Blog posts for ECS 210 at U of R.
This is my digital summary of learning for ECS 210.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
I grew up on an acreage in a rural community outside Edmonton. I went to a small rural high school until half way through grade 11 when I transferred to a new school because the bullying I had been going through since grade 4 was too much and I needed a fresh start. In the two high schools that I attended in my schooling, there was not much diversity in the cultures of the students or families in the school, the teachers or the community.
Growing up in a predominately white community there was little knowledge of other cultures. I can imagine there were some rather powerful encounters for the people of other cultures coming into this community. I did not explicitly see it but that does not mean those types of interactions did not go on in my community. This perception of my community is a lens that I see it through, I did not see the injustices occurring so to me they weren’t there. My lens is not being exposed to that type of hatefulness. To a certain degree, I think that makes me a little nieve to what actually goes on in the world. I was sheltered living where I lived. My mom made sure we saw many places like Seattle, Los Angles, and New York, but I still feel like I saw the world through this sheltered lens. Since going to university I have learned a lot and have seen many different cultural groups in the three universities I have attended. Since moving to Regina and participating in a volunteer placement for another education class I have seen more range in the SES, ability, and ethnicity of people. I want to believe that these experiences are changing the lens I see the world through, but in order for that to happen, I need to stay open-minded.
Along with the place I grew up in I have a lens to what schools mean to me. Being isolated and ridiculed during the majority of my schooling has in many ways altered my lens of what relationships should be like. The way I view the social interactions between students is more serious to me because I have a personal connection to being treated badly by my peers. This lens through which I see schools is one of the biggest reasons I decided teaching is something that I want to pursue. For a long time, I didn’t believe teachers were meant to help students with their social problems becuase many of mine never did. That thought didn’t change until my grade 12 year when my favorite biology teacher reached out and gave me a place I could be when times were tough. Lunch hour was really hard for me becuase I felt very alone when I sat eating my lunch alone in the hall. I didn’t have friends to hang around and waist the 45 minutes with so it felt like an eternity. My biology teacher gave me an open door invitation to each lunch in his classroom. This pretty much saved me, I had somewhere to go and I was able to feel like I belonged at school instead of dreading it every day. The lens I will bring into the classroom is one that sees teachers as guides to students as well as being someone there to help when help is needed.
Something that creates bias is the idea of the “single story,” this is the idea that for many cultures or people from other countries there is only one story created about them as a people or the way they live in their culture. This single story is one true or untrue belief about the culture or the people of a culture and it is the only one that is perceived by others. This idea comes from a TED talk that we viewed in lecture today where an African woman told her story about her interactions with the single stories about her culture and how she lived. In my own schooling, I was told a single story about the indigenous population. Learning about the residential schools and the issues that they still went through today created a single story that indigenous people always live in poverty, have dead-end jobs, and do bad things to good people. This was not the intended story to be left in minds of students during social class in jr. high, but it was the story that was left in my mind. It didn’t help that there wasn’t any indigenous students or teachers in our school to change how that story was written. There was no struggle between who’s truth mattered more, there wasn’t anything to change the perception that we had created. This is a bias that I will bring into the classroom. I am working to change that bias and to become educated through the volunteer placement I am in.
As a future teacher I acknowledge my biases I will be bringing into the classroom and the unique lens I will be looking at it with. There is nothing without bias, as a teacher I hope to reduce the bias that I show in the classroom to give each student a fair chance no matter where they come from.
Featured Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
In lecture today, we had this really interesting woman come in and talk about math. I actually enjoyed math for the most part in elementary through jr. high and high school. I was good at math, mental math, algebra, and factoring. For me, it made sense because I come from a family of people who loves science, math, and computers. She spoke about the disconnect between the abilities of young children and the concepts we try to teach in schools.
