The Struggle for the American Curriculum by H.M. Kliebard - Book Report/Review Example

History of American Curriculum History of American Curriculum Introduction The book d The Struggle for the American Curriculum presents an in-depth analysis of the curriculum development in America from the 19th century. Understanding the curriculum development over the years is of critical importance to education students in the modern day. The American curriculum has come a long way with different contributors highlighting various perspectives concerning learning theories, instructional methods, the purpose of education, and the role of teachers in the education system. One of the outstanding contributors to the curriculum development is John Dewey. Dewey, who lived from 1859 to 1952 made outstanding contributions to the curriculum development in the 20th century. He made his philosophical views concerning education evident placing emphasis on pragmatism, reflection, and experience, interest in the community and democracy, as well as interactions in the education system. This paper will describe the four interest groups that Herbert Kliebard highlights in his book and their contribution to the development of the American curriculum. Views of the Humanists The first interest group discussed by Kliebard comprised of the humanist who emerged in the 1890s. The humanists were the first group to identify the need for a standardized curriculum. Most of the humanists had the conviction that every individual had the potential to develop a high power of reason, moral character, and sensitivity to beauty if exposed to the right curriculum. The following individuals were the key contributors to the humanist view of the curriculum: Charles Eliot, Joseph Mayer Rice, and William Torrey Harris. Most of the humanists considered schools as critical mechanisms with a significant contribution in the transmission of cultural values and sensibilities that defined the western civilization (Kliebard, 2004). Previously, mental disciplinarians who existed before the 1890s had focused on the use of mental faculties in training. Humanists had the conviction that traditional subjects were of critical importance because they served as the bearers of cultural tradition. Notably, the influence of the humanist in the curriculum development was evident in the 1920s. Views of the Developmentalists The developmentalist formed the second interest group discussed by Kliebard in his text. They existed in the 1890s to the 1900s. Developmentalist opined that the school curriculum needed to focus on reflecting content that conforms to the natural development of children. In addition, the developmentalist school of thinking highlighted that there was a salient need for the school curriculum to consider the interests and capacities of children. However, this school of thinking did not give attention to the social and intellectual needs of students that needed to be reflected in the curriculum. Many developmentalists had the perception that as a child moved from one stage to the other, education could serve to unleash different potentials at different stages. Therefore, many developmentalists considered a curriculum that conformed to the natural order of development as the most appropriate (Kliebard, 2004). Some of the outstanding developmentalists included Stanley Hall, Charles Francis Adams, and Colonel Francis Parker. Views of the Social Efficiency Educators The social efficiency educators emerged in the mid-1890s and remained influential until the mid-1920s. The promoters of the social efficiency education believed that the effective curriculum needed to prepare students for the future workplace. Since the economy of the American Nation was facing critical challenges, social efficiency educators believed that if the curriculum prepared students for the future workplace, things would get better. Therefore, the curriculum needed to provide students with an opportunity to specialize in different vocations and acquire specialized skills that would qualify an individual for different positions in the job market. Other social efficiency educators were of the view that the curriculum only needed to train students on aspects that would apply in real life. They also placed emphasis on the need for vocational education, which involved job skilled training integrated into the high school curriculum. Social efficiency educators viewed the relevance of the curriculum form its end. If the curriculum could prepare students for occupational roles, then it was effective (Kliebard, 2004). Some of the social efficiency educators included Edward Ross, Frederick Winslow Taylor, John Franklin Bobbitt, Edward Lee Thorndike, David Snedden, Ross Finney, Clarence Kingsley, Charters, and William Heard Kilpatrick. Views of the Social Meliorists Views of the Social Meliorists had the conviction that the school curriculum could serve to introduce a new social vision. The fact that human effort could make social systems better was one of the bases on the arguments. However, a salient expansion of the curriculum was of critical importance of education was to succeed in creating a new vision. They were highly influential in the 1920s to the 1950s. They highlighted that the design of the curriculum needed to address emerging social and economic problems. An effective curriculum needed to promote social justice and equality (Kliebard, 2004). Some of the Views of the Social Meliorists included Lester Frank Ward, George Counts, Harold Rugg, Ralph Tyler, and Hollis Caswell. John Dewey’s Contribution and his Views Concerning the Schools of Thinking Described Above Notably, John Dewey is the author of over 40 books, more than 700 articles, letters, lectures, and other published works that have been highly influential in the curriculum development over the years. Dewey grew up in a middle-class family relating closely to French and Ireland immigrants. After his elementary schooling, he joined high school in 1872. After the completion of his high school studies, he became part of the student community at the University of Vermont in 1875 (Kliebard, 2004). Dewey found a traditional curriculum in his college days, which did not have any difference from the high school curriculum. However, Dewey’s faculty encouraged students to use their critical skills and develop new ideologies. After finishing his college studies, he obtained a teaching job for two years and returned to his previous college to pursue a degree in philosophy. Afterward, Dewey undertook his graduate studies in philosophy in 1882 and graduated in 1884. After the completion of his Ph.D. studies, he received a recommendation for a junior professor post at the University of Michigan where he lectured until 1894. After leaving the University of Michigan, he joined the University of Chicago. His position at the University of Chicago presented him with an opportunity to engage in extensive research and publish many works not only in philosophy, but also on pedagogy. Dewey opined that it was logical to separate pedagogical studies from philosophy in psychology. He initiated a department of pedagogy at the University of Chicago, which is currently the department of education in that University. Dewey took a keen interest in the newly formed department of pedagogy at Chicago. In 1896, he achieved another milestone by establishing the University elementary school, which was the first experimental school in the University (Kliebard, 2004). In 1897, he gained popularity after one of his famous writings appeared in the school journal. In the writing, he had highlighted some of his beliefs about education and school. He had highlighted that the school curriculum needed to focus on the experiences of the students. Unlike what happened previously, Dewey had the conviction that schools should serve as complementary institutions that had a direct connection to the values learned at home, and that served to enrich a child’s experience. If the school focused on the interests and aspirations of each child, as well as initiating new interests in students, then education will be more effective. Dewey had the conviction that the role of a teacher needed to be understood from the child’s experiences. It was wrong for teachers to impose ideologies in children. However, the teacher needed to adopt a new role of offering the relevant support to children as they interpreted their experiences. Notably, these thoughts defined Dewey’s ideology of child-centered education. The ideology faced numerous criticisms with many of the critics arguing that such an approach would mean that the teachers did not have any control within the classroom. In addition, Dewey opined that authentic education was more appropriate since it would present a child with an opportunity to be aware of social heritage systems by being part of the system (Kliebard, 2004). For this reason, Dewey placed emphasis on the need for education to focus on constructive activities that would enable students to benefit from education. Dewey and Progressive Education Dewey was a strong supporter of progressive education, which highlighted its emphasis on the need for education to be child-centered. Along with other progressives, Dewey sought to ensure that his laboratory school established in Chicago was one of the outstanding progressive institutions. He wanted to ensure that the institution presented students with an opportunity to reconstruct their living experiences. Parents were in support of the new curriculum because it gave attention to the student as well as the subject matter. In addition, the curriculum encouraged students to demonstrate curiosity and critical thinking (Kliebard, 2004). Progressive education served as a replacement of the authoritarianism that had existed previously. Dewey‘s Views on School and Society Dewey had the conviction that schools needed to be a reflection of the society. In his view, the school curriculum had a direct correlation with social actions carried out in democratic ventures. His philosophical knowledge enables him to understand the existing relationship between the society and individuals. He revealed his conviction in 1899 when he authored a book titled School and Society. In this book, he highlighted the salient need for democracy to be reborn in every generation. He highlighted that education would serve as the midwife facilitating the rebirth of democracy. Dewey opined that schools needed not to be simple places that played short-term roles in an individual’s life. On the contrary, schools needed to offer a range of activities that would promote the growth of the learner. He highlighted a mismatch of the content taught in schools and the basic foundational schools needed in an industrial society (Kliebard, 2004). The mismatch he described revealed that the school curriculum needed reforms so that it could give students skills that were of relevance in an industrial society. If schools achieved the goal of imparting students with schools, then such individuals would develop both themselves and the society. Traditional education had focused on a passive and receptive role on the side of the children. Many teachers utilized one size fits all instructional method. Dewey highlighted that students presented different capacities, strengths, and weaknesses. Some students exhibited high levels of spontaneity and imagination. Their imagination caused them to be highly inquisitive. For this reason, the traditional education system did not meet the needs of such students. Dewey explained that the traditional education system was a main contributor to students losing interest in education (Kliebard, 2004). For this reason, he highlighted that the education system needed to consider the needs of students and relied on different instructional methods in order to ensure that the students benefited from the curriculum. Dewey’s Views on Democracy and Education In 1916, Dewey authored an additional book titled Democracy and Education. In his view, democracy was a “means of defining culture”. Democracy was the only way through which the society could enjoy a certain level of freedom. Dewey highlighted in the text that societies were proving to be highly