Search

In this article, I share a number of thoughts and concerns about the current and future status of a field in which I have been a participant for five decades. I know that many others share these worries as well. Speaking honestly, I am deeply concerned that too much of the field of curriculum has lost its way. Too much of it is characterized by a condition of historical amnesia. It has too often forgotten the key questions about what and whose knowledge should be official. It has become lost in postmodern abstractions and deconstructive despair. It is hermetic in too many ways and has in the process lost its ability to speak clearly about some major problems facing schools, teachers, students and communities. With neoliberal, neoconservative, authoritarian populist, and new managerial forces increasingly occupying the space of real policies and practices, we have little voice in the public debates over the realities of schooling and the decisions of curriculum policies and practices. The field of education deserves more.

In Someone Has to Fail, Labaree (2010) offers an admirably concise overview of the history and promise of education reform in the United States, combining insights from the history of education, policy studies, and a refreshingly accurate and nuanced account of what it is like to actually manage a classroom environment. While in this essay we shall raise some substantive questions about some of Labaree's analysis, it is to his credit that we wish to take his work so seriously. Someone Has to Fail offers a reinterpretation of the complexities of education reform, one that is full of useful counterpoints to many of the most common claims made by today's business-minded reformers. Thus, the work is well worth reading. However, we still wish that Labaree had more deeply explored the contexts within which his education "consumers" were making their system-shaping decisions. Such an effort would have offered a more compellingly critical assessment of the importance of curriculum and the struggles over knowledge and culture. It would have brought the experiences and movements of the marginalized closer to the center of its account. And in the process, it might have engendered a somewhat less gloomy perspective regarding the roles that schools might still play in efforts to create a more just society.

There is more and more external control of classroom content and processes. This external control is being vested in legislative and administrative bodies, which are more apt to turn the school over to managerial and industrial needs. Teachers should take organized action to defend their right to control the classroom. (RM)

Control over content, teaching, and evaluation of social studies is moving outside of the classroom. Organized action is needed to see that teachers do not lose their autonomy. (RM)

Assumes that America's economic difficulties and resulting social tensions will continue over the next two decades. Predicts consequent negative and positive trends in curricular content and organization and in decision-making processes affecting curricular change. Suggests that social change is crucial if curricular change is to be effective. (PGD)

This article examines a new trend of high school choice in China – parental choice of emerging international high-school curriculum programs (IHSCPs) recently established by Chinese elite public high schools. We add to the existing critical literature on school choice by providing a detailed empirical analysis of why, how, and under what conditions Chinese parents with high socio-economic status choose a particular IHSCP. Drawing on Pierre Bourdieu's conceptual triad of practice – capital, habitus, and field, the article points out that Chinese upper-middle- and upper-class parents engage in complicated conversion strategies surrounding their individual and collective struggles for elite education in both national and international fields of power. The study foregrounds the role of neoliberalism in articulating local and global education markets that allows privileged Chinese to transcend structural constraints in China and seek out opportunities in the international education field for their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Books for and in schools are commodities. They form a central part of the political economy of publishing. They are also, profoundly, sites of cultural and ideological conflict. While always there, there are periods when these economic and ideological conflicts are even more powerful. This is just such a time. This reality asks us to also examine places in school buildings that might (often wrongly) seem to some people to be "less important." Among these places is the school library as a resource, a teaching device, an access point to things seen as controversial, a mirror of conflicts and economic and political transformations, and for many students, at times a sanctuary. American Public School Librarianship: A History provides us with a richly sourced account of the development of a key pedagogic site in schools and of many of the personal, institutional, and political reasons why they do—and do not do—certain things. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the knowledge about the curriculum and the concrete problems of curriculum policy and practice. Topics discussed include cultural, social and economic capital in the society, cultural, political and economic projects, and valuative visions of what schools should do and whom they should serve.