She touched on a reading by Leroy Little Bear which talks about the social standard that colonialism creates which causes discrimination and oppression. Lots of this is present in the education system and the way we teach children. A personal example from my schooling is when I was in jr. high and I was in my seventh-grade math class. In elementary school, I didn’t have much exposure to multiple choice exams, lots of the evaluations were written responses. Moving into jr. high something I had to get used to was multiple choice exams becoming over half the format of my exams, and not surprisingly, I totally failed the multiple choice part and got 100% on the written part. Due to the difference in weight of each part of the exam had I still had a very low grade in the class. I had no idea what was going on, had I just lost all my math skills or was the things we were learning just too hard? Neither. I was forced to conform to the type of exam-style that was easy for teachers to grade. It is faster to feed 30 exams into a scantron machine than to grade those 30 exams if they were all written. For that entire school year, my self-esteem hit rock bottom (partly due to my being 13, but the drop in my grades also affected me). Looking back as a university student becoming a teacher, I don’t know why my math teacher couldn’t be more accommodating. I had issues later in school in grade 12 with test anxiety where I would completely blank on math exams, which were primarily multiple choice. I wasn’t able to gain my confidence in math back until I upgraded my grades after high school and I was given exams that did have any multiple choice questions on it. I could have developed more mathematical confidence and begin changing the stereotype where everyone hates math if the teachers I had were more open to considering different ways of testing students.
Another article that was assigned for reading this week was by Louise Poirier called “Teaching Mathematics and the Inuit Community”. This article talks about a study where Inuit students in a community in Quebec were taught mathematics in their first language, Inuktitut, until the third grade then they switch to either French or English. Within the Inuktitut language, there are a few ways in which the mathematics of the Inuit challenge the mathematics ideas of Europe. The Inuit’s numbering system is very different from that of the European in that the Inuit have a base 20 numeric system why the Europeans have a base 10 numeric system. Looking at the difference int he cultures it makes sense that the Inuit people would have a base 20 numeric system. The example given by the speaker in today’s lecture was that igloos are very hot so much of the time when there are lots of people in the igloos it is too hot for things like shoes or clothes. When they would sit at the fire to keep warm, they would sit with their legs stretched out in front of them with their toes pointing up. Taking into count that their hands and feet were visible, the base 20 system makes sense. They saw all their fingers and toes and the sum added to 20. In European culture, one’s feet are most often covered, so what is left is the 10 fingers on their hands to count with. Another cultural difference between the Inuit and Europeans is that the Inuit had an oral culture, the Europeans had a written culture. The Inuit mainly relied on oral reteaching to pass on information, while the Europeans relied on the written word to pass on information. The third way that the Inuit challenged the European mathematics system is that the Inuit had three different identifiers for numbers like the number 3 depending on the context. For example, there is a separate identifier for three things inside something, three things, and groups of three. The Inuit numeric system, like much of the culture of the indigenous people, was disregarded as not making sense to the Europeans and therefore it was less valid.
I have had an up and down relationship with math, even though I change my minor from math to English, I still would love to teach a math class when I am a teacher. If I do become a math teacher, I want to take the information I was taught today and put it to good use. I hope to change at least one person’s ideas about math so there can be the start of some change in the stereotype of everyone hating math.
As a teacher would you change the way you write your exams if there were students who would do better with a different type of exam or would you encourage them to adapt to the new type of tests in your class?
Featured Photo by Dawid Małecki on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
Something I was not lucky enough to be taught in school was treaty education. During lecture today the question came up of “did any of you have treaty education in school” there was about 10% of the class whos hands went up. Being from Alberta I have been able to see the difference in the educational process between the two provinces and what the Saskatchewan curriculum emphasizes compared to the Alberta curriculum.
Treaty education is more than understanding that there were treaties signed between the first nations and the settlers coming to Canada. There is a meaning behind what a treaty means, its definition, and what it means today. The reason to teach treaty education to the children and youth of today is to give them the context of what has happened in history in regards to treaties and their meaning.
On a more general note, treaty education is important because it teaches students about the cultures of the first nations, Metis, and Inuit peoples and shows them how to appreciate it. It teaches them to be accepting and show support for causes like #orangeshirtday.
