REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE POST A NEW MESSAGE   

  Author  |   Date  |   Subject  |   Thread

RE: Question 2: Single curriculum

  • Archived: Tue, 04 Jun 13:33
  • Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2002 13:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
  • Author: "Faris, Phil" <philf@lecentre.com>
  • Subject: RE: Question 2: Single curriculum
  • Topic: Student Learning

Curriculum--as used in this thread--appears to refer to the "course of study" and what classes are offered, required, actually taken and how many "tracks" are available. Other responses seem to conclude that the term "single curriculum" means a single track. This can't be right, can it?

The "opt in or out" variables probably are meant to cover the concept of multiple tracks and the possibility of switching between tracks. However, presenting things as "options" seems to instantly break the connection between a coherent view of student progress and return us to the confusion we already experience. Shouldn't the "single curriculum" analysis stay at the theoretical level for archetypical students and not get mired down in what ifs and options?

Finally, I thought the need for a Master Plan arose out of the discrepancy between districts and regions in how well they prepare students and whether students can smoothly "move" between regions. If so, a Master Plan that simply names "courses" that must be taken does nothing to solve this problem. We already have courses named the same thing with similar course descriptions which actually don't prepare the students for any objective standard of achievement. Therefore, shouldn't the "single curriculum" discussion focus on discerning a common perspective on achievement at a very granular level at specific milestones within specific branches of the curriculum flow chart?

I've attended curriculum planning meetings and education conference seminars where the obvious is beaten to death and the unknown remains absent from the discussion agenda. The format for this "instant gratification" two week online discussion seems doomed to follow that same path. Am I whining? I think we all share a common frustration with this problem. We all enjoy a few seconds of fame at the podium but don't seem very intent on finding the truth. Socrates was very good at this negative questioning tactic which I've been using. He was forced to drink hemlock because of it. I'm going to go have a cherry coke instead.

  Author  |   Date  |   Subject  |   Thread

Welcome | Agenda | About Dialogues | Briefing Book | Search