The School Curriculum Ten Years Hence - UCET: Universities ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the first ditch as soon as politicians get their hands on education’. And, in the words of the Minister of Education, Sir David Eccles, the school curriculum was still a ‘secret garden’ in 1962. However, since the late 1970s, we have increasingly come to think about the curriculum (in the words of the last Permanent Secretary, Mr Bichard) ‘in business terms’ – the setting of clear targets; the cascading of these targets to agencies, local authorities, schools, teachers and pupils; the regular measurement of performance according to targets set; the explicit labelling of target achievements to maximise client choice; the increasing responsiveness to that choice within quasi-market conditions; the increasing responsiveness to the perceived needs of other clients (in particular, the employers whose interests need to be served). But such managerial control is the very worst kind of conservatism for two reasons. First, it makes the assumption that there is a group of target setters who have the wisdom to say what is good for all the ‘consumers’ of education – hence, the confidence in the constant setting and cascading of targets, or in the definition of benchmarks and standardisation of degrees, or in the detailed definition of standards for initial training of teachers. But there is no such group of people with this superior wisdom. In facing the future, we are uncertain of the world we are entering into and of the intellectual and moral resources which we need to draw upon in order to face such uncertainties. And, in the face of such uncertainties, one must rely upon the maintenance of a strong, rigorous and independent tradition of scholarship, research and criticism, created within universities and transmitted through the school curriculum. Second, however, even if there were such wisdom at the centre, it could not anticipate the consequences of its wise decisions and actions. For these have to be filtered through the professional judgement of thousands of teachers, and those judgements interact with unpredictable circumstances, thereby creating new contexts, new educational situations. The thoroughgoing assessment regime – the chief tool in the hands of the controllers – does not leave the situation as it is, does not then reflect the achievements and failures as they are, or were, independently of the assessment. Teachers respond in different ways, changing the practices which are to be assessed, devoting their intelligence and energy to beat the system. More seriously and sinisterly, however, is the transformation of the language of education. A shift in metaphor brings with it a different way of conceiving and evaluating an ‘educational practice’ – as, indeed, everything else. Thus, if an ‘educational practice’ is
essentially a meeting of minds – the mind of the pupil trying to make sense and the mind of the teacher (which itself draws upon the minds of others reflected in literature, drama, scientific texts, etc) – then the metaphor of ‘conversation’ is an appropriate one. The pupil enters into a world of ideas, and no one can predict exactly where that engagement will lead. Exploration, argument, discussion, critical appraisal are crucial to such an educational encounter. But such a metaphor is untenable where the ‘educational practice’ is controlled by, indeed is a response to, the detailed and easily assessed targets cascaded down from those who treat education ‘in business terms’. The language, through which one describes, evaluates and appraises, changes. Teaching becomes a delivery of targets; students and pupils become customers and clients; professional judgement is equated with testing against benchmarks; progress is seen in terms of ‘outputs’ compared with ‘inputs’ (with value-addedness in between). Time is devoted to assessment against ‘performance indicators’ – and the performance indicators are confused with targets (and educational objectives). Educational values are reduced to effectiveness. It is fascinating how the absurdity of this receives so little recognition amongst those who do control the system, but it is little short of scandalous to witness how universities in general, and education departments in particular, have been seduced by such a metaphor. The institutions whose main aim is to protect educational values seem hell-bent on destroying them. My fear for the Curriculum of the Future is that it is in the hands of those who think in business terms and that the very bodies whose raison d’être is to protect educational values, have entered willingly into a business relationship. They have become partners with the worst form of conservatives. 4. Implications: Institutions and Teachers The implications of what I have argued do not lie in any curriculum prescription. Rather do they lie in the need to reclaim the educational high ground by the educational profession – by universities and schools working together to preserve and enhance an educational tradition. That educational tradition – one which has built into it the values of open but critical enquiry, of respect for evidence, of recognition of various well developed forms of thought and experience, and of the links between intellectual development in schools and scholarship and research within universities – has, in many respects, been hijacked by those who want to twist the curriculum to meet specific and often quite utilitarian ends.
Page 1 and 2: OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 14 December 20
Page 3 and 4: from 19th-century attitudes, values
Page 5 and 6: to make the task of the supervisors
Page 7 and 8: provide the young with a wider visi
Page 9 and 10: the teacher, always bearing in mind
Page 11 and 12: School Improvement’ in School Eff
Page 13 and 14: consequent crisis of values within
Page 15 and 16: different social and economic conte
Page 17 and 18: social sciences, of linguistics and
Page 19: The curriculum of the future, there
Page 23 and 24: curriculum, not as an escape from t
Page 25 and 26: • supporting and tracking learner
Page 27 and 28: and ‘work related learning’ - n
Page 29 and 30: 16 age group is the provision of wo
Page 31 and 32: in schools 1997-1999. (HMI 219). Lo
Page 33 and 34: The National Assembly for Wales Cir
Page 35 and 36: arose in part from work already sta
Page 37 and 38: continued professional development
Page 39 and 40: This is an effective vehicle for de
Page 41 and 42: • They use a range of strategies
Page 43 and 44: The Revision to the DfEE Circular 4
Page 45 and 46: would tie in better with the planni
Page 47 and 48: social inclusion in terms of the ra
Page 49 and 50: ensure that such an approach is not
Page 51 and 52: producing excellent results as they
Page 53 and 54: II. Professor Ian Menter 1. Democra
Page 55 and 56: phases of schooling, the processes
Page 57 and 58: central. These aspects could includ
Page 59 and 60: The session opened with a recap of
Page 61 and 62: workers, career teachers and others
Page 63: these islands. The main benefit der

The School Curriculum Ten Years Hence - UCET: Universities ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?