Something that was said in lecture today was “we are treaty people”. This idea brings about more than treaties being a part of our history living in Canada. Looking at where we came from in the ancestry of families who came to Canada and settled here there is a huge amount of meaning behind treaties. Treaties are what made Canada what it is today. Without the agreement to share the land between the British settlers and the indigenous peoples of the time the people that make up Canada and the cultures today would have been very different. Being “treaty people” means more than knowing about treaties, being a treaty person is respecting the treaties that were signed, respecting what those treaties meant, respecting the ceremony of making an agreement. A treaty person is honorable, accepting and supportive of others and their cultures. A treaty is a binding of two groups to make one. A treaty is a promise. Being a treaty person is to honor the agreements that were made when Canada was taking its first steps towards becoming the country it is today.
Coming from a different province and having a different upbringing in the schooling I was taught I don’t understand where the disconnect came in emphasizing this part of the curriculum. Why isn’t this taught in Alberta? Why isn’t this information mandatory to be taught and why is it just put on a shelf where we say “I don’t know how to integrate this into all the classes”? As a student and developing teacher, I want to know why I was deprived of this critical information and why my eyes were not opened to this when I was in school?
Featured Photo by Maher El Aridi on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
The article for this weeks reading, “Learning from Place: A Return to Traditional Mushkegowuk Ways of Knowing”, is a study of the Mushkegowuk ways of knowing and interactions between the youth and elders int he community. Much of this article is trying to facilitate communication between the youth and the elders to find more depth in what the land and their river mean in the Mushkegowuk culture and community.
Reinhabitation and decolonization are motifs that are reoccurring in this work. One example is the reintroducing of youth to traditional ways of knowing. With the interviews the youth had with the elders. The sharing of traditions, values, and ways of knowing gave the youth opportunities to learn and develop a better sense of community with their elders and others.
Another example would be the 10-day river trip the youth and the elders took together. This trip was for renaming and reclaiming the land and to have the youth make connections to the land and the river. This was in the interest of decolonization, to take back their culture and their traditions. The value of the land has a big impact on the traditions and the culture of the community.
The idea that culture and tradition depend on place is interesting when reflecting on my own traditions and family values. I have lived in the same house for my entire life, so for me this house is a big part of the history and traditions of my family. Taking this idea into account there is much of this idea that can be applied to the classroom. Connecting a practice or tradition to a place causes a deeper connection with that practice or tradition.
Being a budding secondary biology teacher there is already a connection to land and place within the subject with learning about environment and animals in their ecosystems, etc. Bringing in the connection to place could be making connections to student’s homes and places they love to go. The interest would be to preserve those places by caring about the environment or preserving nature and valuing the natural state of the environment.
Bringing in a connection to land into the classroom could increase the student’s connection to their own places, but how does a teacher foster the deepening of those connections to place or tradition in the classroom?
References
Restoule, J. P., Gruner, S., & Metatawabin, E. (2013). Learning from Place: A Return to Traditional Mushkegowuk Ways of Knowing. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(2), 68-86.
Featured Photo by Tim Mossholder on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
Something I remember from elementary school and junior high is that during holidays like Christmas or thanksgiving there was always a food/can drive at school. We were in many ways required to bring something. In elementary school, it was more to teach us the act of giving to others and to help in our community. In junior high, there was more of a competitive vibe that went along with the community service we were supposed to feel the need as citizens to do. If we were the class who brought the most food or cans to school the reward was a pizza party for the class. I never really saw these acts to be self-less or to be for the greater good of my community. It didn’t click in that we were doing these things for others to become a better citizen. It just seemed to be something we did without thinking, I don’t distinctly remember an explanation for the actions we were doing, it was just exected. One of the only times where I did that type of community service was when my mom and I decided to try delivering packages for Santa’s Anonymous. I was young and I didn’t understand the actual meaning behind the act of doing the community service. The main focus of the community service that I was taught in my younger years was the personally responsible stage. There wasn’t any look as to why these people were hungry or didn’t have money for food. Even some of the places where the actions wanted of us came from were not from places of actual want or feeling to do it. Making something like the competitive took away from the feeling of wanting to help someone or to take your time and give it to someone else to help them. I don’t feel as though I was taught to help others because of solidarity or being a giving individual, that message did not come across in the requirements of my education to do charitable acts for others.
