Playing school curriculum ping-pong

Dear editor,

Surprise, surprise, the UPC proposed changes to the NDP K-4 school curriculum is receiving a negative response from the Progressivists in Colleges of Education and ATA.

The ‘Progressivist’ philosophy of education believes ‘what’ a student learns is less important than ‘how’ a student learns. Therefore, progressivist educators detest any curriculum that would prescribe ordered content of specific subjects to be studied in increasing complexity.

Instead they would have students themselves choose to pursue learning that is most relevant to their present particular needs, as long as they exhibit approved values.

That is, societal values dictate what one should study. Some call it “self directed discovery learning”. The problem is that while progressive education might look good in theory, it is difficult to measure student progress and results objectively.

On the other hand, there are those who believe there is a ‘common core’ of knowledge and skills that students should learn in a systematic and disciplined way. The emphasis is on essential knowledge and skills and intellectual rigour.

In this approach, knowledge gained from what is studied should form our values. This is the more ‘traditional’ approach to curriculum, that employs assessments to measure and report student progress. The problem this poses is motivating students in an ‘individual’ focused society.

What don’t the ‘progressives’ like about the UPC suggestions to create a more balanced approach to curriculum? They reject any return to emphasis on improving memory skills; they resent the study of ancient historical systems of government, preferring instead the study of the present without foundational references to the past; they absolutely refuse to accept any mention of the Christian perspective of environmental stewardship, while advocating an aboriginal spiritual concept of ‘mother earth’ as a superior view of nature.

Progressives teach that a ‘me first’ approach to learning will make a more democratically diverse society; while ‘common core’ teaches that hard work, respect for others and self discipline makes one a valuable part of society.

Progressives consider curriculum ‘fluid’ and in a constant need of change to reflect societal changes. ‘Core Curriculum’ people consider intellectual and moral standards fairly stable and should change only as practical in enabling students to become valuable members of society.

That in a nutshell is at the root of the controversy between the UPC and the NDP approach to developing what students should study in school. Not surprisingly the ATA and Colleges of Education loudly favour the ‘Progressive’ approach to curricular development. If no other voices are raised this is likely what our children will get.

Richard Dietrich Medicine Hat