Curriculum-based Pedagogy

Every educator across trains has their receive consciousness and views round course of instruction and instruction and these may be base from individualized and theoretic cheatledge and from their possess experiences both as a bookman and educator. An educator in the conduct of his or her profession in true practice would be guided by his or her location on what course is and should be. Curriculum studies and training had become abstract and highly theoretical and platform research is a difficult and perplexing ara of analyse which many educators ar non comfortable with.However, the beauty of program inquiry is that it enables educators to come to terms with their declare be liefs and interpretation of computer program. The exercise can be quite painful and revealing to educators as it makes them realize their biases and preconceived whimsy on what direction should be and how lacking or adequate their approaches and philosophies argon. It is in this setting that I begin the process of self-reflection on my own beliefs and perspective on course of translate-based pedagogy and the theories and personalities that read influenced me as an educator.I do not cerebrate to justify my beliefs or rearingal philosophies just instantly rather I endeavour to expound on what I think are strong practices and broadcast theories that I have embraced in my profession as an educator. I know that theories are not inf alto pushherible and about may generate to a greater extent questions and criticisms than answers but I do believe that it is still a obedient practice to anchor ones beliefs in a authoritative theory or perspective as it provides a guide and meaning to what I do as educator.In this paper, I try to make wizard of my own realities and how it has affected my work and my personal support. There are devil kinds of educators, those who quest after computer programmes strictly and those who adopt classs to their own realities a nd information environment (Eisner, 1998). I would like to think that I belong to the latter. I had of any time archetype of curriculum as a guide, as a framework and as an evaluative besidesl in how I conduct my instilling. I do not adhere to a specific curriculum nor do I force curriculum to a erudition environment if it is not suited.I have nothing against those who use curriculum religiously because I have seen it to be effective in some schools however, in a diverse key outing environment, one has to adopt and adjust the curriculum to meet the needs of all learners. I still see this approach as curriculum-based because I follow the instructional models that the curriculum provides the transmits I make are still based on the prone curricula and basically teach the equivalent thing and incur at the same learning goals but in a sparingly much appropriate way for my set of learners.I may not continuously interpret and apply the lessons and approaches provided for by t he curriculum accurately, but I always see to it that every lesson is a learning experience for my school youngsters. There are different reasons for adhering to a curriculum approach, one can be an implementer, a developer or a maker and the choice would be dictated by ones personal experience and perspective.I view commandment as a complete process that mirrors life and teaches scholarly persons the skills and knowledge that they need to break this life. On the otherwise hand, I in like manner acknowledge the great preserve of learner characteristics to the effectiveness of education, thus, curriculum-based pedagogy should not be viewed as a narrow and constricting approach to instruction but as a democratic and tump over artistry that leave alone lead to a more practical and appropriate learning process (Feden & Vogel, 2003).I know of some educators who had adhered to the curriculum they had been trained to use and apply for the longest time, they were experts in that c ertain curriculum and have produced learning and knowledge for their students to absorb and assimilate, but they had ref utilize to learn anything else. I dont blame them, comfort and familiarity is a much safer terrain than change and innovation. At a certain point in my profession, I had also gravitated towards curriculum fidelity wherein I did everything by the book and relied on what curriculum experts deemed as true and do and most effective.However, when one immerses oneself in the filed and puts the curriculum to practice, it is a different story. There were instances when I was left(p) hanging and matt-up inadequate about my teaching even when I did everything that was asked by the curriculum, I thought I was not being a trusty teacher, I took me some time to realize that the curriculum I was using was not meeting the needs of my students.The curriculum was not at fault, nor was my teaching the fuss, the problem was that I restricted my creativity and artistry in interpr eting the guides given by the curriculum I was not confident in my own abilities but relied on what was positive(p) and suggested. The obsession with following curriculum guides, lessons and center led me to become a curriculum transmitter. I was digesting on what was in the book, in the unit lessons and had very few attempts at augmenting the lessons with additional research or innovative strategies.The lessons I was teaching was just based on the prescribed textbook and I followed it unit by unit even though I noticed that some units were not relevant or applicable and that some units were not in the good order of presentation. I thought I was being a good teacher by following closely what was demanded of me based on the curriculum. My asterisk and supervisor ap growd of my teaching and the system that I followed, it was in those quantify when curriculum was the be all and end all of pedagogy.Why would it not be, when it was anticipate that the prescribed curriculum was t he best and that the teaching strategies and unit lessons covered all the things that students are expected to learn? Moreover, the curriculum was designed 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 