In curriculum, there is focus on academic and logical thinking where the topic of self, giving and spirituality of becoming part of the community. The idea of citizenship is personal and is different to each person individually. WIth the curriculum being so focused on the academic part of education there is very little room for the development of a citizen and exploring what that means for every person individually. Obviously, there cannot be parts of the curriculum made for each student individually but there can be areas of the curriculum where students can explore what being a citizen or being apart of the community and the world means to them. This would create the type of spirit of a person, outside the rigidity of Taylor’s want to make the perfect adult. Taking more time in the curriculum and education to explore what being a citizen means and how individuals want to be involved would increase the self of self in students. Understanding where one fits in society and the world creates a direction to where one sees a need for them to fill.
Featured Photo by Don Ross III on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
I have not really thought about the way that curriculum was developed. It always seemed to be this list of things that just appeared in teachers hands or their mailboxes when we talked about it in past education classes. There has to be someone or more than one someone who develops curriculum and makes the decisions on what students are to learn. I think some sort of panel or committee of people educated enough to know what should be taught makes a list of the things they value and that they want to have students learn. After that there is deliberation and the needless topics and pieces of information are weeded out. The order in which the topics of the curriculum are probably vaguely in order of what is most important to least important so that if only the first few points are read the more important information is seen.Cultural, political, and religious biases are most likely injected into the importance and weight put onto some topics and not others. The document is then worded and polished into a mess of words that really don’t have a clear vision of what is to be taught. Fancy letterhead is added to make it official and after that, it is deemed the new curriculum for that age group of students in that specific place. It is handed out to every teacher in that specific place and is taught even though it doesn’t entirely make sense. Since it is now the curriculum it cannot be argued and there can be no clarifications for points that are too ill-defined for teachers to actually know what it is they are to teach.
the curricula for schools is created by positions in the federal government system. People in cabinet positions specialized in education are tasked with developing the curriculum but there are others who may have a say in the content of the document. other political leaders may input their ideas into what should be on the list of things to teach or if there is a deliberation process more people may see the workings of the curriculum. Implementation of the curriculum is the job of the education administration
In reading this chapter I gained a new understanding of how the curriculum is created. It changed my view of the process. The creation of curriculum has a little more substance than just one individual impacting the learning of an entire country or province. The influence of government and politics is overwhelming to me because I am not one to get involved in politics due to the sensitive subject matter involved. Due to the heavy linkage of curriculum to policy and politics, there is an aspect of curriculum that is always changing. Teachers will need to be able to adapt to these changes that come into the curriculum with the changing of political leaders and As I progress into my teaching career my goal is to become more involved with political topics and to become more of an activist for changes I believe in involving education.
What are the most worrisome aspects of education changing with the tides of politics? How much can curriculum change with the ringing in of a new politician?
Featured Photo by Jazmin Quaynor on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
As an aspiring teacher, I would naturally want to have students in my class that were considered “good” students. I don’t know if anyone would want students in their class who are inherently “bad” by social standards. By “good” I mean to be respectful of others boundaries and opinions. Being a good student has changed throughout history. Common sense dictates that a “good” student is to be punctual, positive, open-minded, and to be exactly what the curriculum wants. A “good” student fits into the mould of the curriculum by fulfilling every part of what the perfect adult should be. Many of these ideas of what a “good” student should be were derived from stereotypes in history that were based on different races. There was a hierarchy of which races were considered to be the best students and would be able to succeed in being educated towards the perfect adult at that time, which was typically the English and white settlers. The difference of culture was not taken into account, and education was a melting pot and the goal was to assimilate everyone.
