PGCE PROCESS WORK Unit 1 Tasks 1 and 2 Curriculum and Hidden Curriculum
ACTIVITY 1
CURRICULUM
I will compare my Primary school experience with that of the International school I last taught at where I taught at Primary level.
My School Experience
When I was at school it was learning by rote. You were given pages out of text books to copy and memorise and were tested frequently to see if you had absorbed the knowledge. There was no differentiation in the teaching. Everyone was expected to work at the same pace and there were no teaching assistants in the classroom. You weren’t expected to ask questions, just to answer those posed by the teacher. I remember questioning why something should work in a particular way in a maths lesson and being told not to question it but to learn the mathematical formula and apply it.
My International School Teaching Experience
This was a far cry from the International school which took a child-centred approach to learning. Although it was not a Montessori school it did embrace many of her principles such as the belief in an education system that attempts to develop individuality and nourish the body and mind of its students.
The Montessori Educational View
Montessori believed that:
“The child's development follows a path of successive stages of independence, and our knowledge of this must guide us in our behaviour towards him. We have to help the child to act, will and think for himself. This is the art of serving the spirit, an art which can be practised to perfection only when working among children.” (Montessori,1949, p. 257)
The above quote summarises what Montessori believed was ‘Autoeducation’ which is the notion that, if the right environment is created for them, children will educate themselves and that the role of the teacher is:
“..to guide the child without letting him feel her presence too much…” (Montessori,1967 cited in Morrison, 2014, online)
Rote Learning Versus Child-Centred Learning
The value of learning by rote versus more creative, child-centred teaching methods has been long been the subject of debate, not just in the UK, but internationally. Governments have adopted different views and there have been many changes in the way that education is conducted in the UK since I was at school. Some ministers in education have supported learning by rote and other have vehemently opposed it.When Michael Gove was education secretary in 2012 he was of the opinion that learning by rote was the most successful method. He was quoted by Peter Walker in The Guardian as saying that:
"Memorising scales, or times tables, or verse, so that we can play, recall or recite automatically gives us this mental equipment to perform more advanced functions and display greater creativity.” (Gove,cited in Walker, 2012, online)
Tomás Ó Ruairc, director of the Teaching Council in Ireland in 2015 took the view that a more enquiry based teaching method is best. He stated that:
“Teaching in the 21st century is not just about the imparting of knowledge. It is the challenging and complex task of teaching learners to form questions of their own, explore possible answers and choose the one they think fits best, based on the evidence to hand and their own judgment.” (O’Ruairc, 2015, online).
Personally, when I was at school, the emphasis was on achieving academic excellence rather than on creating a rounded individual. No additional help was given, however, if you failed to grasp the concepts of what was being taught. There was no working in small groups, no discussion and no opportunity to really explore around the area of study. You were seated behind individual, ancient, brown, wooden desks which were positioned in neat rows, filling every available bit of floor space, save for the all important teacher’s desk at the front of the classroom. Here the teacher sat, like a sentinel of doom and presided over the class with omniscient power.
Even where you sat and with whom was dictated to you. There was a hierarchical positioning determined by your results in your end of year examinations. Whomever came top of the class had to sit at the back desk in the corner next to whomsoever had the second highest result; so all the high achievers sat at the back and those who had not attained such good academic results were placed under the teacher’s watchful eye, as if, by being closer to the teacher, some spark of brilliance might rub off.
Did the curriculum and teaching methods I experienced achieve their aims? I think that they got good examination results and most students learned what was required, but it certainly didn't serve the best interests of all the students, particularly those who were not so academic. I also think that it did nothing to encourage independent, self-motivated, opinionated individuals.
Comparisons in the Teaching Environment
The austere teaching environment I had was very different from that at the International school where I last taught. Here the classrooms were bright and colourful with different areas for the children to work and play in. There were tables with chairs around them which were set out with different resources for the children to engage with.The pupils were allowed to wander freely between these tables exploring what interested them for a proportion of the day. The teachers purpose was to guide and facilitate the child’s learning and encourage group interaction.There was a book corner and a carpet in the centre where the children were assembled for story time and also for group activities such as music and dance. There were also structured lessons incorporated into the day’s timetable in which the teacher did impart knowledge to the pupils, but there was also opportunity for the children’s opinions to be sort and for discussion.
