In chapter 9 , I agree with Ornstein and Hunkins when they say power elite in state departments and school districts are dictating to teachers that “school prepare students to “fit” into their social, political and economic places. How true it is though teachers make decisions on how curricula are enacted in their classrooms but still due to never ending work load, above notion cannot be fully guaranteed. In my case, unless teachers are able to reflect the curriculum and relates the lessons with his/her visions, it will be different, but mostly, due to teaching itself is not meaningful to teachers because learning does not fully construe to students, democracy in education can’t be fulfilled. What I am saying is everything is dictated and as a teacher, I just follow everything inside the “guidance” book.
Will there conflict arise due this politics and curriculum decision making? Yes, so many conflicts and to that extend, it can’t be controlled anymore. People will resort for demonstration when they realize open forum and discussion could not work anymore. This can be seen clearly through the implementation of Science and Mathematics to be taught in English as it is ridiculous and deadliest to teachers in my country. What about students who reside in places without internet and proper communication where they can easily access to information /education? They even have problem to understand lessons in their own language and due to pressure from outside, teachers have to opt for this policy? I will agree if there will be at least 18 months process of developing the policy or pilot study as what Dr Diane M Debacker mentioned a fortnight ago, but so far as I am concerned, there were no such things. Sometimes I do wonder why is this happening to my education system, because in the textbook it says, “curriculum decision makers-teachers, principals, and administrators-do not operate in a vacuum because they are indirectly influenced by many other individuals and groups..” anyhow, I am thinking there might be few factors influenced them unwillingly or willingly to be a culprit/traitors to the development of future generations. I can say mostly, democracy in education is not as free as it is here. Knowledge institution (schools, universities) should be a free institution so information/knowledge/decision pertaining to the education of nation should be free rather than bounded by political powers and act as tools. This kind of idea will tarnish the professors’ images in my country; they just keep silent about it. Though they disagree, they agree by shutting up they mouth…silently. Are they just afraid of losing out the research grants or positions?
As I am reading the four questions regarding curriculum decision making and the level of influence in page 315, I like the last question which is “ Who is responsible for what happens?”, having this question all the time, make us to be ethical decision makers when it comes to curriculum matters. Interesting enough to be mentioned, how Constitutions here keep/exerts Federal Government little control/influence on curriculum though recently I can sense there is element to control education via not granting funds or withholding it for schools who do not abide by rules or by sponsoring programs/creating incentives for schools that abide by their rules. It is a smart strategy but personally, I am thinking, this smart strategy can kill the future development of democracy in education.
Indeed, the author in Chapter 18 is true when she said, “ not all teaching can be unpacked by examining it as a labor process or as a class phenomenon…. Neither can all of teaching be understood as totally related to patriarchy.” however we can understand it when we reflect, like what the author said, “ on how we think about the “reform” of teaching and curriculum and the state’s role in it.” Putting into my mind, you can understand it when you understand the big picture of a system in any society. The drive towards changes in education system in any nation is closely related to economic system. Economic system is determined by the worldviews of highest strata in that particular society. It is the ideologies that within individuals ( in the highest strata of the society) later on decide what should they hold as their belief. So it goes to the role of woman in education, it should not be degraded, rather it must be empowered though we know how patriarchy most societies in this world.
When it comes to intensification and teaching, her example makes me realize how true it is the method use by them in the name of rules and regulation. Let’s say that I experienced that, ranging from a total absence of time to keep up with one’s field, have to be at working desk from 8-5 p.m, less empowerment given to apply sense of criticism though it is constructive, books in library are particularly about a good ethical worker instead of instructional management or thinking outside of the box leadership, a bad internet connection that will not allow you to unravel mystery behind democracy in education and etc. A good teacher ( for them) will be those who can maintained a perfect percentage in standardized examination, a good teacher ( for them) is the one who believes the answer for bad internet connection or a bored library are due to limited budget while the other bad teacher( in their eyes) can see more unnecessary physical development are being well developed surrounding areas and keep lamenting about it.
Tags: Against Paiedeia, curriculum, curriculum and state intervention