With this idea of the “good” student, there are predigests that cause certain students to be privileged and others to be burdened. This concept of “good” students being privileged is still seen in classrooms today. In personal experience, if a student fell into the category of a “good” student they were able to get away with behaviours that would have been considered bad or against the rules because they were getting good grades. Any type of bad behaviour was excused because they were doing well in school. Teachers were more lenient on students doing well, because “they were smart” so they are obviously doing everything else right, they can slack off or take a break, while other students had to work harder. In history, many of these students who were privileged were the students who came from the correct background, i.e. white kids. This is still apparent today, and the predigests have only become more numerous because of the expansion of the knowledge of different sexualities and genders. This one adds another dimension to what is considered the “good” student, now they must be white, male, and straight.
With these stereotypes and new dimensions being added to what makes a student a “good” student, there are aspects of life that are made impossible. For example, it is harder to see the good in everyone because if people don’t fit into what is “good” then that means they are bad. These ideas stomp on the potential for the growth if diversity in society because we want everyone to be “good” and fit into the mould of what adults should be. As teachers, I believe we are to open the world up to students, give them more opportunities and show them their potential to be good in whatever standard that want to be in. If, as teachers, we are supposed to sort students into categories of “good” and “bad” there will continue to be the deviation between good and bad people. Some people believe they are bad because they were told they are, so they keep doing bad things to further prove to themselves that the label they received is in fact true.
What is the true goal of the teacher? Are we to sort students into categories like “will go well” and “won’t succeed”, or are we to show students there is good in everyone, not just those who are of the majority?
Featured Photo by Daiga Ellaby on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
“Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.” – John Dewey
This quote hit me kind of hard. I really enjoy learning and becoming aware of new ways of thinking; to me, education and learning are extremely important. To learn is to broaden horizons and to see more of the world in different ways than before, but that being said, there is a lot to be learned outside the classroom or in learning institutions.
The first half of this quote speaks against the classic ways of learning like the Tyler Rationale, which I spoke about in a previous post. The Tyler Rationale on learning is that educators are to prepare students for adult life by moulding them into the “perfect adult.” This idea that education is not simply a process of preparing students for adult life makes other things possible in education. There is potential for learning applicable skills for the students own specific job they want to go into as well as the ability for teachers to specialize teaching methods for students. Adult life can be stressful and simply grooming children to be ready for adult life isn’t expanding their view of the world or challenging their thinking. Using education for more than prepping kids gives more potential for students to enjoy learning so they can become lifelong learners when they are older. Many students, myself included, do not come out of high school feeling they are ready to be an adult or take on the responsibilities of being an adult. In many ways, the education system doesn’t prepare youth for what one more deal with as an adult. What the Tyler Rationale set out the achieve is not actually working.
The second half of this quote says “education is life itself.” These words are saying that to learn is to live. In life, we learn more than what is presented to us in the classroom or what our teachers tell us is true. Personally, I have learned more in my 2 and a half years out of high school than I ever did in high school, and by learning I mean learning to function as an adult (AKA what Tyler had set out to teach in schools). The life experiences I have had have caused me to grow and to change. I am constantly learning new things and understanding more about the world. This is what these words are truly saying, life is the true teacher. People continue to grow and learn throughout life. A 15-year-old isn’t going to be able to learn how to be a grandparent through sitting in a classroom or being taught about it out of a book. No matter how much people disliked learning in school they are still learning every day from the activities they do and the new things they see. These words from John Dewey make a good case for the validity of alternative methods to learning. Teaching in more practical ways instead of the classic lecturing teacher and students in rows. The hidden message of these words is to learn from everything, mistakes, new experiences, and others.
In reflecting on the ways a quote like this could be limiting I realized there are some hard boundaries that these words put on people and what they are able to do. The words “education is life itself” can be meant to say that we learn every day. There are new people we see and new experiences we have every day, no day is the same. On the other hand, the words “education is life itself” can bring some heavier negative connotations to the table. I am someone who enjoys the process of learning and the feeling that comes from seeing something new or viewing a new perspective. There are people that do no enjoy learning when thinking of it in the conventional sense. They may feel as though they aren’t good at the conventional way of teaching and learning that we experience in schools in Canada and the US. In thinking about these people, they are excluded with saying “education is life itself”. One could see these words and begin to believe that because they are not good at this classic way learning and education, they are not good at life. This thought process could cause the reader to further solidify their perception of themselves as being bad at learning and thus do not try to learn new things. Taking these words and the conventional learning and teaching together it seems to convey that being in school and being a student is the only goal or way of life one can have.