complex. Despite the complexity of the societies, such societies needed to transmit cultural values to the emerging generations. For this reason, comprehensive education systems were required to transmit such values to the young. Dewey was aware that education comprised of social interactions with the purpose of transmitting culture from one generation to the other (Dewey, 2001). The transmission of culture occurred through the passage of standards, expectations, ideologies, as well as hopes from one generation to the other. For this reason, teachers needed to focus on teaching critical thinking skills. Only such skills would help students acquire cultural values of the older generation. Dewey was of the opinion that the curriculum needed to promote active learning as well as encourage students to adopt critical thinking skills. He was sure that progressive education was a critical contributor to democracy. Since progressive education promoted open-mindedness and the capacity to undertake personal thinking, it served as a barrier to dictatorship. Dewey promoted the integration of the curriculum with experiential learning so that students could test the concepts they learned in class. As Kliebard highlights in his text, Dewey was of the opinion that curriculum developers needed to consider both the cognitive abilities of students, as well as their learning interests. Despite the criticism that emerged, Dewey had the conviction that such an approach was more effective for the development of a reliable curriculum (Kliebard, 2004). Without doubt, Dewey’s opinions on the development of curriculum exhibited a high level of rationality and reflected the advancements of the 20th century. According to Dewey, teachers needed to play the role of facilitators in progressive education. Facilitators promoted students participation in the learning process as well as independent thinking. Facilitators also presented room for students to indulge in collaborative learning and a positive exchange of ideas among students. The traditional approach that Dewey challenged did not give attention to the needs of the students and promoted a passive role of students. Although it was in the 20th century, Dewey developed a vision for the American curriculum. He highlighted that a proper educational curriculum needed to consider the abilities and learning styles of students. In addition, Dewey placed emphasis on the need for progressive education, which promoted the development of critical thinking skills. Students undertaking such a curriculum were more prepared for the highly industrialized society that needed creative thinkers. Many critics argued that progressive education did not leave room for moral education. However, the progressives highlighted that moral education would be integrated into the diverse range of activities that students would undertake within the school (Kliebard, 2004). Dewey was convinced that students had the potential to master the modern world and that a proper educational curriculum would give them an opportunity to do so. In 1952, John Dewey published an article in which he described the potential benefits of adopting a student-centered curriculum. He made it evident that a student-centered curriculum would present teachers with the awareness that students were human beings with an evident potential for growth in different aspects. In addition, the student-centered approach in the curriculum development focused on the interest of students as a potential source of learning. Dewey was against the traditional system that relied on rewards and punishments as potential motivators top maximize learning in students. He deemed such an approach as both inappropriate and ineffective. In his article authored in 1902 titled The Child and the Curriculum, Dewey placed emphasis on a child-centered curriculum in the American society (Dewey, 2001). He outlined his theory in depth in an effort to defend his convictions that the traditional education system did not provide an opportunity for progressive education. Dewey also highlighted some of the common goals of education. He mentioned that education sought to develop an evident harmony with nature, social efficiency, and transmission of culture. As mentioned above, only a comprehensive education system and curriculum has the potential to promote culture transmission (Kliebard, 2004). The school needed to become an institution that represented a certain type of social life. For this reason, schools needed to share a diverse range of experiences with stakeholders both within and without the education system. In such a setting, teachers had a critical role in adopting new instructional methods and focusing on teaching students different social skills (Dewey, 2001). The success of the education system depended on whether schools were able to cultivate an undying desire in students so that they could seek continuous growth in life. Conclusion Evidently, John Dewey contributed immensely to the development of the American school curriculum. Although Kliebard names different individuals whose contribution is of critical importance in the American school curriculum, Dewey contribution was outstanding. The fact that he introduced the child-centered approach to curriculum development, which is one of the modern aspects considered in curriculum, indicates that he had a clear vision for the American education system. He inspired the curriculum developers by the publication of numerous works that supported his beliefs in progressive education and child-centered curriculum. He was the first person to link democracy to education through his work titled Democracy and Education. In this work, he highlighted how a proper curriculum had the capacity to promote democracy in the society. His ideas have been of critical help in the design of the modern education curriculum in the American society. References Dewey, J. (2001). Democracy and education: Apenn state electronic classics. N.p.: Pennsylvania State University. Kliebard, H.M. (2004). The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893-1958. NY: Routledge Falmer. Read More