Analyzing the Curriculum (Pages 12-23)

Summary
5 Concurrent Curricula
i) Official Curriculum- Includes guides, standards, lists of objectives (like our ministry curriculum documents). Its purpose is two-fold. Teachers can plan and evaluate learning using this document as a guideline, while administrators can use these documents to hold teachers accountable.
ii) Operational Curriculum- Comprised of the “taught” curriculum and the “tested” curriculum. Teachers select the “essential” content to focus on. Students influence this process and can bargain way content with teachers. The author warns that this often leads to devaluing the curriculum as teachers will tell students what to memorize for a test.
iii) Hidden Curriculum- Contains messages about such things as race, gender, class and authority roles.
iv) Null Curriculum- What is not taught, and what is ignored
v) Extra Curriculum- Planned experiences outside of school subjects. Example- lessons about character education

A Curriculum Framework: The Tyler Rationale
4 Questions to Consider When Planning Curriculum

i) What educational purpose should the school wish to attain?
-> Study learners and society, and consult with SMEs to determine plan
-> Align research with school philosophy to determine objectives


ii) Determine what experiences will promote these objectives
iii) How can we organize these experiences?
a. SEQUENCING
b. INTEGRATION
iv) How can we be sure that we met our objectives?
a. What evaluative methods will be used to ensure our system is working?


The Technical Production Framework
- The most dominant curriculum framework- heavily researched-based, and high reliance on “experts”
- Curriculum decision makers have technical expertise in method and content
- An attempt is made to make curriculum value-free
- The purpose for curriculum is based on studies of learning

Author’s Views
- The author’s propose an expanded analysis model
- When we analyze the curriculum we should also look at political and ideological perspectives to tease out hidden agendas in our curriculum
- We need to move beyond the technical approach as no approach can be completely value-free.
- Pages 20-22 provide questions to help us effectively analyze the curriculum
- The author cautions us not to take a curriculum developer’s admissions about his/her underlying assumptions at face value; the author argues that many developers are unaware of their values.


Commentary

Theory to Practice
As a student and teacher, I have witnessed many examples of the hidden and null curriculum. One notable example occurred while I was teaching Civics as a new teacher. The textbook contained examples of political scandals, and only showcased Conservative scandals. The text was published after the notorious Liberal party HRDC scandal, so it seemed ridiculous to omit this recent, and highly relevant faux pas.

My Critique of the Reading
I saw this reading as a general introduction to curriculum theory and analysis. However, I took issue with some aspects of the article. The author outlined the importance of unravelling a doctrine’s hidden agenda. I took his advice in my analysis of his work.

When Posner describes the operational curriculum, he only addresses the ways in which the curriculum can be watered down by teachers and rendered incongruent with deep learning. Yet, as teachers we are always encouraged to make our operational curriculum or essential content as relevant and as rich as possible. I would argue that teachers make decisions about essential content based on students’ individual learning needs more often than they water content down to “bargain” with students.

Questions for the Class Discussion
1) In your experience, do teachers water down the curriculum to bargain with students?
2) If not technical experts, then who should be responsible for curriculum development?
3) Is the technicist approach truly the dominant approach in curriculum development?