810 Module 1: Curricular Conceptions

Evolution of Curriculum Conceptions

Curriculum conceptions appear to go through an evolutionary process.  As society evolves along the continuum of collective consciousness, economic, political and spiritual lines, so does curriculum. In the evolutionary process, some orientations remain strong and prevailing, while others become extinct.  The evolution of curriculum conceptions would seem to be non-linear, instead an intertwined array of personal/ interpersonal and cultural values, needs and priorities, as well as collective ideas about past, present and future.    

As I think it about the stability or instability of curricular conceptions, I reflect on Vallance’s explanation the evolution of her own conception.   “I’ve come to appreciate both its (curricular orientation’s) special value and its time-bound limitations” (24).    What I think she means is that times change and call for different or modified conceptions to cope with the current events, problems and challenges of society.  Curriculum must evolve with the times.

To illustrate the point, Technology, as it’s own conception, was not included by Pratt with no specific reason for the omission.  This may be because by the time of his writing in the 1990’s, technology was assumed as the means for all delivery and did not need it’s own orientation.  Technology in planning and delivery was simplyimplied in all other conceptions.  Vallance seems to support this idea, stating, “Instruction in the use of computers is now available in most school districts and is now mentioned as a basic cognitive skill needed by all children” (26).  The same may be true of why both Pratt and McNeil did not include Cognitive Process in their conceptions, because it was implied that all their remaining conceptions would have opportunities for the flexing of cognitive muscle embedded within them. 

Shiro referred to the pressure of the process on the curriculum battle for survival in his idea of visions for curriculum as “four great magnets” that exert pressure on each other, pushing for agreement and control, but with a resulting in a discourse that often leads to cooperation (9).    Similarly, Pratt explains the orientations are like a “unity” of “four seasons” contributing to an “eclectic” orientation that borrows values and meaning from one another (22).    However, in order to endure as an unique school of thought to be able to survived to integrate into a eclectic and cooperative conception, the orientation has be remain somewhat intact to endure the test of social pressure and time.  I consider this a parallel to the culture of Canada in which the melting pot effect blends cultures and blurs cultural lines overall, but how the individual cultures themselves remain relatively intact so you can recognize them as distinct unto themselves. 

In the case of Ornstien’s idea of foundations, it would seem that the lines between curriculum conceptions became somewhat burred under different naming conventions but shared commonalities with mainstream conceptions.  This leads me to believe that the main curriculum conceptions will continue because of they are clear and easily understood, articulated and argued.  I view this as similar to how political parties have overarching shared ideas, but the platforms and policies burr the overarching intent.

I believe that some curriculum conceptions prevail because humans have individual and collective values and priorities that they wish to be addressed through the process and experience of education.  When the individual value system is under pressure by external forces of society, I think it creates discourse that individuals seek to resolve.  When the individual viewpoint meets society, and there are shared problems, concerns, or even successes, the viewpoint can gain important social and political steam.  This may be enough to convince others to join the conception of curriculum has it merge to current events and what matters at that time and history.  This is what I think contributes to a conception’s endurance in the evolutionary race of curriculum orientation.

As a certified Myers Briggs Personality Type indicator, I can’t help but look at conceptions of curriculum through lens of Personality Theory.  What is most enduring in individual personality is core values and assigned meaning.  These tend to remain steadfast and true, while other interests come and go, barely noticed.  By aligning individual personalities to those of others in society, we get schools of thought and ideas gather momentum.  When like-minded and passionate professions are able to express core values and interpretations of meaning within the context of curriculum, I think this extends outward beyond thought and into things.  Outputs like research, experimentation, sharing and advocacy could then result to further the conception of curriculum, thus proving why others should join in the school of though.   In thinking about this, I was able to hypothesize the core values of Cognitive Process, Self Actualizing, Social Reconstruction and Academic Rationalists to the temperaments in Myers Briggs personality theory, based on the core values of self-fulfillment, cognitive freedom and mastery, active social engagement and logical order.  Each of these values would, no doubt, be important to all educators, but when pushed to commit to a core value, educators would likely have a “pet” conception.  This leads me to think that these conceptions have endured, and will continue to endure, because they are humans are compelled to live out their core values within society.  The fact that this creates discourse that threatens, but also gives opportunity for borrowing from different conceptions, seems to achieve something of a social equilibrium that serves to improve education overall. 

Perhaps, in time, the other conceptions, like Pratt’s Feminist orientation, Vallance’s Personal Success and Commitment , or Orienstien’s Managerial approach will become mainstream.  In either case, I think the melting-pot of Canadian culture, and the socio-economic forces, foreseen and unforeseen, will be the deciding factor of the survival of the fittest conceptions of curriculum for that time in history. 

