the ways financial resources have on
education see “Does Money Matter in Education? Second Edition,” Albert Shanker
Institute (2023), accessed October 28, 2023, URL: https://www.shankerinstitute.org/resource/does-money-matter-education-second-edition#:~:text=Schooling%20resources%20that%20cost%20money%2C%20including%20smaller%20class%20sizes%2C%20additional,positively%20associated%20with%20student%20outcomes.
[3] For a granular review of how money affects the
quality of education students of various income levels receive, see Henry M.
Levin, “On the Relationship Poverty and Curriculum,” North Carolina Law
Review, 85, 5 (June 1, 2007), 1383-1418, (quotation below, page 1403). Here is a sample of that work:
The signs of
different expectations are subtle but evident, even at the elementary school
level. Schools serving lower-income students often stress following directions,
while the middle class students are charged with critical analysis of school
subjects." Teachers of low income
students often place more emphasis on discipline, and children's experiences
are circumscribed because of concerns that they will not behave appropriately
if given challenging or enriching experiences or provided with too much independence.
[4] For example, see “Unequal Opportunities: Fewer Resources, Worse Outcomes for Students
in Schools with Concentrated Poverty,” Commonwealth Institute (1921), accessed October
31, 2023, URL: https://thecommonwealthinstitute.org/research/unequal-opportunities-fewer-resources-worse-outcomes-for-students-in-schools-with-concentrated-poverty/.
[5] Jere E. Brophy, “Effective Schooling for Disadvantage
Students,” in Better Schooling for the Children of Poverty: Alternatives to Conventional Wisdom,
edited by Michael S. Knapp and Patrick. M. Shields (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 1991),
211-234, 211-212.
[6] Robert Gutierrez, “Teaching Secondary Social Studies
to Low and Moderate Achievers: A Modest
Proposal,” The Social Studies, July/August, 149-154.
[7] For readers new to this blog, the liberated
federalist view promotes a view of state-building which depends on a sacred
(either secularly or religiously defined) agreement in which founding parties
come together to formulate the resulting polity. In turn, it counts of its citizenry to maintain
a relatively high level of federation among its members. Hence, a “fraternal ethos” becomes important. The problem is that this nation has veered
away from such leanings and has adopted a natural rights view with its high
level of individualism to define how the citizenry defines governance and
politics.
No comments:
Post a Comment