- Jun 2023
Unlike many developed countries, the United States lacks a national curriculum or teacher-training standards. Local policies change constantly, as governors, school boards, mayors and superintendents flow in and out of jobs.
Many developed countries have national curricula and specific teacher-training standards, but the United States does not. Instead decisions on curricular and standards are created and enforced at the state and local levels, often by politically elected figures including governors, mayors, superintendents, and school boards.
This leaves early education in the United States open to a much greater sway of political influence. This can be seen in examples of Texas attempting to legislate the display the ten commandments in school classrooms in 2023, reading science being neglected in the adoption of Culkins' Units of Study curriculum, and other footballs like the supposed suppression of critical race theory in right leaning states.
- Texas Legislature
- curriculum standards
- Units of Study (literacy program)
- ten commandments
- curriculum development
- teacher training
- Lucy Calkins
- education policy
- education standards
- critical race theory
- Jun 2022
essentially all neuroscientists agree that our understanding of the brain is nowhere near the level that it could be used to guide curriculum development.
This looks like an interesting question...
- Nov 2021
Courses should prioritize flexibility and experimentation.A course should be designed as a living structure, and be constantly tuned to the ongoing experience, adjusted based on what each participant brings and needs.
Similar ideas discussed here: Ellis, B., & Rowe, M. (n.d.). Guided choice-based learning (No. 4). Retrieved November 29, 2021, from https://inbeta.uwc.ac.za/2018/02/09/4-guided-choice-based-learning/
- Dec 2020
Academic research and teaching often necessitate manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding, etc. This “manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding” — in other words, hacking
It's not self-evident to me that these activities are the same as those associated with hacking (and I'm not talking about the malevolent/negative connotations of hacking).
I also think of a hacker as a tinkerer, which can include "manipulation, re-creation, breaking, building, etc." but need not. It feels like there's something fundamental missing here but I can't put my finger on it.
I don't really have a conclusion here, other than to suggest that the hacker/scholar relationship might need a lot more development than I see here.