Concluding Post: The business metaphor

My students,

One is always judged by their output, and these judgments can often define a person’s success. As a child I always battled the thought, “am I good enough?” Like many children with siblings think, it seemed as though my brother was always favored. I thought, and still think, his favor is due to his accomplishments. He was a straight-A student, saved money, worked hard, and kept his room clean. To earn my parents favor, in return, I fought hard to accomplish as much as him; however I always seemed to fall short. What I learned from this experience is that what a person does or accomplishes will reflect their value.

The use of the word, “value” as previously stated, the thought of “am I good enough?” and the marketing philosophy of successes and actions reflecting worth, all lead for me to view my own classroom and the position of the school in general as a business. While I am not proud to admit to this metaphor nor do I necessarily think this is good, I am realistic and view the system for what it is.  And with realizing and admitting to this metaphor, I acknowledge its position as a central form in my language of practice, and an embodied expression for my actions and practices (Connelly & Clandinin, 1988, p. 71).

In an observation from my principal this year, he noted that I run a “very business-like” atmosphere in my classroom. In some ways I found my “business-like” atmosphere to be fitting and appropriate. The truth of the matter is that the climate of consumerism is now seeping into daily instruction. Though this may make me uncomfortable, it may also be a reality, given the present climate of education. Schools and teachers are in a more vulnerable state than ever, with the ever-growing focus on test scores, the implementation of school of choice, and the increasing number of charter schools.  My insecurities with “being good enough” and my awareness of my value being determined by my output (test-scores) amplify this consumerism dynamic that is becoming more apparent in schools.

      First I would like to zoom out to examine the idea of consumerism in education as a whole. From the curriculum and politicians who choose the curriculum to the global competition of school systems, education is diminished to products. Much like how the success of businesses is determined by how popular their products are; curricular choices are being made to make our “products” (the students) more popular, mainly in business but also in politics.

When thinking about curriculum, specifically, the Common Core State Standards are designed to standardize the product. This has its benefits; standards help control product quality so that no school or business can produce less acceptable products. In the same way, standards can be limiting; in that they could restrain better means to producing even better products.  With standards, this is where the difference between products of business and products of schools become clear. Specific standards in business help regulate product quality, however specific standards in schools are not capable of regulating quality. Students are not lifeless products, no matter how much our system may operate and function in that way, students are people. We cannot simply regulate the quality of educated people by defining specific standards. Education cannot be reduced to systems of business, yet that is our reality.

In The Aims of Education, Nel Noddings noted in regard to the development of standards in education, “the underlying aims seem to be (1) to keep the United States strong economically and (2) to give every child an opportunity to do well financially,” (p. 431). The value of our country resides with our ability to be competitive globally in business and government. To be competitive globally in business and government, we need for our people to be educated in such a way that we have superior understanding over citizens from other countries. Here again, at a global view, education is reduced to a need for business.

Now if we zoom back in to look at the school level, the idea of business is just as present. School districts are competing for funding by competing for students and families to enroll, and are therefore looking for ways to increase their value. In the business world, competition typically means cutting costs to increase revenue and company worth along with having strict demands on the system for the creation of competitive products. This is all in the effort to obtain more customers, which in return feeds more money back into the system. I can’t honestly say that there is much difference in the educational system when it comes to competition. Schools and school districts need to attract more customers (students and families) to increase funding. But when funding is currently limited or dismal, many districts are looking for ways to cut costs whether it be by hiring teachers at lower salaries, shopping around for cheaper textbooks or other curricular aids, settling for less than ideal technologies or less than ideal learning conditions yet they impose strict demands for students to achieve higher test scores. In business the products or the process to create the products can be improved with clear fixes. However in education, we again are not working with products but rather people, which lends itself to being much more ambiguous and multidimensional. Higher test scores are not achieved by simply having higher thinking standards, or better classroom technology, or even simply better teachers; rather it is a collection of those variables along with many others that may lead to higher rates of success. But even then, there is no guarantee. School districts cannot offer a lifetime guarantee with their services, education is much more complex.