There were not really any similarities between the teaching methods I had and those used in the school I last worked in. The ethos of each school was very different.My school was concerned with delivering a lesson and the onus was on the pupil to absorb the knowledge and reproduce it in test form. Success was judged by whether you passed or failed the 11 plus exam to determine if you went to Grammar school or not. The school I worked in, by contrast, was aiming to instil a love of learning and create an individual who was inquisitive,caring, environmentally and culturally aware. The curriculum was centred around trying to achieve this and acknowledged that children learn and develop at different rates.
The school I taught in embraced the concept that:
“Education can no longer be the giving of knowledge only ; it must take a different path. The consideration of personality, the development of human potentialities must become the centre of education.” (Montessori, 1949,p.2)
ACTIVITY 2
HIDDEN CURRICULUM
I believe that the intended hidden curriculum when I was at Primary school was that children were to attend regularly and punctually and behave in a polite and respectful manner towards the teaching staff and towards each other. We were not taught a set of classroom rules, but, anyone who did not behave in the desired way was immediately corrected or received some sort of punishment. The punishments meted out were not standardised and were determined by each teacher in each particular situation.I would therefore say that they were not following a strictly designed code of conduct established by the school governing body, but rather maintaining the ethos of the school which emphasised politeness, respect and regular, punctual attendance. For these reasons I would say that this was a hidden agenda but also an intentional one.
The other hidden curriculum, unintended or otherwise, was that academic success was of paramount importance. Test results were called out in the class so that everyone was made aware of who was excelling and who was struggling with their studies. Top marks were rewarded with gold stars. There were no rewards given for the most improvement, or for being helpful, or, in fact, for anything other than academic achievement. The school motto was: “Always strive to do your best”, but the message that came across was that your best wasn't necessarily good enough. I remember pupils who attained low marks being ridiculed by one teacher. Academic success was all important and those who didn't achieve it were perceived to be failures.
I believe that a hidden curriculum needn't be harmful to the students provided the teachers are aware of it and provided that it has positive aims and is delivered in a constructive manner.
As a student I was not aware of any hidden curriculum, intended or otherwise. As a pupil, I just accepted that this was the way it was at school. There were certain expectations, both behaviourally and academically and there would be consequences if you did not comply.
I feel that if a teacher has prejudices of any kind then these can be conveyed unintentionally or otherwise in a hidden curriculum by the way in which they present a particular topic to the students. This could be potentially very damaging. A teacher, could, for example, impose his or her religious or political beliefs. A recent article in the Guardian reported how schools were:
“… indoctrinating children through an extremism-based education curriculum, and fostering them to become future terrorists.” (Townsend, 2016, online)
In such cases it could be argued that the curriculum isn't hidden but is purposefully designed to brainwash its pupils. some teachers, however, may unintentionally be imposing their own beliefs upon their students and, whilst this is not as drastic as deliberate indoctrination, it could be potentially harmful for the students.
Bibliography
Montessori, M. (1949) The Absorbent Mind, (online). Available at: https://archive.org/details/absorbentmind031961mbp (accessed on 1st October
2016).
Morrison, G.S. (2014), Principles of The Montessori Method,Early Childhood Education Today, (online). Available at: http://www.education.com/reference/article/principles-montessori-method/ (accessed on 26th September 2016)
O’ Ruairc, T. (2015) Rote teaching vs enquiry learning: the debate continues, The Irish Times, (online). Available at: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/rote-teaching-vs-enquiry-learning-the-debate-continues-1.2363114 (accessed on 28th September 2016)
Townsend, M. (2016) How Islamic State is training child killers in doctrine of hate, The Guardian, (online). Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/05/islamic-state-trains-purer-child-killers-in-doctrine-of-hate (accessed on 6th October 2016).
Walker, P. (2012) Tough exams and learning by rote are the keys to success, says Michael Gove, the Guardian, (online). Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/nov/14/michael-gove-backs-learning-by-rote (accessed on 26th September 2016).
No comments:
Post a Comment