Theory and Practice - Essay Example

?Running Head: Curriculum Curriculum – Task Ruth Ramirez Curriculum – Task All academic disciplines comprise of two main components: theory and practice. The theoretical component strengthens the foundation of the discipline by providing it with guiding principles whereas the practice is the practical manifestation, the application of these principles in everyday life. One of these disciplines, which present itself ever so often in the modern world is the discipline of education. The discourse of education holds significant importance in the contemporary academia. Everyone agrees that the modern society would collapse at once if one were to take out the education industry out of the equation (Young, 2006). The reason being, unlike older times, today’s industrialized world is heavily based on sectors of industries run by qualified individuals. This means that, only a person with sufficient acumen of business can run successful merchandise and only a qualified doctor can provide medical care to the sick. The reliance of this industrial matrix on the notion of transmission of specific quanta of knowledge from one generation of employees to the next ensures a continued, long-term importance of the profession of teaching. Like any other discipline, the discipline of pedagogy is full of theories and principles that provide groundwork for the educators, researchers and the teachers to develop effective classroom environment and lesson plans (Wiles, 2010). This does not only help the teachers in imparting knowledge to the learners in the most conducive environment but also help the learners to accumulate this knowledge and reflect upon it, thereby broadening their intellectual horizons (Weimer, 2002). One of the theories that arose in the past decade in this regard was the Curriculum Theory, which brings together the elements of theory and practice on one avenue. The teachers employ this theory in building strategies, which they use in teaching subject-specific content to learners in manner best suited to the needs of the audience. With this agenda, the curriculum theory offers distinct ideologies, which instructors choose from, depending on their instructional setting. These ideologies then function as intellectual frameworks in which the teachers then design their curriculum accordingly. This paper examines the efficiency of two such ideologies in an instructional setting. It then merges these two ideologies in forming a personal philosophy of curriculum, which then forms the guiding principle for the personal teaching practice (Wiles, 2008). It is important here to establish few observations about the instructional setting in which the ideology implementation will take place. The setting here is a high school for at-risk teenagers at an adult county jail where the curriculum will be taught to English Language Learners. The setting is different from most high schools because of its students. The learners are mostly from the minority groups with poor financial background, susceptible to drugs, street crime who little no exposure to a proper school system before. To begin with, let us look at the Social Reconstructive curriculum ideology in detail and examine its appropriateness to the instructional setting. The social reconstructive ideology holds that the purpose of education is to reform the values of the society (Weimer, 2008). This ideology perceives curriculum as a tool of social reconstruction. This is important because this explains why this ideology is significant to the development of curriculum for ELL learners in adult county jail. The learners in this setting are not only materially disadvantaged but have also been victims of aggression, violence, and abuse. As psychology dictates, such adverse living conditions and unhealthy lifestyle not only affects the physiological health but also disrupts the psyche and the personality of the subjects making them more pessimistic and violent. Thus, the protocol of Social Reconstructive ideology influences this very aspect of their lives and plays a great role in bringing it back to normal. These learners require a curriculum, which does not restrict itself only to the teaching of English language but also employ the language as a tool to reform the current lives of these learners by introducing them to a softer communication pattern, rich historical heritage, and lingual richness of the English language. Social reconstructive ideology expands the purpose of English language class in this setting. Rather than just teaching the language, the teacher teaches a completely different lifestyle, which helps these learners make better choices in their lives. The appropriateness of social reconstructive ideology in this instructional setting can be judged by its ability to facilitate the teacher in the design and development of the curriculum. First, the curriculum based on this ideology would try to find the status of the learners so that it can assess the magnitude of the reform that needs to be planned and implemented. For this purpose, a diagnostic evaluation in the beginning of the term will help the teacher in figuring out where does each individual learner stands and then plan the curriculum accord to the indvdiual uniqueness of the learner (Schiro, 1978). Secondly, the curriculum based on social reconstructive ideology pays equal attention to language and literature. Since the purpose of the lesson is to reform the personalities so that the ills of society could be rectified, the focus of the class is not only to teach the complexities of grammar and nuances of the language but also to let the beauty of the language penetrate through the minds of the learners so that they can benefit from the it. Finally, a curriculum based on social reconstructive ideology must also involve excursion and trips to other areas of the city. This will not only help them to be creative in learning new words and enriching their vocabularies and imagination but will also enrich their minds and broaden their perspective about the world. The second ideology is the Social Efficiency ideology. According to Schiro, Social Efficiency ideology “believes that the purpose of schooling is to efficiently meet the needs of society by training youth to function as future mature contributing members of society . . . [with] the skills and procedures they will need in the workplace and at home” (Schiro, 2008). In