Everywhere I turn when I analyze the school system and education as it is viewed today, I am always reminded of the business influence and design imposed. While this is not ideal, I cannot help but let it trickle down into my classroom practices. The large influence of money and business on education has forced me to think of my classroom practices as functions of business. The heart of any business is the customer; in the same way the heart of a school’s success is often family buy-in and support. Many teachers, including myself at times, find we are avoiding to admit certain truths about a student to a parent to avoid losing their support or loyalty. It is easier more now than ever for a parent to simply transfer their student to another school, as easy as it is for a customer to purchase a better product at another business. There is often pressure on teachers to not let this happen, and when it does happen there is often an unspoken disappointment in the teacher. I find myself wanting to avoid, at times, negative feedback about grades or behavior at a rate that it should warrant because I am afraid it reflects badly on the school or myself. We are in an era with which the “customer is always right.” And no matter how many strategies I have implemented, time I have taken, and communication I have logged in effort to correct a failing student it seems as though there is always room to blame the teacher or the system.

Beyond the influence of losing customers are the daily transactions in my classroom. I feel strongly about putting more time and effort into the development for the students learning and behavior to increase their value and worth to the system. This is where my business metaphor influences my daily practices positively. In a business the quality of a product is often determined by how well it was made, its ability to last for many years, and its usefulness. I think about my students as assets to the world, and I need to increase their worth by ensuring that they are educated and responsible. Schools, parents, universities and employers will use grades and test scores as an assessment of their value at that given time.  And with any business, if the product is not valuable the business fails. Additionally, if my students are not successful with tests or produce good grades, it reflects directly on me and I become a failure also to my school system. This is why many teachers cheapen assessments by making them easy to pass, or inflate grades; but this will not cheat the standardized assessment system and at some point the value of both the students and the teacher becomes evident.

Looking forward I am afraid. The capitalistic world that we live in along with a growing global economy may only strengthen this business metaphor for schools. Elliot W. Eisner elaborates on the idea of consumerism curriculum, “education has evolved from a form of human development serving personal and civic needs into a product our nation produces to compete in a global economy. Schools have become places to mass produce this product.” It would be unrealistic to expect education to ever be free of the influence of money, yet we should be more aware to the impact it has on the learning for the students. In some ways it seems as if it is what we are teaching the students, rather than content of the disciplines such as English, Literature, Science, Social Studies, etc. John Dewey (2001) stresses the impact of experience on learning (p. 109). Perhaps with my metaphor, I have provided students with the experience of business in school. In many ways I feel as though my metaphor is preparing my students for reality. No matter what they do with their lives, they will need to understand the influence of business and competition.

Additionally, I would hope awareness to this system of business within our school system could help alleviate some of the focus and control of money on learning. We are not only determining curriculum through business and money, but we have now turned our schools into places of business. Students are the products; parents are the customers in which they are free to shop around via school of choice. Teachers are forced into “sales” in which we are tiptoeing around telling certain truths to parents about their children or the school itself, so we do not lose a “loyal customer.” Learning is controlled by money, in so many ways. Whereas learning should be a natural process and a civic duty not just a means to be successful in a capitalistic environment. Yet the reality remains that money equates to power, and power leads to control and success i.e. value; and our schools are not free of this dynamic. Therefore I must succumb to this reality and prepare my students to be successful within this system. 

Yours truly,

Carole Harkins

CEO of your classroom

Subordinate to the school-system

Works Cited

Connelly, F. M., &  Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as Curriculum Planners. Narratives of Experience. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Dewey, John. (2001). The Child and the Curriculum. In The school and society & The child and the curriculum (pp. 103-123). Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. (Original work published in 1902) 

Elliot Eisner. (2009). What does it mean to say a school is doing well? Phi Delta Kappa, 82(5), 367-372. Reprinted D.J. Flinders & S.J. Thornton (Eds.), The Curriculum Studies Reader (3rd ed., pp. 227-235). New York: Routledge.

What does a good school look like?

