Becca Wells

CT 709

Philosophy of Curriculum

Part One: Comparison of two theorists

In my first paper, I chose to write about the theorists Maria Montessori and John Dewey.

Montessori felt that children should control their learning and go at their own pace with the use

of stations/centers in what she called the discovery model. Even were the stationary seat

helpful to the childs body, it would still be a dangerous and unhygienic feature of the

environment, through the difficulty of cleaning the room perfectly when the furniture cannot be

movedwhat might happen to the spirit of the child who is condemned to grow in conditions so

artificial that his very bones may become deformed. (Montessori, 1973) She was stating that by

having students confined to a desk is not healthy for the child in their growing and maturing

state. However, having them go from station to station promotes a healthier lifestyle for the

students.

Montessori stated that teachers should only need to prepare the educational environment

but not do direct teaching of the students. the thing which we should cultivate in our teachers

is more the spirit than the mechanical skill of the scientist; that is, the direction of the preparation

should be towards spirit rather than toward the mechanism. (Montessori, 1973) Thus, allowing

the students to have control and creativity over his or hers own educational career.

Dewey on the other hand, felt that students went to school to learn more about their

community, by doing things within their community, finding ways for them to contribute to their

society. The only true education comes through the stimulation of the childs powers by the
demands of the social situations in which he finds himself. Through these demands he is

stimulated to act a s a member of a unity, to emerge from his original narrowness of action and

feelings, and to conceive of himself from the standpoint of the welfare of the group to which he

belongs. (Dewey 1929) Dewey felt that the teachers job was to provide a guided experience for

the children to learn from so a higher level of intelligence in the community can be produced.

Both Montessori and Dewey had the believe that education should be based upon the

interests of their students. They knew that if there had not been an interest in the subject matters

there was not going to be a higher level of understanding and the information that they were

learning would not stick as well as it would if it was a topic/subject matter that they are

interested in.

This was a paper that was written about 7 weeks ago, after this class I have a deeper

understanding of the two theorist that I wrote about. I now see how they have even more in

common than I had realized. While completing the group project on Dewey, I learned a little

more on his theories. He was really looking for the students to become independent individuals.

He felt that it was up to each individual to make sense of their personal experiences. With that

being realized I could see how Montessori and Dewey have even more in common. Montessori

was allowing the students to be individuals and independent in their learning taking control of

their futures from the use of the centers/stations in her discovery model. the individual who

is to be educated is a social individual and that society is an organic union of individuals. If we

eliminate the social factor from the child we are left only with an abstraction; if we eliminate the

individual factor from society, we are left only with an inert and lifeless mass." (Dewey, 1929)
Part Two: An issue in curriculum

In my second response paper, I discussed an issue that I have with curriculum, which for

me is the academic performance of the learners being related to the issues of the implementation

of the curriculum among the different schools and teachers. Which goes deeper than that where I

feel that the schools and teachers are not taking control over the curriculum choices that they

make for their schools. Maxine Greene stated in her article Curriculum and Consciousness by

stating Curriculum, from the learners standpoint, ordinarily represents little more than an

arrangement of subjects, a structure of socially prescribed knowledge or a complex system of

meaning which may or may not fall within his grasp. (Greene, 1971) This was one of my main

reasons for why I feel that teachers and schools really need to be making more informed and

educated decisions when it comes to their students. There have been too many times when I have

spoken with administers and teachers and listen to them complain about the curriculum that they

are using in their school system. Complaining about how they do not have creativity in the way

they present their materials, or that the curriculum is not easy to accommodate to the needs of

their students. Even though, they, the schools and the teachers, are the ones that should be

making the choices in what curriculum their school chooses to use. They are not making the

effort needed to make a change for the better of their school and for the sake of the education of

their students. A curriculum needs to be able to be accommodated to a students needs, socio-

economic status, their cultural backgrounds, language, disability or even learning styles. In my

paper I explained that the community I live in is very rural, however, we have been receiving

refugees to our community from the program through our state, they are working on our town

