Education Advisory

III. CURRICULUM DECISION-MAKING

We note that the general principle in a free, democratic society is that public institutions must reflect the public’s will and not the self-interest of those who run the institutions. The Let’s Talk About Schools discussion paper (1985) reflects this basic principle: 

The Provincial curriculum is presently determined by elected representatives of the people – the legislature and schools boards. Their authority in this regard is based on the proposition that the public, through its representatives, has the right to determine what is taught in schools.” 

However, our committee found a discrepancy between policy and practice. The seemingly official practice is described in this passage from a recent article in the BC Teacher, April/May ’86 (“An Agenda for Curriculum, the Next 10 years: A Perspective from the Ministry of Education”, by Bob Overgaard), 

…curriculum development in B.C. is a system controlled largely by teachers, on behalf of, and in contact with, their colleagues. Although the government reserves the right to inject its authority at any point in the process, its role has consistently been to support a process of professional and collegial negotiation…” 

Question # 5: What do parents think about their exclusion from the curriculum process, that is, the development, review and incorporation of community values?

Question #6:  Do parents think “collegial negotiation” among differing educator view-points adequately covers the range of input that might be gleaned from the wider community?”

We have examined the materials relating to Social Studies, Grade 1 - 3. With respect to the question of family and personal privacy, we note that much attention is focused in the Grade 1 materials and suggestions for class discussions on sharing information about one’s family and one’s feelings (What are some things that make your family happy? Sad? Tell your class about a special relative.”…) 

The concepts to be learned from the Grade 1 curriculum are listed as understanding “family, identity, interactions, need, change, diversity, interdependence and power.” 

We note awareness on the part of curriculum developers concerning matters of privacy and sensitivity: 

Studying family life involves many sensitive subjects: death, divorce, adoption, step-parents. We remind you that tact will be needed when dealing with such topics and urge you to reassure the student that his or her family, whatever its form is an acceptable one. Many of the activities call on the students’ own experiences of family life and some children may reveal confidential information about their families. You should be sensitive to situations which approach an invasion of privacy: guided by a knowledge of your students and the local community, you should be able to select and monitor appropriate classroom activities.” 

Question #7 Do parents think the children are mature enough at the age of 6 and 7 to deal with such matters as the above curriculum goals dealing with interactions, interdependence, power and such matters as may be raised concerning death, divorce and adoption?

Question #8: If any problems concerning lack of sensitivity arise, how do parents proceed for appeal or remedy?

In our study, we also examined contrasting views of the family as held by such divergent ideologies as traditionalists, feminists and socialists (Family Issues and Public Policy, Study Commission of the Family, London, England). We note that one’s attitude to the family is strongly influenced by one’s value system or point-of-view. 

Depending on one’s philosophy, ideology or value system, there is a difference of opinion as to whether curriculum should aim at a) giving students facts with which to make their own decisions, b) extend family values, or 3) change values. We feel that the “decision-making” exercises and the texts in the Explorations series can undermine family authority and integrity and can lead to peer dependency and socialization to a group norm. The following question arises: 

Question #9: Do parents think schools should be involved in value questions, and if so, at what age levels, and with what guidelines and philosophy? 

I.                   Cognizant of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, Article 26, Section 3, that

 Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given their children

a)      the right to information, and

b)     the right to family privacy.

a)      to inquire into the influence of the public education system upon attitudes towards the family as an institution.

b)     to inquire into the influence of the public education system upon attitudes towards parental authority:

ii) in the child’s school concerning the child’s participation in school activities and choices among school courses,

c)     to inquire into the attitudes and practices of schools towards parents when they ask questions concerning their children’s’ courses of study, curriculum content, progress, behavior, etc.,

d)     to make recommendations concerning the need, and the ways and means, of encouraging parents everywhere to become knowledgeable about their schools and what is being taught,

e)      to make recommendations concerning mechanisms for obtaining parental input into curriculum decisions and choices of books and other authorized materials,

f)       to undertake an initial study of identified curriculum materials where concerns have been expressed, or as the committee so decides,

g)      to consider the multicultural dimension in BC in the study and recommendations,

h)     to inquire of the Ministry of Education on any matter that is pertinent to the development and selection of curriculum,

i)       to inquire concerning any other matter that the Council deems pertinent in the interests of families and education,

This study is to concentrate on programs of a mass education nature and excludes counseling situations between teachers and students.

At the Conference on the Family (BC, Canada) 1976, considerable attention was focused on the alienating effect public schools were felt to have on families and the potential (but often unused) power they had to help strengthen family competencies.

The Family and Education Committee was struck to examine these concerns and issues and make recommendations. Following is the Interim Report, 1987. I was a member of that Committee.

The history of this committee really goes back to 1975 when the groundwork was laid for the B C Council for the Family. The rationale for the eventual formation of the Council was the concern that

 …lying at the root of many current social problems was the plight of the family.”

…examine the issues affecting family life in this province and to recommend to the public and to the various levels of government policies that will diminish the difficulties and enhance the opportunities for a healthy and happy family life.”

Most parents are concerned about the welfare of their children in school, and their own involvement in the overall process of education. However, not all parents felt that their views were really welcome or appreciated.”

Recently, the teachings of Ruby Payne have surfaced on how to reach the "hard-to-reach", mainly poor kids in schools.  Below is my reply to this discussion:

Don’t blame the family, the kids, the neighborhood, the class system…..

If we want effective schools, let’s look at the schools.

In 1978, Ron Edmonds of Harvard University Grad School of Education put the term "Effective Schools" on the map with his speech, "Some Schools Work and More Can".

"We can, whenever, and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us.
"We already know more than we need, in order to do this.
"Whether we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven’t so far.

His Checklist for Effective Schools:
1. Instructional Leadership - Principal an effective communicator, effective supervisor, the instructional leader.
2. Focused School Mission - General consensus by school community on goals, priorities, assessment, accountability. Mission statement specified and reviewed periodically.
3. Orderly Environment - Purposeful atmosphere, not oppressive, and is conducive to teaching/learning.
4. High Expectations - for students and staff. The belief is that students are capable and able to achieve: that teachers are capable and not powerless to make a difference.
5. Mastery of Basic Skills - In particular, basic reading, writing and math skills are emphasized with back-up alternatives available for students with special learning needs.
6. Frequent Monitoring of Results - Existence of a) means to monitor student progress in relationship to instructional objectives (with results easily conveyed to parents); b) means to monitor teacher effectiveness; and c) a system of monitoring school goals.
7. Meaningful Parent Involvement - Parents are kept well-informed re: programs, goals, etc. There is ample opportunity for them to keep in touch with their child’s progress. They are consulted for feedback about the school and when changes are foreseen. Parent-initiated contact with the school encouraged.
8. Avoidance of Pitfalls - Up-to-date awareness of good educational practice plus retaining currency in the field concerning promising and discredited practices. One of the cardinal characteristics of effective schools is that they are as anxious to avoid things that don’t work as they are committed to implementing things that do.

Reference: Social Policy, Mar/Ap’79, Ron Edmonds, "Some Schools Work and More Can"

Folks: That was 1978! How many casualties since? Why are we still re-inventing the wheel?

Tunya Audain

[Posted to Education Consumers Clearinghouse, Sept 17, 2007]