            One of the largest tensions in education this course has made me aware of is the idea of consumerism schools versus socially responsive schools. What I mean by this is that we live in an age in which schools, and specifically curriculum, are driven by money. However, what is socially right and necessary in education continues to challenge the business side of education politics; yet it often loses.  As it has been said, money runs the world.

           

            This has been a personal tension for me. I have found myself programmed and trained to think of school in business terms. The cost of technology per student, the cost of good curricular programs, the cost per teacher, per student are some ever-present issues in any school. In a district we battle public versus charter for funding. Nationally, we battle larger districts (or states, in reference to Texas in the last lesson on curriculum) controlling what is to be taught and/or bought. All of theses things truly affect the learning that takes in classroom from whom with the most money gets to decide what should be learned to schools needing to make decisions that impact students and classrooms based upon designated funding.

            Right now, public schools seem to be losing the funding battle to charter schools. At least in my district we are feeling the affect of money on student learning. Many Arts classes are being cut, along with teachers. Class sizes expand making the dynamic for learning even more challenging in an already struggling environment.

           

            It seems as though money is determining how and what students learn instead of pedagogy, philosophy, research, and experts. Yet here we are, educators whom understand the need for a demanding curriculum and high-quality instruction, struggling to do what is right in an environment where it sometimes seems impossible. This observable tension can sometimes lead to burnout. As I am approaching the end of my school year, and am faced again with projections for our school’s budget next year, our principal asks us, “how can we make cuts?” I wonder when we will get relieved of this battle, when will we win? Will there be a time in which money does not determine our children’s quality of education? The answer to this question is more than likely, no; so we must move forward in thinking about curriculum within the context of each budgetary frame. With the resources we have, how can we deliver a quality education, one of equal value to the school 5 miles down the road with twice as much funding?

            In The Aims of Education, Nel Noddings noted in regard to the development of standards in education, “the underlying aims seem to be (1) to keep the United States strong economically and (2) to give every child an opportunity to do well financially,” (p. 431).  Even the purpose for education, at the national scale, is underscored by money and business. While that is realistic and sensible to connect education to jobs, the JohnDewey inside of me insists that education is more than a means to earn money and get a job.  John Dewey is known for his ideas for curriculum to be meaningful and relevant and build on natural inquiry within in natural contexts. It is the most genuine form of education, it is education undressed, unaltered, uninfluenced.

            Elliot W. Eisner elaborates on the idea of consumerism curriculum, “education has evolved from a form of human development serving personal and civic needs into a product our nation produces to compete in a global economy. Schools have become places to mass produce this product.” We are not only determining curriculum through business and money, but we have now turned our schools into places of business. Students are the products; parents are the customers (or in some ways the community as a whole are the customers) in which they are free to shop around via school of choice. Teachers are forced into “sales” in which we are tiptoeing around telling certain truths to parents about their children or the school itself, so we do not lose a “loyal customer.”

            I noted early, my own personal struggle with this tension of business in education. Recently I have had an observation this year in which the principal noted that I run a “very business-like” atmosphere in my classroom. Although he stated this in form of a compliment, I couldn’t help but be slightly offended. Teachers are stereotypically the anti-business personality, they are warm, welcoming, funny, understanding, etc. Was the notion of schools as businesses now affecting my demeanor in my classroom? I continued to reflect on his statement, wondering if it was a good or a bad thing? In some ways I found my “business-like” atmosphere to be fitting and appropriate. Yet I still felt uncomfortable with this idea of a business like atmosphere. Whether it is good or bad, the truth of the matter is that the climate of consumerism is now seeping into daily instruction. Though this may make me uncomfortable, it may also be a reality given the present climate of education. 

How Should Curriculum be Developed?

