Coverpage

Introduction

Eisner and Vallance (1947) proposed five curriculum orientations: academic rationalism,

cognitive process, social reconstruction, self-actualization and technology. Each orientation has

specific beliefs about curriculum design and curriculum elements. Eisner's concepts of

assessment and evaluation are broad and flexible: "Assessment is more an aspiration than a

concept with a socially confirmed technical meaning" (Eisner 1947). In these few words the

essence of both the debate on the complex issues of assessment in present-day education, and his

own inclinations, are encapsulated.

In this paper, I have discussed based on the findings of Eisner and Vallance, evaluation as an

aesthetic experience by identifying the characteristics of curriculum- making, compared two of

them against the arts and suggested how I can apply two of the characteristics in my specialist

area. I further went on to explain how four of these characteristics of the teacher’s working in

this mode will make traditional student evaluation/assessment challenging. Last, I prepared a

lesson plan that utilizes the guidelines set by Eisner to prepare a lesson plan with alternative

assessments.
(a) (i)

In the characteristic of academic rationalism, art and curriculum are aimed at utilizing the most

pleasant way to convey knowledge and vision. In the instance of a curriculum planner, he/she

creates the curriculum by utilizing the appropriate content, strategies, etc. so as to enable all

students to obtain knowledge on the information presented. Similarly, an artist creates his/her

artwork by utilizing the best techniques in making his masterpiece with the objective that it is in

a form that his/her audience will be able to understand and appreciate.

The cognitive characteristic is focused on the problem-solving process which is achieved in both

curriculum making and art. In curriculum making, the curriculum maker would design the

curriculum to utilize knowledge and skills developed by students to think analytically and

critically which lead the students to be able to understand that a similar problem can be solved in

different ways by different persons. In art as well, when artists view the art of others, they begin

to understand everyone has their own unique perspective on the world. This allows them to

realize someone may view a problem differently than they do. As a result, they can begin to

come up with new and creative ways to solve such problems.

ii.

In my Social Studies classes, I can apply academic rationalism by utilizing appropriate and

creative activities, lessons and evaluations that are relevant to the students’ grade level and

experiences so that they are able to quickly grasp the ideas and information being conveyed to

them during the teaching/learning process. These activities, lessons and evaluations can include

role plays, web quests, portfolio creation, video making, etc. which are methods that will

encourage students’ participation and make the process of learning enjoyable.

The cognitive characteristic can be implemented in my Social Studies classes by giving students

a problem, e.g., pollution and ask them to come up with ways to help the communities rid their

environment of pollution. By doing this, students will be able to give suggestions and use

graphics to illustrate their ideas on solving the problem and as ideas differ from student to

student, they will all be able to develop their problem-solving skills by appreciating and utilizing

the other ideas they are now exposed to.

(b)

The teacher, as an artist, avoids the freezing of “pedagogical intelligence” into mechanical and

routinized behaviours by allowing for the unanticipated and creative (Eisner, 1985). This in

itself is a clear indication that the use of traditional evaluation/assessment to appraise students’

knowledge will be a challenge.

To begin with, the cognitive process orientation focuses on learning process rather than content;

therefore, the role of teacher is to facilitate the learning process and create an environment that

helps students practice solve-problem skills, ask questions and think critically. In this domain,

the teacher’s connoisseurship in the curriculum’s merit, design and sequence is key to ensure that

he/she utilizes appropriate strategies and assessments in enabling students to complete activities

in a manner that is enjoyable and relevant to the subject matter. This, conflicts with the

administering of traditional assessments since traditional assessments are focused on getting a

correct answer on tests and not judging the assessment based on steps in a process during an

activity.

Next, the social reconstruction orientation pay attention to communities’ problems. Therefore,

the aim of curriculum here is to help students think about their communities’ issues and try to

solve them and make decisions, and the role of teacher is to create a safe and open environment

that encourages students to ask questions and think critically and reflectively. This allows for the

teacher to place criticism on the curriculum by providing a description of the curriculum based

on his /her interpretation of it by indicating the advantages and disadvantages in a report which

describe the curriculum itself and the educational environment in which the curriculum is to be

implemented since this may be an in the school. The teacher would also need to get the students
to derive solutions to problems in society by creating portfolios or journals with graphics to aid

their suggestions to solve the problems identified. This report will consist of a description of the

problem and the suggestions to solve the problem based on the children’s interpretation of it and

their knowledge and thinking to solve it. Looking at the way this activity will be assessed as one

which will have multiple creative answers, there will be no room for it to be assessed in the

traditional manner and as a result be very challenging for a teacher to assess using the traditional

evaluation methods.

