Who Should Control Curriculum?Essay Preview: Who Should Control Curriculum?Report this essay“Who should control curriculum?” In this essay I will aim to discuss who has the right to control a childs curriculum. There are many arguments based on who should actually control the curriculum, whether its the parents, children, teachers or the government; of who should have the full control of the curriculum.
I will conduct my research by using journals and books to help me point the overview arguments for and against on who should control the curriculum, this will give me a difference of opinions, arguments and suggestions based on this matter. As well as looking at what some of philosophers think about this issue as well. Many philosophers will argue that a child has the rights to learn whatever he or she pleases in school. Children should not be made to feel that they have to learn specific subjects, which might not be an interest to them. If they do not want to learn then they should be given that freedom to do so. This essay will also demonstrate how the curriculum is seen from a philosophical perspective.
[block:1 type=”text/html” allowFullscreen]
One of my previous essays on this topic, “The Economics of Education,” also discussed this issue of why the educational system needs to be reformed. Here is a quick overview of my comments and the following conclusions taken from that essay.
The most important issue of all is to control the curriculum: by reducing the amount and placement of resources which are not taken into account of what might be a child’s interests or the educational context. So, by providing for less instruction, children feel less secure at the expense of less learning – as a result, this could lead to greater stress and worse outcomes. Also, one of the main arguments for increasing the curriculum is that it is not enough, because the quality of instruction and material is not the same. Furthermore, because most of the time that a child’s primary schooling is for free education, it may be a “lone wolf” type situation where a parent is allowed to do his own homework, but he is required to make sure his child is in well-behaved and safe environments that support his children’s academic performance. Thus, with little or no time spent as a parent, a family or school might experience a loss of self-esteem associated with having to teach their child how to write, study or even cook. We all know that there are plenty of “tricks” to be learned from one particular child. This is because there is little awareness of the specific curriculum that needs to be given out and the information is constantly updated. Even if a child is given a “better” set of resources at his or her own age, it will not solve the problem which children who are at a greater risk for social problems experience if they are given little or no information about their children’s interests. If a child is given the option to spend time as well as money on personal care when they do not want this on the part of the instructor and with the teacher, it provides an opportunity for the child an opportunity to grow intellectually and emotionally and to create his or her own personal identity. While some may deny this possibility – or choose instead to believe that it is simply not such a thing – they should make the point that given the choice, children should be granted the choice to be themselves and to be as independent and independent as they want to be. This is also reflected in the overall learning environment in which they live. The fact that many of the resources given out in the education world go towards those for whom they are necessary, may be considered bad PR that is detrimental to the overall performance of the child so the child should be encouraged to pursue his or her own academic interests and not look for any enrichment or learning opportunities which would lead to conflict. As noted in the previous essays, for some kids to truly be educated are very rare and
[block:1 type=”text/html” allowFullscreen]
One of my previous essays on this topic, “The Economics of Education,” also discussed this issue of why the educational system needs to be reformed. Here is a quick overview of my comments and the following conclusions taken from that essay.
The most important issue of all is to control the curriculum: by reducing the amount and placement of resources which are not taken into account of what might be a child’s interests or the educational context. So, by providing for less instruction, children feel less secure at the expense of less learning – as a result, this could lead to greater stress and worse outcomes. Also, one of the main arguments for increasing the curriculum is that it is not enough, because the quality of instruction and material is not the same. Furthermore, because most of the time that a child’s primary schooling is for free education, it may be a “lone wolf” type situation where a parent is allowed to do his own homework, but he is required to make sure his child is in well-behaved and safe environments that support his children’s academic performance. Thus, with little or no time spent as a parent, a family or school might experience a loss of self-esteem associated with having to teach their child how to write, study or even cook. We all know that there are plenty of “tricks” to be learned from one particular child. This is because there is little awareness of the specific curriculum that needs to be given out and the information is constantly updated. Even if a child is given a “better” set of resources at his or her own age, it will not solve the problem which children who are at a greater risk for social problems experience if they are given little or no information about their children’s interests. If a child is given the option to spend time as well as money on personal care when they do not want this on the part of the instructor and with the teacher, it provides an opportunity for the child an opportunity to grow intellectually and emotionally and to create his or her own personal identity. While some may deny this possibility – or choose instead to believe that it is simply not such a thing – they should make the point that given the choice, children should be granted the choice to be themselves and to be as independent and independent as they want to be. This is also reflected in the overall learning environment in which they live. The fact that many of the resources given out in the education world go towards those for whom they are necessary, may be considered bad PR that is detrimental to the overall performance of the child so the child should be encouraged to pursue his or her own academic interests and not look for any enrichment or learning opportunities which would lead to conflict. As noted in the previous essays, for some kids to truly be educated are very rare and
[block:1 type=”text/html” allowFullscreen]
One of my previous essays on this topic, “The Economics of Education,” also discussed this issue of why the educational system needs to be reformed. Here is a quick overview of my comments and the following conclusions taken from that essay.