Curriculum is at the heart of education. In fact curriculum is education in that it is "what" students should learn. Beyond the arguments of what should the curriculum be, is the argument for how the curriculum should be made. The process and people behind the development will surely influence the product being created. To put this in a different context; the CEO of Coca Cola and the CEO of Pepsi Cola may argue and disagree on how soda should be made. Their different ideas and processes for making soda lead to very different flavors and products, labeled within the same category of soda. Likewise, dependent upon the people and process used to make curriculum, "what" we teach students may be of different perspectives or entirely different content.  Curriculum should be made carefully and thoughtfully by experts who understand the learning process.
While that may seem obvious to say that curriculum should be made thoughtfully by experts, at some periods of time and at some places, curriculum has been made as an after-thought by people with little investment into the educational process. With that, I am referencing Russell Shorto's "How Christian were the fathers?" article, in which curriculum development is degraded to political and religious arguments by people whom have lives and passions outside of schools. "The board has the power to accept, reject or rewrite the TEKS, and over the past few years, in language arts, science and now social studies, the members have done all of the above. Yet few of these elected overseers are trained in the fields they are reviewing." (Shorto, 2010). To think that something so vital as curriculum is being dictated by people, whom not only have little content or pedagogical knowledge, but also by people whom dedicate only their secondary hours beyond their "real jobs", is scary. Curriculum is not only a influential and powerful tool to shape generations politically (as the board members in the article view it) but it is also influential and powerful to promote greatness and intelligence within the disciplines.
When considering how the political warfare on the Texas school board dictates many curricular choices, it becomes apparent that the influence of the people designing curriculum has a large effect on the curriculum itself. So who is qualified to make such impactful decisions? I may argue, instinctively, that teachers should be designing curriculum; however that may also not be the best choice. Teachers may be qualified in that they understand the learning process but unqualified in that many are not experts in all content areas, nor are they experts in curriculum design. As stated previously, curriculum is not something to be done as an after-thought or secondary to another career focus. Rather, curriculum should be the focus of study and the primary duty of the people whom are designing it.
When reading Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction by Ralph W. Tyler, the careful thought and dedication to understanding the value and design of curriculum was apparent and noted as a necessary resource. Many things are to be gained from reading Tyler's words. First is the idea of collaboration between the disciplines as a necessary means to create a learning as a connected and whole understanding of the world.  In the article, Tyler (1949) describes how people learn and how curriculum is and can be written; "In working on curriculum in any field, it will be necessary to identify elements that are relevant to and significant matters for that field as well as for the total curriculum," (p.45). At face value, I believe Tyler is encouraging curriculum to be written as a collaborative work between experts in the contents. Beyond that, and of equal value, is what I inferred from the reading; which is that curriculum should be written by people who understand the dynamic, both horizontally and vertically (p. 84), of curriculum, like Tyler, himself. Essentially, a well-written curriculum should be the product of collaboration of content experts as well as curricular experts whom are devoted to the development of this learning framework. I would have to believe Tyler would be appalled  by how the politics in Texas is influencing the curriculum.
With Common Core State Standards now being adopted in many states, I wonder how the historical influence of the Texan school board politicians will change? Common Core State Standards boasts that it was a collaborative effort between teachers, employers, parents, and experts in content areas, but was it influenced by experts in curriculum development? Meet Chris Minnich, Executive Director of Council of Chief State School Educators. Chris has a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and a Masters degree in Public Policy. He spent years working to develop assessments at the state level, and was a leader in the development of Common Core State Standards. Minnich's educational and professional experience leaves me to question his expertise in curricular development? However, Chris was only one of many people responsible for Common Core State Standards; and without researching the background of everyone person involved, we would have to hope and trust that these new standards for teaching were made with careful thought by experts dedicated to education.

Should we teach controversial topics in the classroom?