becoming a refugee hub. So we now have a large number of Somalian and Koran. Sparking my

thoughts of how I would need to make accommodation to many things I teach to ensure that
every student is able to understand and that I am not making and cultural offenses and that I am

able to meet the learning styles of each student. If I can go through a curriculum and be able to

say that I will be able to easily accommodate it to any student. That it will not make any cultural

offenses to any student. The information that is meant to be taught is clear and concise and I

would be able to take creatively liberties in how I present materials, I know that it will be a good

curriculum. As Paulo Freire started his article Pedagogy of the Oppressed, As we attempt to

analyze dialogue as a human phenomenon, we discover something which is the essence of

dialogue itself: the word. But the word is more than just an instrument which makes dialogue

possible; accordingly, we must seek its constitutive elements. Within the word we find two

dimensions, reflection and action, in such radical interaction that if one is sacrificed-even in part-

the other immediately suffers. There is no true word that is not at the same time a praxis Thus, to

speak a true word is to transform the world. (Freire, 1970)

After this class I really do not feel that my beliefs have changed when it comes to schools

and their curriculum and how they need to be careful when choosing their new curriculum for

their students and school. I believe that they need to take more time and put in the effort for the

sake of their students education. They need to take the curriculum and make it meaningful to

their students to help them to fully understand the subject at hand. I am not going to claim that it

must also be in the imaginative mode. Nor am I going to assert that, in order to surpass the

given, the individual is required to move into and remain within a sealed subjectivity.

(Greene, 1971)
Part Three: Philosophy Framework

My philosophy of curriculum is taken from several different theorists. Dewey and

Montessori is two huge ones. As I have mentioned earlier I believe that curriculum should

engage the students and be of their interests in order to get the most out of their educational

experience. I also feel that one needs to believe in positive approaches. By this I mean you

need to build relationships with your students. There needs to be a line of trust and caring

between the you. You need to know what is best for the students and how they need information

presented to best suit their needs. You also need to understand that no one wants a reputation,

every student has positive attributes and this is what you need be focusing on. Do not focus on

the negative, it is the positive that it going to help them to succeed in their lives. I also believe

that it should be learner centered, not just in the way of what the student is interested in but, in

the way that you truly understand your students. a democratic society must provide equal

educational opportunity not only by giving to all its children the same quantity of public

education-the same number of years in school-but also by making sure to give to all of them, all

with no exceptions, the same quality of education. (Adler, 1982) You know what works and

does not work for them; you know what it important to them in order for them to learn or what is

important for them to have in order for them to get the most out of their educational experiences.

Also you always have to always remember that every behavior is a form of communication. As

a teach you need to know or find out what it is that the student is attempting to communicate to

you. Is it that they do not understand the material and you should make an accommodation. It is

too easy for them; do you need to up the skills level for them to work on. Is there something else

that is going on at home that could be causing it? This is also why I stress the importance of the

relationship with the students but not only just them but also their family. In order for a student
to be fully inclusive into their education you need to be able to support them on all means of

their lives. If you know there is a difficult issue at home, this is when you need to allow them

that time to talk it through or seek that assistance with a counselor. You also need to make sure

that you, yourself is supported. You are not able to provide support if your supports are not met.

There is a wealth of normative prescription about the acknowledgement of culture. Cummings

(1996), Igoa (1995), and Wong-Fillmore (1991a-b) have highlighted the academic, emotional,

and societal importance of acknowledging diversity by engaging students in learning about their

home cultures and languages. (Chan, 2006) Finally, the last thing that I have in my philosophy

of curriculum is that collaboration is key. Academic freedom. Both perceived and actual

academic freedom help explain the degree and kind of implementation of the curriculum.

(Misco, 2010) One does not need to recreate the wheel. Take the advice of your peers, work

together, come up with alternatives, be creative. Use the academic freedom to find ways for

the curriculum to work for all. Together you can go far with meeting the needs of your students

mentally, physically and emotionally.

Resources

Flinders, D. J., & Thornton, S. J. (n.d.) The Curriculum Studies Reader.