other words, the social efficiency ideology puts focus on the needs of the times and what are needed to become a productive member of society and thereby design the educational curricula according to the assessed need of the time. It emphasizes skills and competencies that have to be learned in order to survive in the real world. The Social Efficiency ideology sees education as another tool to prepare individuals for the cutthroat competition of the 21st century. This ideology is time bound and responds according to the needs of the time (Sawyers, 2004). Thus, social efficiency ideology invites the researchers to stay abreast with the changes in the modern time to assess the needs of the society and prepare the individuals accordingly (Olsen, 2006). The social efficiency ideology is highly applicable and relevant to the design of the curriculum of ELL learners in the context of county jail. By applying the ideology of being useful, the residents in the county jail will now have the necessary skills and competencies not only to fend for themselves, but also to keep their hands full with productive activities that they will no longer have to resort to petty crimes and delinquency just to survive that once characterized their beings. There are also built-in reinforcement mechanisms in the social efficiency ideology that could be effective in the residents of county jail. Social efficiency ideology speaks the language of economics in terms of education that the learner could benefit from it concretely in terms of pecuniary gain. Learning good English has many applications such as allowing them to get better job and consequently better income which could be a good motivator for people who have distressed economic background because it enables them to make a living. Personally speaking, I believe that the philosophy of a curriculum should be a combination of basic skills and humanistic ideals. A curriculum has to educate, to reform, to expand our mind and to be useful for the student to become a well rounded person that contributes to the greater good of society. This philosophy incorporates both social reconstructive and social efficiency curriculum ideology. The social reconstructive part comes in the first part where the philosophy stresses upon the need to teach the learners how to distinguish right from wrong and to develop themselves to become better individuals. The social efficiency part comes in when the philosophy stresses on the education being able to become produce citizens who are valuable resources to the society (McKernan, 2008). The social reconstructive ideology fits well with the rubric of the philosophy of curriculum presented since the curriculum based on the social reconstructive ideology tends to highlight the wrongs of society and tries to fix its ways using ideals of a good society as a template that significantly sync with a socially efficient educational ideology (Macalister, 2009). It also emphasizes on the strict definitions between what is ideal and desirable from what is socially unacceptable thereby rejecting the ambiguity of relativism and universalism (Last, 2001). This purposefulness is necessary due to the fact that the education industry is, by its inception, responsible for producing productive citizens who will guarantee the reproduction of essential knowledge and continue the industrial cycle on which the wheel of this industrialized society persists (Kaplan, 2004). There are strategies where this philosophy can actualize in the lesson plans for the ELL learners in the adult county jail. The two strategies are through instruction and through content. Let us look at them one at a time. Instruction is an ideal way of displaying the underlying philosophy. Often times, the teacher work very hard on the curriculum philosophy but fails to express it in their lessons either because they try too hard in squeezing all of it in their content or not trying to express it at all. However, via instruction, a teacher can brilliantly express their philosophy and aims of the course with subtlety and professionalism. For instance, the above-mentioned philosophy expressed in the mode of instruction done by assigning writing assignments that asks the learners to reflect on the issues of right and wrong and their aim in life (Ediger, 2003). The other strategy is through content. The content is often the best reflection of the teacher’s philosophy (Cummins & Davison, 2007). For instance, the prose that teacher assigns for exercises can be from a particular self-reflective genre, which can subliminally drive the point home. Curriculum philosophy is an important aspect of any lesson plan and whether through instruction or through content, its manifestation is highly important for the course to be effective. References Cummins, J., Davison, C. (2007). International Handbook of English Language Teaching, Part 1. Springer. Ediger, M. (2003). Philosophy and Curriculum. Discovery Publishing House. Kaplan, K.C. (2004). The Literacy Curriculum and Bilingual Education: A Critical Examination. Peter Lang. Last, E. (2001). Planning Curriculum in English Language Arts. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. Macalister, J. (2009). Language Curriculum Design. Routledge McKernan, J. (2008). Curriculum and Imagination: Process Theory, Pedagogy, and Action Research. Taylor & Francis. Olsen, L. (2006), January through April. Secondary school leadership for English learner success. Presentation through California tomorrow, the secondary school leadership for English learner success development series. Oakland California Sawyers, D. (2004). Fundamental Aspects of Interpreter Education: Curriculum and Assessment. John Benjamins Publishing Company. Schiro, M. (1978). Curriculum for Better Schools: The Great Ideological Debate. Educational Technology. Schiro, M. S. (2008). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN: 978-1-41295316-0 Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-Centered Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice. John Wiley & Sons. Weimer, M. (2008). Developing Learner-Centered Teaching: A Practical Guide for Faculty. John Wiley & Sons. Wiles, J. (2008). Leading Curriculum Development. Corwin Press. Wiles, J. (2010). Curriculum Development: A Guide to Practice. Pearson. Young, T. (2006). Supporting the literacy development of English learners increasing success in all classrooms. Ira Newark de. Read More