Schools cannot avoid controversial topics, such as homosexuality, when it is both a part of and affects the school's educational agenda. In order for students to learn, they must feel a part of the school's community, and both physically and emotionally safe within the classroom. If I imagine being in a place in which I feel attacked, hated, threatened, or not accepted, I would be emotionally distressed. The majority of my thoughts would be dedicated to survival, rather than hearing or engaging in whatever or wherever I am presently attended. So how can we, as educators, expect students to attend to what we are teaching when they are dealing with issues that interfere with their open acceptance and engagement to the traditional curriculum? It is those issues that we must invite into discussion in our classrooms. The issues that prevent from having all students engaged in learning are worthwhile in investigating within the classroom. Furthermore, students need to be able to collaborate regardless of personal beliefs or lifestyle differences both in school and in their future workplace.  Lessons on tolerance and acceptance through education on facts, is necessary. Above all, while homosexuality or the stigma of HIV/AIDS may be considered controversial; there should be no debate against teaching tolerance and acceptance.
As a Science teacher, year after year, I am faced with questions of religion versus the theories of Science. I invite students to share their opinions, as long as they provide research to support their thoughts, just as how the Science textbook provides evidence to substantiate the many scientific theories. Although I allow students to share their questions or opposing thoughts, I also do not advertise this controversial debate. I do not believe the controversy of creationism versus evolution affects a student's ability to learn, nor does it affect their ability to be successful in any workplace. Therefore, it is not a worthwhile controversy in which I engage with my students for any great lengths of time in the classroom. It can be dangerous to impose my authority and power that comes with my role as a teacher to assert any opinion on my students that does not affect their learning. It is dangerous in two ways, one in which students feel the need to agree with the teacher in return for a good grade, and also dangerous in that the legitimacy of the instruction is lost when a student disagrees. These are consequences that do make the inclusion of the debate of creationism or other religious views not valuable in my Science instruction. Controversial issues such as my example of creationism versus evolution does not be investigated heavily in the classroom, however issues that are far greater and contribute to a functional society are worth instructional time.
So what are the controversial issues that should be discussed? Issues such as bullying, HIV/AIDS, especially in the context of homosexuality, or issues surrounding race need to be included in school curriculum in the context of teaching acceptance and tolerance. It is interesting to assert the previously mentioned issues are even considered controversial, because in my eyes, it is a matter of acceptance and tolerance which are concrete human values that cannot and should not be argued against. In contrast to the consequences of including creationism in a Science class, Joseph Silin, in HIV/AIDS Education: Towards a Collaborative Curriculum asserted a similar fear for teachers when addressing the controversies that lie with HIV/AIDS Education, "When teachers believe their ability to influence students rests n the control of information, the lack of that control can lead to lethal silence," (p. 11). However, this feared consequence is illegitimate, in that every teacher should feel confident and in complete control when addressing the issue of acceptance. Everyday, teachers encourage students to collaborate with their peers, not only to accept the differences for the sake of friendship, but also to accept the differences in spirit of learning. We are professionals at educating tolerance and acceptance, so educating those same themes through traditionally perceived controversial issues should be no different.
Why should we discuss these sensitive topics in the classroom? The purpose of education is to create global citizens that are prepared to make thoughtful decisions and perform successfully in a diverse workplace, therefore discussing and educating students on issues (be it, controversial) that they will undoubtedly encounter in their adult lives is apart of that purpose. Students need to be informed so they are prepared to make decisions that are substantiated with educational fact rather than misinformed opinion. Regardless of anyone's personal belief system, they will encounter controversial issues such as HIV/AIDS or homosexuality in their professional lives. It is illegal to discriminate at the workplace, and we must educate and inform our students so they will be able to work collaboratively and professionally with individuals, even those they may personally disagree with.

What should schools teach? How should they be held accountable?

          Statistics show that about 50% percent of new teachers quit the profession within the first three years. I thought I would be one of those statistics. My student teaching experience was in a setting far different than my first “real job” as a teacher. I student taught in an elementary classroom in an academically successful rural district, yet my first job was in a seventh grade classroom in a struggling urban charter school. During my first year of teaching, I was battling issues, problems, and making decisions that I was not prepared for. I questioned my four years of undergraduate work and its purpose. How could I spend four years at a University Institution studying education, and yet still feel like a failure and inadequately prepared to do my job.

