Curriculum Controversies

The Context of Curricular Reform

Consider the meaning derived from the term civic. The Latin-to-English derivation references the significance of the Roman civic crown. The crown was reserved for men who saved the lives of fellow soldiers throughout their duties of service. Similarly, educators' civic responsibility is to protect the lives of those underserved in American schools. Gary Howard notes that such responsibility remains Eurocentric at best. The U.S. educational system's response to uphold societal values and traditions translates into disproportionate academic outcomes for different racial groups, increased hate-group activity, inequities in educational funding, and monoculture teacher–school leader preparation. The curriculum perpetuates hegemonic pedagogical practices. The recognition of cultural nuances through a critical and truthful lens might reveal how cultural contexts influence power and abuses within American schools. Especially important is the examination of cultural nuances—what is taught, who is taught, educational resources, access to social networks, curriculum design, and pedagogical practices. It is impossible to separate structural conditions that guide curricula, research, and work from action taken in the broader public domain. If educators do not reconsider the complicity to create and support the conditions to meet the needs of traditionally underserved children, schools will continue to fail these children. Educators should take a critical stance—blend humanity and educational reform to extend beyond classroom walls. Cornelius Castoriadis suggests schools must do everything within their power to provide children with fundamental knowledge and skills to make sound judgments to exercise choice that supports the possibility of democratic change.

For many educators, addressing the injustices faced by historically oppressive groups in schools is an unbearable burden. Educators struggle over what social order would best serve humanity through the educational system. Some educators assume that children living in poverty and those from historic racial minority groups are to blame for the achievement gap that separates them. They point to research by James Coleman in the 1960s and assert that it is the family and not the teacher that most influences student achievement. The key is that good teaching occurs when the lived experiences of the students are recognized by teachers who themselves understand how to connect those experiences with clear academic expectations.

Developmental psychologists Patricia Greenfield, Barbara Rogoff, and Lev Vygotsky focus on how [Page 249]varying social actions affect human development. If children develop their competencies through social interactions, then it seems impossible to separate an educator's heritage (personal background) from what happens in the classroom. Lived experiences, including economic and political conditions, shape pedagogical practices and work as “educators” in the 21st century. Peter McLaren and Joe Kincheloe note that many educators struggle with how to serve human interests within an increasingly culturally diverse democratic social order. The current assault on the educational system is first and foremost an attack on myriad contexts that make culturally responsive pedagogical practices possible. It also raises questions regarding the real problems facing our traditionally underserved children and families. Culturally responsive pedagogical practices must be understood as fundamental to exercising academic freedom. Exercising such freedoms defends the institution of education, recognizing it as a space in which democracy is practiced in the public sphere.

...