Curriculum Conceptions Interpretations and Use In Professional Context

My professional context is in the delivery of Employment Ontario programs and services.  Interestingly, the Ministry who funds this work sets outcomes and objectives, such as targets for achievement, but not the means by which these results are achieved.  This leaves some blissful room for local and agency interpretation, given there is no set curriculum for workshops and classes.  However, there is no mistaking the fact that efficiency and effectiveness is tied to technology (and likely best aligns to the Technology curriculum conception) is important to this Ministry.  Thus, in planning curriculum, it is important that I am aware of using technology, not only for statistical information gathering, but also to communicate with my clients using technology, like social media, and making my lessons available for e-learning. 

In my delivery of curriculum created, I must be mindful of Vallance’s revised conceptions that include Personal Success and Personal Commitment to Learning because our learners often have individual needs that vastly differ from one another.  This challenges our curriculum planning greatly to be broad enough for different learning levels and styles, but specific enough to address learning gaps.  Employment Ontario has a clear commitment to raising the skill level of Ontarians and if I am not mindful of what it means to our learners to have personal success and what will make them personally commit to learning, I will fail to inspire anyone to overcome inertia and reach to higher personal goals.  While instructing, I find clues as to why learning is personally meaningful, then can apply these “pulls to learning” while in the process of providing individual solution-focused brief counselling that we also offer clients beyond classes and workshops. 

I have worked outside the college-sector delivery of these Employment Ontario services, which has made me recognize the differences in organizational culture of agencies.  Because my current context is a community college, I find that it functions somewhere along the lines of a Academic Rationalism/Social Reconstruction conception.  Fitting the corporate culture often means aligning to the values, traditions and history of Academic Rationalism but also the Social Reconstruction themes of helping students to cope with the realities of society and the labour market.   Having worked at an agency that was much more focused on Self-Actualization and Social Transformation, I can tell you that there is a vast difference in how each agency defines success.  Planning, and instructing curriculum for each takes on very different tone in each of these cultures and defines the role of the teacher in the eyes of the agency.  Again, fitting into the agency conception of curriculum ensures job security, but also always for personal conception of the role of the teacher and, when well aligned, gives an opportunity for the expression of self in the process of teaching.  I know that it is true that this can greatly impact planning, instruction and assessment of curriculum. 

The assessment of curriculum in my organization is both narrative and statistical.  Because this happens at a post-intervention level, I see the humanistic conception being most useful to me in my teaching approach. Students can reflect on growth, development and their potential pre and post intervention, as well as what the classes meant to them and their own abilities to cope as a human, and a participant in an unstable labour market.  If I could not engage the Self Actualization conception with my clients in this way, I know my own self-actualization could not be realized, as my core values include helping others to succeed.  I literally need to probe into self actualization of my learners, but need to remember that this may, or may not be, the learner’s own conception for their education.  What this means for me is that I need to be aware of when learners with to reflect on growth and when they would rather not dwell in the ideas of growth and development.

For future reference:

I found it very hard to keep the different authors and concepts straight and so I created this reference chart as a way to consider the different orientations and visions we have so far visited.

Sources:

Al Mousa, N. (2013). An examination of cad use in two interior design programs from the perspectives of curriculum and instructors, pp. 21-37 (Master’s Thesis).

Brown, G. T. L. (2006). Conceptions of curriculum: A framework for understanding New Zealand’s Curriculum Framework and teachers’ opinions. Curriculum Matters, 2, 164-181.

Eisner, E., & Vallance, E. (Eds.). (1974). Five conceptions of the curriculum: Their roots and implications for curriculum planning. In E. Eisner & E. Vallance (Eds.), Conflicting conceptions of curriculum (pp. 1-18). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.

McNeil, J. D. (2006). Contemporary curriculum in thought and action (6th ed., pp. 1-13, 24-34, 44-51, 60-73). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2013). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (6^th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Read part of Chapter 1, pp. 1-8.

Pratt, D. (1994). Curriculum perspectives. In D. Pratt, Curriculum planning: A handbook for professionals(pp. 8-22). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publisher.

Shiro, M. S. (2008). Introduction to the curriculum ideologies. In M. S. Shiro, Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns (pp. 1-12). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sowell, E. J. (2005). Curriculum: An integrative introduction (3rd ed., pp. 37-51). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Thomas, C. J. (1990). Conceptions of curriculum and classroom practice: An ethnographic study of family life education teachers, pp. 26-34 and 74-112 (Doctoral Dissertation).

Vallance. (1986). A second look at conflicting conceptions of the curriculum. Theory into Practice, 25(1), 24-30.