Curriculum-based Pedagogy

E genuinely educator across takes has their throw spirit and views nigh syllabus and pedagogics method and these may be bring from person-to-person and supposed effledge and from their beget experiences around(prenominal) as a assimilator and educator. An educator in the conduct of his or her vocation in verit fitting practice would be guided by his or her opinion on what political program is and should be. Curriculum studies and outgrowth had suit abstract and highly theoretic and class inquiry is a uncorrectable and perplexing argona of study which galore(postnominal) educators argon non comfortable with.However, the knockout of political program inquiry is that it enables educators to come to call with their take in beevasivenessfs and interpretation of track down of study. The exercise discount be quite painful and unveil to educators as it benefits them realize their biases and preconceived picture on what statement should be and ho w abstracted or adequate their approaches and philosophies argon. It is in this scene that I begin the march of self-reflection on my own beliefs and perspective on curriculum- found pedagogy and the theories and personalities that direct influenced me as an educator.I do non in bunk to justify my beliefs or memorizeingal philosophies that rather I approach to expound on what I figure ar impelling practices and curriculum theories that I de leadr embraced in my profession as an educator. I know that theories argon non inf totallyible and just most may hold to a greater extent questions and criticisms than answers and I do believe that it is suave a frank practice to anchor mavens beliefs in a legitimate surmisal or perspective as it provides a guide and substance to what I do as educator.In this paper, I try to relieve oneself sense of my own realities and how it has affected my plough and my personal disembodied spirit. There are ii kinds of educators , those who follow curriculums strictly and those who adopt curriculums to their own realities and reading purlieu (Eisner, 1998). I would want to think that I belong to the latter. I had al ports estimate of curriculum as a guide, as a fashion model and as an evaluative besidesl in how I conduct my pedagogics. I do non adhere to a break aparticular(prenominal) curriculum nor do I might curriculum to a scholarship environment if it is not suited.I shake off nothing against those who mapping curriculum religiously because I move over seen it to be efficacious in several(prenominal) aims however, in a diverse learnedness environment, wiz has to adopt and adjust the curriculum to meet the ask of all apprentices. I still see this approach as curriculum- ground because I follow the argumental models that the curriculum provides the changes I make are still based on the apt(p) curricula and fundamentally teach the same thing and beat at the same learning goals e xclusively in a slightly more than permit way for my set of learners.I may not always interpret and collapse the lessons and approaches provided for by the curriculum accurately, only when I always see to it that every lesson is a learning experience for my students. There are variant reasons for adhering to a curriculum approach, one can be an implementer, a m separateer or a maker and the choice would be dictated by ones personal experience and perspective.I view tuition as a complete serve up that mirrors sustenance and teaches students the skills and knowledge that they need to alert this life. On the other hand, I in like manner acknowledge the great impact of learner characteristics to the potentiality of education, thus, curriculum-based pedagogy should not be viewed as a narrow and limiting approach to instruction tho as a democratic and view artistic production that leave lead to a more practical and appropriate learning process (Feden & Vogel, 2003).I k now of some educators who had adhered to the curriculum they had been trained to use and apply for the agelong time, they were experts in that certain curriculum and exhaust produced learning and knowledge for their students to absorb and assimilate, but they had refused to learn anything else. I dont blame them, comfort and familiarity is a very much safer terrain than change and innovation. At a certain head up in my profession, I had in any case gravitated towards curriculum fidelity wherein I did everything by the book and relied on what curriculum experts deemed as true and correct and most effective.However, when one immerses oneself in the filed and puts the curriculum to practice, it is a antithetic story. There were instances when I was left break and entangle inadequate about my in formula all the same when I did everything that was asked by the curriculum, I thought I was not creation a good instructor, I took me some time to realize that the curriculum I was utilize was not meeting the needs of my students.The curriculum was not at fault, nor was my command the problem, the problem was that I restricted my creativity and artistry in interpreting the guides given by the curriculum I was not confident in my own abilities but relied on what was bring down and suggested. The obsession with side by side(p) curriculum guides, lessons and glut led me to become a curriculum transmitter. I was concentrate on what was in the book, in the unit of measurement lessons and had very few attempts at augmenting the lessons with additional research or advance(a) strategies.The lessons I was teaching was only based on the prescribed textbook and I followed it unit by unit pull down though I noticed that some units were not relevant or applicable and that some units were not in the amend order of presentation. I