sate covered in the curriculum was not disciplineally appropriate because students were not absorbing it, that sometimes the lessons were too long for something that was easy 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 felt guilty about skipping some units but thusly I install out that the amount of learning students gained was not affected by the skipped units.I also tried little by little to put out tonic information from other books or materials and made use of different strategies in presenting the lessons and student became more interested, in the past I was labeled as a boring teacher, but when I made the changes, I became a little popular and students started greeting me in the hallways. But I did get in trouble for those changes, my principal was alarmed at why my previously quiet classes were becoming noisy, and why were my lesson plans not in accordance with the nub in the book.I was told to revert 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 way of teaching the same content. This is when I decided to find answers to my questions and I pursued higher education to augment my knowledge and sense of educational practices and curriculum. I guess I have gone behind to school full of idealism and the trust of finding 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 course 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 difficulty reconciling the fact that there are a keep down of curriculums that different schools adhered to and that effectiveness is often measured in terms of student outcomes and achievement 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 better apply my curriculum 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 institute 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 confused instead of gaining understanding.I begun to read about curriculum theorists and I was savant by their conceptions of what curriculum should be and how it is applied in real(a) 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 naive realism as a teacher. But I knew that whatever practical understanding I have of those curriculum theories, I was sorely lacking in the theoretical aspect and could not distinguish one from the other.Thus, I knew I had to go back to school, this time with a more open question and a desire to learn. In the n ext part of the paper, I ordain outline the different perspectives of the curriculum theorists and educational figures that have impacted my own professional life as an educator and how they contributed to my own conception of deliberate artistry. John Dewey and the Social Curriculum John Dewey is one of the pioneers of curriculum development and in his pedagogic creed he outlined the nature of education and what its subject content should be (Dewey,1897).I read Deweys creed as part of our course readings and I readily found his perspective to pull in to my own sense of educational focus. Dewey argued that clawren develop through hearty interaction and the amicable environment that the child is situated in. Thus, to him education should reflect the social 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 instructions mirror re ality and actual life relationships and processes instead of some abstractions.It is very easy 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 predict the make out of baseball homeruns? Math becomes more real to the student when it is explained in terms of baseball, a sport that most students play or know about and are very real to them.Dewey also say that there are two aspects of education, psychological and social, 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 meaning to his or her capacities in relation to his or her social reality.It is important for both the psychological and sociological aspect of education to be adjust as it would benefit the child and lead to optimum learning. For example, providing psychological stimulation without social meaning will leave behind to dilettante learning while focusing on the sociological without considering the psychological would result to developmentally inappropriate 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 communicate such practice because we now know that learning and instr uction 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 homo development some children develop faster 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 chemise them from their self-confidence and diminishes their self-worth. In an age where we know more about cognitive development than ever before, we fail at incorporating that knowledge to the social understructure that is responsible for educating our children and our future. Dewey was correct when he said 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 said 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 institution 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 counting 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 historic event to students without connecting it to their present realities. For example, if I teach children about some past civilization 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 shaped 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, books, dustup, culture and science as it encompasses the essence of human life. However, he cautioned on the mere teaching of science as an butt 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 expression and cultivation o f life experiences (Dewey,1897). It is important to study literature as it provides children with an unrestrictive mean(a) 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 die out our own creativity. Language instruction should first focus on the expression of experiences, the learning of grammar rules, tenses and subject-verb-agreement would then follow because the student has found that language is an effective agent of expressing ideas and experiences. In the classroom, this would mean that importance should be determined on developing students language skills such as speaking and then motivating them to become more effec tive communicators through the learning of correct grammar and pronunciation.