While much of the critical scholarship around elite schooling has focused on the students who attend elite institutions, their social class locations, privileged habituses and cultural capital, this paper foregrounds curricular form itself as a central mechanism in the (re)production of elites. Using Basil Bernstein's conceptual framework of pedagogic codes, this paper depicts how one of the most high-status forms of school knowledge – critical thinking – is taught in both an elite as well as a mainstream secondary school in Singapore. It argues that even as, or more accurately, precisely because the Singapore Ministry of Education emphasizes the teaching of critical thinking in all schools and to all students, how such knowledge is presented and performed in the school curriculum becomes crucial in differentiating elites from mainstream students. Findings suggest that whereas the pedagogic codes in the mainstream school remain oriented towards an instrumental rationality and the fulfillment of external and profane market exigencies, in the elite school they invoke a rationality that is inward-looking, personalized and that encourages the development of narcissistic, sacred identities. This paper concludes by considering how curricular form itself functions as a non-neutral mechanism for the transmission of educational knowledge, and the ways in which, in Singapore's highly stratified society where meritocracy functions as a key principle of governance, the elite identities that accrue from such a curricular form further entrench the political legitimacy of a “meritorious” class. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

All educational reforms have particular histories. And all of them are driven not only by technical considerations but also profoundly by cultural, political, and economic projects and by ideological visions of what schools should do. In this contribution to my Reviewing Policy section of Educational Policy, I discuss a significant contribution to our understanding of these projects. “Academic Success and Social Power” focuses on the growth of crucial aspects of a number of these visions, on the conflicts that they often entail, and on who continues to benefit the most from them over time. Richard Teese directs most of his attention to the reform of curriculum and to the social field of power that determines or at least sets limits on what is considered important knowledge. In the process, what he has produced can serve as a model for how critical education studies of culture and power should go on. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses curriculum theory and curriculum language. It analyzes the theory presented in "Curricular Language and Classroom Meanings," a chapter by Dwayne Huebner from a book published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). The author emphasizes the importance for educators to avoid "self-confining schemas" of language, and explains five systems used in educational activity: technical, political, scientific, aesthetic, and ethical. He argues that these five fields should be explored in new ways to create new opportunities for educational growth.

This article traces part of the history of neoconservatism in the United States and analyses its impact on contemporary schooling. It examines the political evolution of a fraction of old leftists whose disenchantment with the possibilities of radical transformation led them to become new rightists. Whether attacking the countercultural left or the welfare state in the 1960s, or critical multiculturalism more recently, neoconservatives have embraced anti-utopianism as the only corrective for the assumed naivete of leftist cultural and economic desires. Concerns for the 'restoration' of cultural and national order are evident in reforms endorsed by this segment, including educational standards and a core curriculum that mediate against the progressive monopoly presumed to exist in schools. Rather than allowing more radical desires to be disciplined by such reforms, it is imperative to reclaim the freedom dreams embedded in past democratic movements and to learn from the grassroots efforts of communities working to create real utopias in education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of the continuing series of the Reviewing Policy section, this article examines some of the recent literature on the creation-evolution controversy. These controversies are placed within a larger analysis of the growth of authoritarian populist movements in the United States. The article then focuses attention on debates both over a number of arguments surrounding the ways in which intelligent design had been justified and surrounding some of the dangers of possible arrogance that have been associated with the history of the popularization of evolutionary perspectives. The author then offers some strategic suggestions for going forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Comments on the paper "Education Reform and Content: The Long View," by E. D. Hirsch Jr. Views on the educational reforms that have come out of the No Child Left Behind Act; Lack of curricular coherence in schools; Description of the situation during the 1960s and its implications on education and schools during the period; Emphasis on the belief that the education of children in a collective responsibility.