As part of the teacher preparation program requirements, I had to earn many “pre-service” teaching hours, but those hours were inconsistent and structured differently than the dynamic of being the sole teacher in a classroom. My educational classes in the program were, however, diverse. I had many philosophical education classes, and other courses with more practical applications like lesson planning, strategies and techniques for teaching certain contents. But none of my courses required much real-world practice with those concepts or discussed (with any depth) classroom management or discussed and practiced (with any depth) parent-teacher conferences and other correspondence with student families. If teacher-preparation programs were held accountable solely to teacher success rates for staying in their field, then they would be failing.

So there I stood, standing in front of a room full of students, a moment I had always dreamt of yet so different than my dreams. The students I faced were high need, below grade level academically, and notoriously difficult behaviorally. I had little to none in terms of teaching materials such as textbooks for students, paper, pencils, calculators, etc. How do I apply what I had learned about proper lesson planning, differentiated instruction, and/or how to use the latest and greatest teaching strategies and technology into a classroom where I feel like I am drowning with challenges, in both student need and my school’s expectations?

Since that first experience, I had an opportunity for a fresh start at a new school in a new district. Although equally challenging in terms of student need and expectations of teachers, I was more prepared going into the experience. However, I still wish I had been as prepared for my first teaching experience, I wish I was able to give those students the same experience I am now able to give my students. I wish I would have had more time in my student teaching experience, and even more time with real and practical application during my undergraduate courses. Perhaps then, I would have not considered being one of the fifty percent. Perhaps I could have entered on my first day of teaching with a realistic expectation of how to address the needs of those students and thrive as a teacher in such a challenging environment.

The Studio schools featured in the TED video, proposed by Geoff Mulgan (2011), focus on learning through real-world applications that are directly connected to the work place. This nontraditional approach to learning prepares students to be successful professionally, while they instill many similar academic standards that traditional schools offer. Quest for Learning, as featured in Sara Corbett’s (2010) “Learning by Playing: Video Games in the Classroom

” made learning relevant for students by presenting it in game format. Even though both schools, Studio and Quest for Learning, are different in how they teach their students, they also share some similarities in philosophy. Both schools place high value on making learning relevant and interactive.

E.D. Hirsch Jr.(1988) suggested in contrast to the progressive nature of Studio schools and Quest for Learning, that “The American school curriculum is fragmented both horizontally across subjects and vertically within subjects,” (p.116). Furthermore, the idea of transferability as mentioned in research from James Baker and Edward Thorndike according to Hirsch Jr. (1988) is inconsistent in how effective one can be in applying knowledge gained specific to one content into other disciplines or facets (pg. 122). Hirsch addresses these concerns regarding both of the traditional educational system and the idealistic proposition from John Dewey by suggesting a blend of the two. Where the focus is intensive in which students spend more time understanding content through more relevant and specific studies that apply to the same traditional learning standards, but with more depth (p. 128, 1988).

Had my own educational experience been as relevant as Studio school’s curriculum, or as interactive as Quest for Learning, or even as intensive and inquiry-based as suggested by Hirsch, then perhaps my real-world experience in teaching would not have felt as challenging and disconnected from my education. 
        In addition, accountability is not as intimidating and perhaps less demanding, when there are natural consequences to a successful curriculum, as discussed in The New Accountability: High Schools and High-Stakes testing by Martin Carnoy, Richard Elmore, and Leslie Siskin. Carnoy et. al explain the natural accountability with performing arts, specifically music. Traditionally music has not been a standardized discipline in which the students demonstrate what they learned on standardized assessments. Instead, the accountability of the music teacher is based upon their effectiveness to lead a good performance, in which an audience is there to witness and judge their ability (pg. 92). There accountability is relevant and applicable to the discipline. Yet when the discipline was charged with the same type of standards and assessments as other contents, its focus became less relevant to the discipline, the focus changed to how to pass the test. Instead of a school's success solely measured on a standardized test score, perhaps we need to also consider more relevant measurements to partner with the more relevant instruction. How many students graduate and go to college? How many students are employed in a desired career? Or in my personal scenario, did my teacher preparation program adequately prepare me for the classroom?

