Curriculum. There is a word that I thought I knew the definition of: a course of study or the subjects taught in a school. Even though I have heard of the word before, I never really thought about what it meant until I started teaching. Over and over again I hear curriculum being uttered by educators without really questioning it too much. These were old-school educators who did things the traditional way; since they had more experience than me, I viewed them as professionals who had the answers. A few years ago, when I started teaching at a public school, I was immediately shown the math curriculum guide, designed by a former math coach. I just assumed that that is what I am supposed to do. It was so specific that it had the amount of days that it would take to teach a certain topic; 2 days on this, 3 days on that. This was curriculum, I had what the state expected the students to learn in the form of standards, and I had this guide thing. All the other math teachers followed it and I was much too inexperienced to go against the grain. I was all set, now I had to figure out how to make these lessons meld with the grey matter of young adolescents.
What Every Middle School Teacher Should Know, 3rd Edition by Dave Brown and Trudy Knowles is helping to rewrite my own personal definition of curriculum. They view curriculum not as scripted lessons, standards, or textbooks, but more of students’ total experience at school, “from the moment they walk into the building until they leave at the end of the day.” (P. 128). It is not what is taught but rather what is learned. Educators who focus on the needs of developing adolescents can use this idea of curriculum as way to address and engage students in learning.
The traditional subject-oriented curriculum is what I have been doing for a while. My middle school is set up where I am a math/science teacher on a two-teacher pod (the other teaches ELA/geography), within a larger team which is composed of 3 pods, within 2 separate houses. In math class, I teach math, and in science class, I teach science; a single-subject approach that is very common. Some things that are missing from this approach is the experiences of democratic ideals and the interactions with the social world. I try very hard to mix things up by using video clips, having students practice at the whiteboard, and working in small groups. What is missing is most students’ passion for learning the subject matter.
What blew my mind was the practice of an alternative curriculum called curriculum integration which is engineered by the students to answer questions on topics they feel are important. Having them ask questions and recognize what they are interested in gives them ownership and hopefully passion to find a way to answer these questions. Through a process of self-reflection, question asking, developing themes, and action, students are driving there own instruction. This will engage them in cognitive, social, emotional, and physical learning, speaking to multiple types of intelligence, ethnic backgrounds, and different abilities. This seems like a great way to engage students by including them to design their own course of study.
In a city public school, this approach could work well for many students. With administrators and parents on board, a group of teachers could implement something like this. Or, a single teacher could try and borrow ideas from this method while still requiring students to satisfy state standards. Teachers who teach math, such as myself, would have a hard time connecting all the dots and staying a step ahead in making sure that the students have all the necessary skills they would need. But then again, what is the difference? It is hard enough to plan regular lessons, at least with curriculum integration, the students are using the subject matter to answer and solve questions that they are interested in.