This article focuses on interrupting globalization as an educational practice. During the past decades, the literature on what has come to be called critical pedagogy has become extensive. Although this is an important development all too much of that literature and not a few of the writers have been less connected to the actual practices of real teachers in real schools in real communities. Because of this, a good deal of this movement has been rather rhetorical and has stayed at too abstract a level. This has not only limited its effects but also meant that many of the writers on critical pedagogy are not themselves able to be taught by practicing educators who are already engaged in building models of critical curricula and teaching and putting them into practice in schools throughout the country. The book "Rethinking Globalization; Teaching for Justice in an Unjust World," edited by Bill Bigelow and Bob Peterson, demonstrates why it is important for all critically oriented educators to make such connections. It is quite a valuable resource both at the level of classroom practice and as a statement of how one can embody critical pedagogical principles into the daily life of teachers and students in those same real schools.

In a number of volumes over the past decade, the author has critically analyzed the wave after wave of educational reforms centered around neoliberal commitments to the market and a supposedly weak state, neoconservative emphases on stronger control over curricula and values, and "new managerial" proposals to install rigorous forms of accountability in schooling. The first set of reforms has not demonstrated much improvement in schooling and has marked a dangerous shift in the very idea of democracy from "thick" collective forms to "thin" consumerdriven and overly individualistic forms. The second misconstrues and then basically ignores the intense debates over whose knowledge should be taught in schools and establishes a false consensus on what is supposedly common in U.S. culture.

An essay is presented on U.S. educational issues. It reminds the people of the importance of the philosopher's role in questioning music education practice and forging a vision of what education can ought to be. The author relates his criticism of the political, commercial, and other factors that combine to blunt educational purposes toward a more humane society.

The article presents information on the ways in which a set of policies are linked to larger dynamics of social transformation. In addition, how it is linked to a coherent strategy that aims to change the mechanisms of the state and the rules of participation in the formation of state policies. of the state and the rules of participation in the formation of state policies. The authors describe and analyze the policies of the "Popular Administration" in Porto Alegre, Brazil. They focus on the "Citizen School" and on proposals that are explicitly designed to radically change both the municipal schools and the relationship between communities, the state, and education. The authors argue that they exhibit crucial implications that how one must think about the politics of education policy and its role in social transformation. According to the neo-liberals turning the schools, teachers, and children over to the competitive market will result into a solution. Curriculum transformation has been recognized as a crucial part of Porto Alegre's project to build "thick democracy." The starting point for the construction of curricular knowledge has been recognized as the culture of the communities themselves, not only in terms of content but in perspective as well.

Examines several techniques teachers can use to teach the school curriculum to students. Importance of engaging students in serious discussions; How can schools teach critical thinking to students; Classroom conditions which facilitate the use of confrontation as a pedagogical device.

The article offers information on professor Herbert Kliebard his contribution to Curriculum Field at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. Topics discussed include Kliebard combined the history of Taylorism and the control of labor, his office being filled with history books and pictures, and he created sequences of curriculum courses.

Looks at the politics of curriculum and teaching. Effects of class, race, and gender divisions in the larger society; Impact of educational policies and proposals; Integration of education into a wider set of ideological commitments; Establishment of curriculum initiatives.

Discusses the relationships of education with curricular and teaching policy and practice in the U.S. economy. Educational history documented in the teachers contract 1923; Educational movements during 1930s; Increase in the number of Christian fundamentalist schools; State-sponsored educational reports; Impact of the economic conditions on the education system; Need for changes in schools and curricula.

The article presents the author's reply to a review of the book Sociology and School Knowledge by Geoff Whitty. There is no volume currently available that does a better job of reviewing the growth and the conceptual, political and ideological lacunae of the new sociology of education and of critical work on the curriculum. Whitty has also attempted--successfully I believe--to apply this political and conceptual apparatus to concrete politics and tendencies involved in evaluation, in the authoritarian populism of the conservative restoration and to counter-hegemonic possibilities in education. His willingness to entertain aspects of the neo-Weberian perspective is refreshing. A paradigm case in point here is the criticism levelled against traditional Marxist interpretations by feminist authors. One of the criticisms made of the book is its lack of an elaborated program. It does not entail a socialist curriculum. I too believe that it is crucial that we develop the principles and practices entailed in such a curriculum. In contradistinction to this, a truly socialist curriculum--one that is democratic in more than a rhetorical sense--must be decided in exactly that way, democratically.