Resources

1. Check out this article by Greg Toppo featured in USA today about the ever-changing demographic of teachers. While the content is mainly about the culture of education as there are more new teachers in the field than ever, it also discusses the challenges new teachers face.
2. Some math game websites are far-reaching to math concepts, this website however seems relevant, interactive and fun.

What is Curriculum? What is its purpose?

           In Mathematics I have learned to multiply, divide, add, subtract, and perform difficult equations and formulas to solve for textbook problems such as slope-intercept, Pythagorean theorem, velocity of train and when it will intersect with a second train. In Science courses I have learned how to distinguish between hypothesis and theory, how to perform good scientific research, the layers of the earth, the difference between igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks, among many other scientific concepts. In English courses I have studied the great works of Shakespeare, learned how to draft complete sentences, how to write for a particular audience, and other general mechanical and grammatical rules for writing. In Social Studies courses I have learned the structure of our government, legislative, and, well, the other branches. Let’s face it, social studies was never my best subject. In my years of schooling I have mastered curriculum, or at least the designated curriculum by state standards at the time. But what is curriculum? According to William H. Schubert in Perspectives on Four Curriculum Traditions, “curriculum, at its root, deals with the central question of what is worth knowing; therefore, it deals with what is worth experiencing, doing, and being,” (p. 169, 1996). 

            If curriculum, is “what is worth knowing” then who determines worthiness? A scientist would argue for the worthiness of studying the layers of the earth, while a mathematician may argue for the worthiness of studying slope-intercept formula. Before we tackle the issue of who get’s to decide what is worth knowing and studying, we must first focus on purpose.

             According to the developers of Common Core State Standards, we (teachers) are to be developing global citizens, and preparing students for the modern demands of colleges and professional workplaces. I view the idea of global citizenship as people that are able to make informed and intellectual decisions, that they understand not only impact their personal situation, but in a way impact a community as part of a global system. We live in a world that is so quickly and easily connected by the click of a mouse. Communication of ideas, thoughts, actions that were once isolated, is now shared internationally within seconds. With this digital age, we need to be able to think and live globally to fully take advantage of all of the resources and set ourselves up to be able to compete with people from all over the world. In education, we are now comparing ourselves to educational systems globally now more that ever. Colleges are competing for status and rank globally. Many companies compete internationally. 

            Common Core State Standards (Common Core Mathematical Learning Initiative) were written, apparently, for a greater purpose of helping students think analytically in the pursuit of learning.  Yet, this analytical thinking is still derived from and around the traditional standards for education such as slope-intercept formula in mathematics. The plethora of higher-thinking standards is arguably too great to truly accomplish its very purpose. Instead many teachers are forced to skip topics, while they delve deep into certain areas, or skim the surface of understanding for all of the listed standards. We are not only telling students that they need to know slope-intercept formula, but now they need to master it in that they can apply the concept in many different ways, and then be able to justify and explain their method. Other than for use in future mathematic classes, or if you are a math teacher, how often is slope-intercept formula used?

            The Social Behaviorist and the Experientialist in Perspectives on Four Curriculum Traditions share a thought, in that they both question what is important to learn. While the Behaviorist argues the worthiness of what is to be learned should be based upon the needs of the society, the Experientialist argues the worthiness of what is to be learned is to be based upon natural inquiry and experience. I believe both of these ideas can work together, educating based upon what society needs and designing instruction to fit natural inquiry. But this cannot be done without radical change in the education system.

            Currently our system is grounded on measurement and data. While those are important variables (especially when one considers competing globally and how to determine the effectiveness of instruction) they stifle creativity, designing individualized instruction based upon need, and delivering instruction through inquiry. John Dewey in The Child and the Curriculum states,

            “Abandon the notion of subject-matter as something fixed and ready-made in itself, outside the child’s experience; cease thinking of the child’s experience as also something hard and fast; see it as something fluent, embryonic, vital; and we realize that the child and the curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process,” (p. 109).

