Where do I begin describing a “successful curriculum”? As educators we all know that the curriculum that we teach is not limited to the grade level expectations and curriculum maps that spell out the objectives for us. In the seven plus hours that our students spend with us each day we hopefully spend time not only teaching them reading, math, science, and social studies but much more. We teach them how to interact and relate to their peers, we teach them how to problem solve, we expose them to things they have never encountered, and hopefully encourage them to continue searching for the things that interest them the most. So, where does that leave us with regard to answering this week’s guiding question, What constitutes a successful curriculum?
For me the Cycle Five reading offered snapshots into some of the possible ways to explore designing a successful curriculum. Geoffrey Canada, founder of the Harlem Children’s Zone is quite obviously trying to find ways to help disadvantaged students close the achievement gap between their more advantaged peers. The Harlem Children’s Zone has designed specific programs that aim at intervening early and providing ongoing support for students and their families. While the Meier article discussed Central Park East Secondary Schools and their approach to community building (I linked to a specific article here but, overall the entire Responsive Classroom website is really interesting.) within their schools to provide students with intervention and support. Neither model differs that drastically from the other in their desired outcome, helping students be successful in school and throughout their lives.
The Eisner article and Noddings article reminded me of things that we must keep in mind as we develop curriculum, design schools, and most importantly educate students. I thought Kyle’s description of Noddings as a “happy skeptic of all things standardized” could not have been put more accurately. Noddings proposes that happiness should be one of the aims of curriculum but is often neglected. I think that her assessment is fair and agree that we should not be designing curriculum that is “one-size fits all”. Students need to be able to express choice and interest in their courses of study. I think that while students need a broad understanding of many subjects, I am not sure that every student should have to take a specific math class because that it what comes next or because that’s what every post K-12 institution is looking for. Perhaps, as Noddings points out, we should be more focused on our students goals and interests, the things that will make them happy throughout their lives and not just assign those things we think are best for them.
One of the most important points that Elliot Eisner made for me as I consider successful curriculum is summed up in the following quote. What connections are students helped to make between what they study in class and the world outside of school? A major aim of education has to do with what psychologist refer to as "transfer of learning." Can students apply what they have learned or what they have learned how to learn? Can they engage in the kind of learning they will need in order to deal with problems and issues outside of the classroom? If what students are learning is simply used as a means to increase their scores on the next test, we may win the battle and lose the war. I think that Noddings and Eisner go hand in hand. If we engage our students in learning that is interesting and provide them with some amount of happiness they will be more likely to “transfer their learning”.
After reading all four articles, I am left questioning; does the Harlem Children’s Zone strive for and successfully integrate the “transfer of learning” that Eisner discusses? Does Central Park East Secondary Schools, KIPP, or a traditional public school? I am not questioning that all four of the aforementioned options have noble intentions, but I wonder if one of the structures has really successfully integrated “transfer of learning” as one of the centerpieces of a successful curriculum. Personally, I thought that a structure like the one at CPESS had the best design for implementing a successful curriculum that acknowledges the importance of student interests and goals. It seemed to me that they have very strategically created intimate communities within their schools to not only foster teacher-student relationships, but also student-student relationships and teacher-teacher relationships. I think a model like the one used a CPESS allows staff and students to get to know one another. As a teacher this knowledge would allow you to access your students interests and aspirations and use that as the basis for your curriculum.
As a former kindergarten teacher, I would agree that you really get to know your students because so much of kindergarten has to be individualized to meet the individual students’ needs. In getting to know your students, I think you naturally learn about their interests and goals. In discovering these interests and goals, I think that we not only find what makes students happy, but also what allows them to take their learning beyond the boundaries of the classroom. As educators we hope that our students will take what they have learned in our classrooms with them throughout their educations and lives. We need to start asking ourselves how we can achieve such an ambitious goal not only for our own classrooms, but also in a way that is replicable in classrooms everywhere.