The major national reports on education in the United States have acted to alter the very discourse of education. They shift the terrain of debate from a more social democratic concern to the language of efficiency, standards, and productivity. These reports are not only indicators of ideological shifts, however. They are themselves part of the cultural production of such altered public discourse and are constitutive elements of a particular hegemonic project. The reports and the proposals for [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents information on social evaluation of educational curriculum. It demonstrates some of the inherent limitations of the usual ways education evaluation is conducted. Most evaluations of school curricula depend on measures of the achievement scores of pupils to determine the success of a specific curricular offering. Recent research on the social, ideological, and economic role of our educational apparatus has pointed to three activities that schools engage in. First, schools assist in the recreation of an unequally responsive economy by helping to create the conditions necessary for capital accumulation. Second, schools are important agencies of legitimation. That is, they distribute social ideologies and help create the conditions for their acceptance. Finally, the educational apparatus as a whole constitutes an important set of agencies for production. No social institution, no set of ideological forms and practices, is ever totally monolithic. And students, for instance, will not necessarily always accept what the school teaches.

Many analyses of the hidden curriculum have been strongly influenced by correspondence theories, theories which posit a mirror image relationship between the norms and values taught in school and those "required" in the economy. Correspondence theories, however, often miss the elements of resistence, contradiction, and relative autonomy that occur in schools and in the workplace. Studies of the work culture document the past and continued existence of such elements, elements which mediate and can provide the potential for transforming the pressures for social reproduction. We must be very careful of romanticizing such resistance, however, for the terms are often set by owners, not workers. The existence of resistence and contradiction is important, though, since it provides for the possibility of educational action in the face of the power of the hidden curriculum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the Increasing power of conservative movements in the larger society, there is considerable pressure currently not only to redefine the manner in which education is carried out, but to redefine what education is actually for This has had a major impact on teachers' autonomy and the definition of what counts as a skill. We argue that teaching is a specific kind of labor process, one that is currently being subject to rationalization, deskilling and intensification. Since teaching has historically been seen as largely "women`s paid work" the gender implications of such tendencies are crucial. By interpreting teaching in gender and labor process terms, we report data from an ethnographic study of the use of a computer literacy curriculum to illuminate the effects of these tendencies on teachers' daily lives. in this context, teachers often employed a prepackaged curriculum that deskilled them and frequently left them bored and reliant on outside experts and purchased material. Yet they also employed the curriculum for their own purposes, using it to partly solve the problems caused by their intense schedule and work load. This Pragmatic response cannot be understood unless the gendered realities of teachers' work inside and outside of the school are recognized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the current educational crisis and the need for curriculum reform in science education. It is argued that education has become increasingly dominated by economic interests that can lead not to enhancing equality but to its opposite. The author points to the changing relations of power that have stimulated, and been stimulated by, such reform documents as "A Nation at Risk" and other more recent reports and to the ideological shifts that have resulted. The author also notes that such shifts in what education is for are not the only significant changes that are occurring. Educators are witnessing important alterations in the content and control of curriculum and teaching at the level of policy and practice. This has also been accompanied by an attempt to not only enhance the influence of economic needs on schools, but to make education itself an economic product like all others. This will have a major impact on science education because both science and technology are seen as high-status areas in the transformation of education into solely an economic tool.

The author discusses the necessity of developing educational policies that have international impact in order to successfully address issues of diversity, globalization and education in the U.S. He acknowledges tendency of other nations like China to follow lead of the U.S. in terms of curriculum and teaching. He also explores factors that need to be considered in expanding policies including inclination of people to travel, indigenous languages and commitment of parents and communities.