Perhaps worthiness of what is to be learned is calculated upon experience.  I am not suggesting for students to not learn ideas such as slope-intercept formula. Rather they should learn it through an applicable experience or inquiry, then, and only then, is it a worthy topic. But that requires time and individualized instruction that our current system just does not allow for.  “What is worth knowing”, alternatively the curriculum, should serve the purpose of providing students with skills necessary to be a life-long learner, and to be able to discern educated decisions personally and professionally. I do not disagree with Common Core, at its heart. I want to prepare my students to compete internationally, and to be well-informed global citizens. The purpose of curriculum is clear, however the approach to achieve that purpose has room for improvement.

            I have since used my knowledge of slope-intercept formula, Pythagorean theorems, and calculating velocity, directly, in my career as a math teacher. I cannot say the same for knowing the layers of the earth, or how to write in the genre of fiction or poetry, or my studies of Shakespeare. I will never be a critic of theater, books, nor will I be an author. I do not plan on mining deep into the earth for oil, nor do I plan on predicting weather patterns based upon my understanding of systems of the earth and atmosphere. But I am grateful for my basic understanding and opportunity to explore each topic during my time at school. But most of all, I appreciate the skill sets I have gained for performing good research, analyzing and comprehending topics, so in the event I do decide to predict weather, I am capable.

Resources

 Eight Problems with Common Core Standards

 This is an interesting article addressing the purpose of Common Core. While some of it is easily debatable, it does bring up some interesting points about who decides and what is decided is important to know. Also if you scroll down, to the comments section, one person makes an interesting point in connection to the digital age and modern day learning. This person discusses their daughter learning specific violin skills by watching youtube, but a passion for music from their music teacher. 

"Although they need rich deep curricula, in some respects it doesn't matter what specific topics students study while they are in school. What they need is to learn how to learn and to develop a passion for learning so they will become lifelong learners." 

Introduction

Readers, welcome to my first blog for TE 818. I look forward to sharing my ideas, opinions, and learning's throughout this semester. I am anxious to document my understanding of curriculum and the educational system publicly and share with, not only my peers in this course, but any other interested person who may stumble upon this web address.

To fully understand my thoughts and opinions as I proceed to document them on this blog throughout the course, I first must share with readers more about myself. My name is Carole Harkins. I teach eighth grade math and science in a K-8 building under the jurisdiction of a traditionally urban school district. I am in the middle of my third year of teaching. I hear, after the third year, the chaos and challenges (that seem to be overwhelming at times) in my chosen career, will lessen. However, I also believe I should always feel challenged when I am teaching. I can always improve and be a better teacher, and overcoming those challenges will only help me be more successful in the future.

I have seen many things in my three short years. I have taught in four different school settings. I have experienced teaching in environments with little to no parent involvement, young children in gangs, a large distrust in the school system, failing test scores, and extreme teacher and administration turnover. I had to quickly learn how to still be successful and thrive in places where many people would want to give up.

My teaching career, so far, has been far different than my school experiences growing up.  Learning to teach in a setting so different than the setting in which I had learned, proved to not only be challenging but also enlightening. I have come to realize the many dynamics of what makes a school successful versus unsuccessful, along with what helps a child be successful versus unsuccessful in any environment.

One such factor is literacy, which brings me to the present. I am currently certified to teach Mathematics and Science through eighth grade. But as I have learned from my experiences, we are in a literacy crisis, and we need strong literacy education in schools in all disciplines. It is such a multidimensional topic, as I have come to discover. So I am currently seeking my Masters degree in Literacy. I value skillful reading and writing as the foundation for all subject areas,  and most importantly as the key to being a  productive member of society. I feel most valuable to my students, and the educational system by expanding and broadening my own understandings and teaching capacity.

In addition to growing as an educator, I am always trying to grow to be a better friend, partner, daughter, and person in general. As part of bettering myself, I have recently learned how to ski. I am afraid however, instead of it helping me to expand my experiences, it has only served to expand my bumps and bruises all over my body.

I am also excited to marry the love of my life in June on Mackinac Island. My life, both professionally and personally, is ever changing and becoming better and better as I continue to grow and learn.