Spiral Progression Curriculum: A Solution or A Problem
Spiral Progression Curriculum: A Solution or A Problem? This is the question in the minds of many educators who are engaged in the curriculum, experiencing quite a bit of a problem arising from the application of Spiral Curriculum Approach.
According to Jerome S. Bruner, a Psychologist and Educator who developed and introduced Spiral Curriculum, children as they grow must acquire a way of representing the recurrent regularities in their environment. Learning does not only include concepts, categories and problem solving procedures but also the ability to invent things for oneself. Cognitive growth involves interaction between human capabilities and culturally invented technologies.
There are three modes of representation according to Bruner. Modes of representation are ways in which information or knowledge are stored or encoded in memory. These are enactive occurring at age 0 to 1 year, appears when a child responses through motor skills; iconic occurring at age 1 to 6 years, information are stored visually through diagrams and illustrations; and symbolic develops from 7 years onwards, the most adaptable form of a code from images to actions.
Bruner constructivist theory suggests that learners should follow progression process of development through several stages in order to learn and acquire all the skills for the total development of the child. But problems arise due to time frame, scarcity of materials used in teaching, too many activities and unfocused environment.
It's up to you to say whether spiral progression is a solution or a problem in the teaching-learning process.
The author is Master Teacher I at Sindalan High School.