Continuing, Eisner’s characteristic of academic rationalism is concerned with the transformation

of knowledge through the use of the curriculum. The teacher’s connoisseurship in their field of

teaching will be a vital factor in assisting the teacher to impart knowledge to the students in an

efficient and enjoyable way since the learning process may need to be inspired to continue even

out of the classroom since the teacher cannot teach everything a child needs to know in the

classroom. To encourage students to learn even out of the classroom, the teacher will need to

utilize a variety of activities that may range from video making to portfolio creation which will

be used as assessments. In contrast, the traditional evaluation/assessment strategies such as

multiple choice and true/false tests will be challenging to implement since the activities like

video making and portfolio creation will encourage learning even out of the classroom and even

in groups which would definitely affect the guidelines set out by the traditional evaluations

causing conflict for the traditional evaluation to be implemented with these strategies for the

teaching/learning process.

Lastly, self-actualization, or curriculum as a consummatory experience. Strongly and

deliberately value saturated, this approach refers to personal purpose and to the need for personal

integration, and it views the function of the curriculum as providing personally satisfying
consummatory experiences for each individual learner. It is child centered, autonomy and growth

oriented, and education is seen as an enabling process that would provide the means to personal

liberation and development. This approach focuses sharply on content. Unlike the cognitive

process approach, the concern is very much for what is taught in school. It conceptualizes

education as a liberating force, a means of helping the individual discover things for himself.

Schooling is seen as a vital and potentially enriching experience in its own right, and content as

present experience is a major focus of concern. Interestingly, this orientation is concerned almost

as much with process as the two preceding orientations, but in a different sense. Rather than

directing itself to how the curriculum should be organized, it formulates the goals of education in

dynamic personal process terms. It emphasizes personal growth and, therefore, though it sees the

curriculum as a consummatory experience in itself, it is also necessarily somewhat reformist. It

implies a need to break bonds, to change, for the development of personal integrity and

autonomy is seen as problematic in the face of broader social pressures to the contrary. It is

reconstructionist in a very personalized sense. Contrastingly with traditional assessments, all

students would need to be progressing at the same rate by completing the same content at the

same time and there is not much room for change which makes it difficult for a teacher that

utilizes this orientation of Eisner’s to use the traditional evaluations to deduce a child’s

knowledge in subject matter.

Conclusion

“In a democracy, the last thing we need is a one-size-fits-all curriculum with one single set of

goals for everyone.” (Eisner, 2011). With this in mind, Eisner focused a lot of his efforts in

reforming the curriculum to use traits of the arts to be implement a more flexible and creative

curriculum that encourages students to learn better and apply their knowledge to higher level

tasks. This is evident in the characteristics that he and Vallance derived to make evaluation an

aesthetic experience for the teacher and students. These characteristics of evaluation enable

students to learn through cognitive process, rationalization, self-actualization, technology and

social reconstruction. However, though these characteristics bring many positive influences on

curriculum, they conflict with teachers being able to use traditional assessments in the schools to

assess students like they used.

References

Eisner, E. W. (1967). Educational objectives: help or hindrance? Sch. Rev. 75: 250-266. (as

cited in Popham).

Eisner, E. (1974). Eisner, E., & Vallance, E. (1974) Introduction - Five ... Introduction to

Five Conceptions of Curriculum.

https://talkcurriculum.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/eisner-e-vallance-e-1974introduction

five-conceptions-of-curriculum.pdf.

Eisner, E. W. (1977). On the uses of educational connoisseurship and criticism for evaluating

classroom life. Teaching College Records. 78, 9. 345-358.

Eisner, E. (1985). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school

programs. New York: Macmillan.

Eisner, E. W. (1988). The ecology of school improvement. Educational leadership 45 (5).

Eisner, E. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational

practice. New York: Macmillan.

Eisner, E.W. (1994). The educational Imagination: on the design and evaluation of school

programs. (Third ed). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Eisner, E. W. (1998). The kind of schools we need: personal essays. Portsmouth NH:

Heinemann.

Eisner, E. W. (2011). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.