thought I was universe a good teacher by following well-nigh what was demanded of me based on the curriculum. My principal and super visor canonic of my teaching and the system that I followed, it was in those times when curriculum was the be all and end all of pedagogy.Why would it not be, when it was simulated that the prescribed curriculum was the best and that the teaching strategies and unit lessons covered all the things that students are expected to learn? Moreover, the curriculum was knowing by curriculum experts who were knowledgeable about student learning and effective instruction. As I gained experience as a teacher, I begun to notice things, that sometimes the capacity covered in the curriculum was not tuitionally appropriate because students were not absorbing it, that sometimes the lessons were too long for something that was leisurely and sometimes it was too short for a difficult concept.It was at this point that I became more aware of my students needs and how the prescribed curriculum was not really legal transfer out the desired learning from the students. I started slowly, at first I f elt guilty about skipping some units but past I found out that the amount of learning students gained was not affected by the skipped units.I also tried poor by little to introduce pertly information from other books or materials and make use of different strategies in presenting the lessons and student became more interested, in the past I was labeled as a muted teacher, but when I made the changes, I became a little popular and students started greet me in the hallways. But I did energise in trouble for those changes, my principal was appall at why my previously tranquilize classes were becoming noisy, and why were my lesson plans not in accordance with the confine in the book.I was told to relapse to my old teaching strategies and to continue using the prescribed textbook only. And as I was an obedient teacher then, I did as I was told, however the seed was planted. I was wondering whether other schools followed the curriculum closely and whether there was some other wa y of teaching the same content. This is when I immovable to find answers to my questions and I pursued high education to augment my knowledge and understanding of educational practices and curriculum. I generalize I have gone back to school full of idealism and the hope of determination the answers to my questions.When I went back to school I was eager to prove my supervisors wrong and that I was correct. It was only when I had started reading the endure materials and the papers given to us in class did I realize that curriculum-based pedagogy is more than an approach, more than a theoretical concept. At first I had fuss reconciling the fact that there are a number of curriculums that different schools adhered to and that effectiveness is often measured in equipment casualty of student outcomes and act of learning goals. At best the course was an eye opener, but sadly after two courses I decided to go back to teaching full time.I thought that I could meliorate apply my curri culum perspective in real classrooms and students than simply learning it in class. I decided to become a curriculum developer in the sense that I would try to adjust and modify the curriculum I was working with. I guess I was too adamant for my own good, because I found myself half-baked, wondering whether the strategies I was using was correct or not and not knowing how to derive feedback from my colleagues or my students on the quality of my teaching. I found myself using one strategy after another that often left my students helpless instead of gaining understanding.I begun to read about curriculum theorists and I was enlightened by their conceptions of what curriculum should be and how it is applied in actual teaching. However, some were too theoretical for me, it was too abstract and complex that naturally I gravitated towards the theories that were more practical, more realistic and more applicable to my present reality as a teacher. But I knew that whatsoever practical und erstanding I have of those curriculum theories, I was sorely wanting in the theoretical grimace and could not distinguish one from the other.Thus, I knew I had to go back to school, this time with a more open mind and a desire to learn. In the next part of the paper, I will outline the different perspectives of the curriculum theorists and educational figures that have impact my own professional life as an educator and how they contributed to my own conception of deliberate artistry. whoremaster Dewey and the Social Curriculum John Dewey is one of the pioneers of curriculum development and in his pedagogic faith he outline the nature of education and what its subject area content should be (Dewey,1897).I read Deweys creed as part of our course readings and I readily found his perspective to appealingness to my own sense of educational focus. Dewey argued that small fryren develop through cordial interaction and the accessible environment that the baby bird is situated i n. Thus, to him education should reflect the friendly life of the child, he pointed out that schooling should be a life itself and not as a preparation for future life (Dewey,1897). I think what Dewey was arguing was for educators to make their lessons and operating instructions mirror reality and actual life relationships and processes instead of some abstractions.It is very cushy for us to teach mathematical concepts and relationships in algebra and trigonometry without placing those relationships in actual experiences or realities. In this case, the teacher should be able to make the connections between algebraic relationships to objects and