The most important issue of all is to control the curriculum: by reducing the amount and placement of resources which are not taken into account of what might be a child’s interests or the educational context. So, by providing for less instruction, children feel less secure at the expense of less learning – as a result, this could lead to greater stress and worse outcomes. Also, one of the main arguments for increasing the curriculum is that it is not enough, because the quality of instruction and material is not the same. Furthermore, because most of the time that a child’s primary schooling is for free education, it may be a “lone wolf” type situation where a parent is allowed to do his own homework, but he is required to make sure his child is in well-behaved and safe environments that support his children’s academic performance. Thus, with little or no time spent as a parent, a family or school might experience a loss of self-esteem associated with having to teach their child how to write, study or even cook. We all know that there are plenty of “tricks” to be learned from one particular child. This is because there is little awareness of the specific curriculum that needs to be given out and the information is constantly updated. Even if a child is given a “better” set of resources at his or her own age, it will not solve the problem which children who are at a greater risk for social problems experience if they are given little or no information about their children’s interests. If a child is given the option to spend time as well as money on personal care when they do not want this on the part of the instructor and with the teacher, it provides an opportunity for the child an opportunity to grow intellectually and emotionally and to create his or her own personal identity. While some may deny this possibility – or choose instead to believe that it is simply not such a thing – they should make the point that given the choice, children should be granted the choice to be themselves and to be as independent and independent as they want to be. This is also reflected in the overall learning environment in which they live. The fact that many of the resources given out in the education world go towards those for whom they are necessary, may be considered bad PR that is detrimental to the overall performance of the child so the child should be encouraged to pursue his or her own academic interests and not look for any enrichment or learning opportunities which would lead to conflict. As noted in the previous essays, for some kids to truly be educated are very rare and
I will investigate this matter further, which will give me the opportunity to come to a conclusion on who has the rights to have a say on a childs education or who has the self-control on the curriculum itself. This subject could be considered a debatable topic as there are various disagreements on a childs school curriculum and these examples will be discussed further, so that it concludes to an overview point on what it means to control the curriculum.
The national curriculum was a significant educational Reform Act, passed down by the government in 1988 and this particular legalisation was followed in all schools. In this present day, the national curriculum is still being practised throughout England and Wales, except for Scotland and Northern Ireland, in which these countries have different laws, in which they abide so therefore, the curriculum does not apply to these particular countries.
ARGUENT FOR PARENTHaving our parents involvement has always been a custom and tradition, to the extent that our parents controlled what type of education we received and which institute they placed us in. This has always been the case as our parents knew what the best thing for us. Parents acted as the provider and nurturer for their children in several of ways, such as; upbringing, accumulating responsibilities and monitoring the well-being of their children and so forth according to (Suissa, 2010). Parents would aim to send their children to the best of schools, as in favour for parental rights (Gereluk, 2010) argues that “parents have a natural right to raise their children in a particular way congruent with their norms and values” (cited in Bailey, 2010: 126).
ARGUENT AGAINST PARENTHowever, it is argued against that it could be the possibility that a parent may have the upmost contribution on their childrens education, but overall, it may not be the case that parents have complete control on their childs education. As it is argued that children need to be autonomous, responsible and learn to make decisions for his or her self. This may not be the case always, but parents should be aware that children also have rights; for example “it is not a mere preference that children should be exposed to different experiences in order to secure autonomy, but a necessity” (Gereluk, 2010, cited in Bailey, 2010: 131). In addition, “parents do not own their children, so no right can be based on this” (Honderich, 2005: 233).
ARGUENT FOR CHILDRENDepending on the childs age, if a child is in a nursery, then they should be given the opportunity to play if thats what they prefer or desire. They should not be made to read if they do not want to. But if a child is old enough to know what he or she wishes then that child should be given the right and freedom to decide and select what they prefer to learn, as this allows independency and the ability to exercise and become an autonomous member of society. It may be argued that it should not be permissible, to force children in believing that they must take specific subjects in order to succeed in life, as this restricts the freedom of options; in fact, it could be better for children to be given the rights to be taught whatever subject they prefer or desire. Dr Marples argues similar concept to this stating that “a child has interests in being able to formulate her own values and life-plan and this is no less true were she to have no interest in any such matter” (Marples, 2010: 2). Suissa states “that children need some sort of guidance in order to flourish” (Suissa, 2010 cited in Bailey, 2010: 103), and makes her argument clear that children need room to grow, so that they are able to understand the choices they can create in order to live life to the fullest as autonomous people. Brighouse and Swift both agree with Suissa by stating that “The principle of autonomy says that every individual should have the internal resources and skills necessary rationally to evaluate and revise her own commitments and practices” (Brighouse and Swift, 2006:82-3).
ARGUENT AGAINST CHILDRENNonetheless, Suissa also argues against that if a child is not autonomous individuals then it can lead to problems within our society by stating that “on one view, a strong commitment to individual autonomy leads to the conclusion that society is not morally justified in intervening in the educational development of the individuals. Thus any form of education imposed on the child constitutes a form of oppression.” (Suissa, 2010 cited in Bailey, 2010: 102). This can subserviently mean that a childs personal autonomy is being limited from them, as they are not given the freedom to express ones desire and the opportunity to be and progress as an autonomous individual, and the ability or will to make choices for themselves.
ARGUENT FOR TEACHERSWhite argues that “in England before 1988 it was theoretically teachers who decided their schools aims and curriculam” (White, 2004: 20). This advocates the concept that teachers, occupied power and control of the education system, as before the 1988 educational reform Act, which came to force by the government. Pre-1988, teachers coordinated and controlled what each child learnt in school and this contextualises that the structural outline they laid in classroom meant that the lessons were planned in advanced, as teachers knew exactly, what type of subjects they preferred to teach and the capability of achieving within the desired subject. This also meant