Curriculum Change and School Reform - Essay Example

Curriculum Change and School Reform: Challenges for Educators in the 21st Century [ID Throughout my educational career, I always felt guilty when I did well in a class but didnt internalize it, or put off something I found boring and uninteresting. This is why I was so vindicated when I read social and political critic Noam Chomsky write, “It doesnt matter how great the thoughts [being taught] are, if they are simply imposed upon you from the outside and youre forced through them step by step, after youre done youll have forgotten what they are” (2002). I realized that everyone can “[get] an A” and “a week later [not] even remember what the course is about” (Chomsky, 2002). And when students who appear to be failing or struggling get bad grades, the question always is: Would they have failed no matter what (in which case, they were in the wrong class or expectations were unrealistic), or did they fail because the material failed to be interesting? Approaches to curriculum design and reform must always take into account students real, lived experiences and their networks of actual interests and beliefs to be effective. Education has to make itself relevant for students. This is especially true for curriculum reform for special education students in the field of language arts in middle school: Techniques have to be calibrated to their realistic ability levels and actual interests. A philosophy I adopt as a rubric or general organizing principle, culled from the Deweyan literature, is essentially, “You dont know if you try”. When any student arrives in any classroom, it is almost impossible to predict, even with all the knowledge about their educational background and relevant family and personal background (which is never available to teachers in toto anyways), how they might do and what they might like about the class. Institutions can either choose to err on the side of optimism, knowing in advance they will waste some resources on students not ready for, not interested in or not capable of handling the material; or they can err on the side of pessimism, knowing in advance that they will waste opportunity and potential. The cost of the latter is too high to imagine. Limited curricula that underestimate the abilities of some students, then, should be rejected. One of the most major questions for educational advocates as regards middle school Special Education students is whether and how much they are included in regular class. It is virtually impossible to tell if this policy should be adopted in general: “Current legislation supports the concept of including students with disabilities in the general education classroom but leaves many wondering, Is this approach working? Determining the effectiveness of this practice is a task not easily accomplished. The term...is not found in any law and is used inconsistently..Inclusive programs differ greatly from district to district... [A]mount and nature of support provided to the regular classroom teacher differ dramatically from district to district” (Hines, 2001). In general, the primary justification for this reform approach is one of justice. Disability students should be in classes with their able-bodied peers: Its a form of de jure segregation based on ability status if theyre not. Legislators have embraced this reform influence whole-heartedly, which is a positive change from prior, less progressive views of students in general and Special Education students in particular. While this is a wonderful principle, and erring on the side of more inclusion and more optimism that they can participate meaningfully in the process given a chance is always good, the fact is that the analogy between racism and disability status is a poor one. Students with learning, mental, physical or educational disabilities have innate, not just social, roadblocks to academic success. Treating them exactly like their able-bodied peers is just as inappropriate as treating black or Latina/o students identically to white students with no regard to real difference in background and what that might do to goals, family support or values (Wise, 2010). Hines finds that the research is “scattered”, sporadic and paradoxical: There is evidence that putting disability students into the regular classroom hurts their self-esteem, presumably due to peer group interactions; there is also evidence that it helps, presumably by eliminating overt and subtle stigma. While legislation is going the way of inclusion as a general fact, then, I would say that each middle school honestly look at their budget, resources, and the type of disabilities they are dealing with and determine then if inclusion or different classes are the appropriate solution. The reform to a more integrated classroom is a fact of life, for better or for worse, so it is the goal of educators to find a way to make this new integrated classroom beneficial for both Special Education and main-track students (Hines, 2010). Curriculum design should be inclusive or differential based on the real needs of local communities, not abstract political principles. A district that only has thirty disability students among six hundred students could certainly afford to distribute Special Education students among the classrooms; one with a hundred Special Education students in a two thousand student middle school, on the other hand, might see a benefit at having separate classes due to the disparate needs of such a wide student body. Melodie Bitter recommends that Special Education curricula be flexible and expansive (Mandel, 1995). Special education students have unpredictable levels of energy and focus: Having a curriculum with many options allows teachers to be comfortable changing from, say, a word Bingo game to song singing if interest in the former wanes. She further recommends that extracurricular activities like singing, dance, sports and theater be emphasized, since special education students can often thrive in those environments and it can promote more interaction between Special Education students and main-track students. All this leads me to believe that a general approach to a curriculum for language arts would begin with entrance testing, wherein a teacher gets a feel for each students language mix. Some disability students are highly verbal and creative with language; others struggle. After this, “modules” can be pulled together, including songs, games, videos, worksheets, and so on, for salient content areas, such as Spelling, Vocabulary, Grammar, Creativity and Syntax. Ultimately, if teachers try as hard as possible and use creative tools, the vast majority of special education students should exceed their wildest dreams. References Bracken, L. On Equal Terms. TeachNet. Retrieved from: http://www.teachnet.ie/lbracken/disability/ . Accessed 1/16/2011. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2011). Teachers-Special Education. Occupational Outlook Handbook. Retrieved from: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos070.htm . Accessed 1/16/2011. Chomsky, N. (2002). Understanding Power. The New Press: New York. Hines, R. (December 2001). Inclusion in Middle Schools. ERIC Digest. ED459000. Mandel, S. (1995). Special Education. Retrieved from: http://www.pacificnet.net/~mandel/SpecialEducation.html . Accessed 1/16/2011. Richmond, W. (January 15, 2011). Stone principals journey to Fall River guided by passion for education. The Herald News. Wise, T. (2010). Color-Blind: The Rise of Post-Racial Politics and the Retreat from Racial Equity. City Lights Open Media. Read More