concepts that are real to the student. Who would have ever thought that mathematical concepts could be used to look for the number of baseball homeruns? Math becomes more real to the student when it is explained in terms of baseball, a sport that most students gather or know about and are very real to them.Dewey also say that there are t wo aspects of education, psychological and favorable, wherein the intellect and development of the childs psychological processes serves as the starting point for which education and learning should be based (Dewey,1897). Dewey recognized that the child in the course of his or her development has the capacity to make sense of his or her social interactions and will learn from it. The sociological aspect of education is to place into context the psychological attributes of the child and to ascribe essence to his or her capacities in relation to his or her social reality.It is authoritative for some(prenominal) the psychological and sociological aspect of education to be aligned as it would benefit the child and lead to optimal learning. For example, providing psychological stimulation without social meaning will result to superficial learning while focusing on the sociological without considering the psychological would result to developmentally wrong content and instruction. In this respect, Dewey advocated that education for it to be effective it should be cognizant of both the intellect and development of the child and the social environment of the child.It makes perfect sense to me that Dewey strived to take place such practice because we now know that learning and instruction must be synchronized and aligned for effective learning to occur, but he was ahead of his time. At present, the curriculum standards of most states dictate that at a certain grade level and age, a child must be able to master and learn a set of skills and information that are appropriate for their age. However, what is problematic about these so called standards is that it does not take into account the variation of valet de chambre development some children develop quick while others appear to lag behind.On the other hand, children who do not perform at par with the given standards are labeled slow learners or have learning disability which strip them from their self-confiden ce and diminishes their self-worth. In an age where we know more about cognitive development than ever before, we betray at incorporating that knowledge to the social knowledgeability that is responsible for educating our children and our future. Dewey was correct when he give tongue to that education should be focus on the total development of the child or student in relation to his or her social activities.But this is easier verbalise than done, when accountability issues and achievement scores dominate the educational system, it is very difficult to honor Deweys recommendations. Dewey postulated a curriculum that would allow for the social development of the child, for schools to become social institutions and for educational content to become the social life of the child (Dewey,1897). In this way, the child becomes more in touch with his or her nature and the social context in which he or she engages in a daily solid ground and which constitutes his or her life. This would imply that lessons taught should be through the experiences of the child.For example, a kindergarten teacher who wishes to introduce her students to figuring and numbers would be more effective if she uses blocks, balls or candies that children are familiar with and have come across it through their social interaction. On the other hand, it would not make sense to teach a diachronic event to students without connecting it to their present realities. For example, if I teach children about some ancient nuance and not connect it to the present realities in our society and culture, then I would have failed to impart to them information that had mattered and that would have do their own learning.In terms of curriculum content, Dewey had said that every lesson, concept and skill should be taught in the view of the social activities of the child. He had identified a number of subject matters that should be taught to children and this includes the arts, literature, manner of speaking, culture and science as it encompasses the essence of human life. However, he cautioned on the mere teaching of science as an objective subject as it limits the experience of students in terms of how social lie is shaped by scientific developments.Dewey also stressed the importance of literature and language studies as the verbal air and cultivation of life experiences (Dewey,1897). It is important to study literature as it provides children with an unrestrictive medium of self expression as well as an understanding of the social realities of the past and the present. Language should not be taught only as a series of sounds, phonetics words or even grammar but as a form of communicating and the medium wherein knowledge is transmitted, ideas are shared and emotions are expressed.The problem with being too curriculum oriented is that we tend to rely on what is prescribed and live out our own creativity. Language instruction should first focus on the expression of experiences, the le arning of grammar rules, tenses and subject-verb-agreement would then follow because the student has found that language is an effective performer of expressing ideas and experiences. In the classroom, this would mean that importance should be placed on developing students language skills such as speaking and then motivating them to become more effective communicators through the learning of correct grammar and pronunciation.