I relate to the positive connotations of this quote because I love education and learning. In my understanding of education and learning this quote relates to the hidden curriculum in the classroom. There is more to learn than just in the classroom and from the teacher.
What are some quotes you have seen that have been eyeopening and changed your ideas on education?
Featured Photo by Kimberly Farmer on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!
In the reading for this week, The Social Efficiency Ideology by Michael Schiro, the Tyler Rationale on the development of curriculum was discussed. The Tyler rationale is probably very familiar, but you may not realize it is. Learning objectives, evaluations, separation into grades, and standardized tests. These are a few developments that have come out of the Tyler Rationale. In the lecture, we learned that Ralph Tyler was a behavioural psychologist. He was also considered the “father of assessment and evaluation.”
The Tyler Rationale was a very influential part of my elementary education and it continued into my secondary school time as well. Provincial Achievement Tests (PAT’s) were a part of my education in grades 3, 6, and 9. PAT’s were taken by students every three years starting in grade 3. These tests were to see where the province was in terms of academic achievement. This concept most likely came indirectly from the ideas that Tyler had on what education should lead to. An example from my past education was when there were attempts at changing the grading of students. Instead of using percentages or letter grades like A, B, C where new letter grades that were used like E for excellent and P for proficient and L for lacking. The school was attempting to be less like the classic way of education and evaluating. They wanted to be more inclusive of all students and their academic levels. Coming back to common sense, many parents (mine included) were resistant to this change because it was different than the way it had always been done. “We had normal grading systems when I was in school,” “this is so weird,” “what does that even mean,” my parents would say to me when I should them my E on my math homework. Commonsense is going to be a hard wall to break through when trying to change the ways of educating and evaluating future students.
There are some major limitations in the Tyler Rationale. For example, the idea that all students are to be cut into uniform cookie cutter people is limiting on the potential for diversity. There is no room for creativity to grow and diversity to be explored. With this rationale young people are to be just like every other adult. This leads to students feeling as though they don’t belong or that they are not “what they are supposed to be.” People of minorities such as race, gender and sexuality could be impacted greatly by this concept. Tyler is trying to fit everyone into a box, but what if someone doesn’t if nicely and neatly into that box? They are likely to feel as though they are excluded and they are othered by society. Making the “perfect adult” is not the goal of educators. The goal, is rather, to give young people tools to help them through their adult lives which are specialized to each different individual. Some tools may apply to wide ranges of aspects of adult life while others are very much individual for the type of job, family structure, or life a student wants to live.
Tyler’s Rationale isn’t completely ineffective. His four questions for creating a curriculum are extremely helpful in the creation process. For example, his first question, which is noted in the reading, “What educational purposes should the school seek to attain” is a valid process in finding experiences and knowledge that students would benefit from knowing. In order to know what knowledge should be taught there needs to be somewhere to start or a baseline. In general, the four questions are very useful in finding the type of education and knowledge young people should be practising before coming into society. The idea that all young people should become the same type of adult is the ineffective aspect of this rationale.
Tyler’s thoughts and ideas about curriculum have been around for a long time, but does the sense of tradition make his ideas still valid and effective in this time period? Are there other ways to achieve what he set out to achieve? Would there be a need to completely recreate the system of curriculum or could there be a hybrid created of Tyler’s Rationale and a new system?
Featured Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash.
Jessica is a student at University of Regina. Her passion for helping others and advocacy for the prevention of bullying in schools has lead her to a career in education. She is a dog lover, photographer, and a food lover.
Make sure to comment below and follow her on social media, she loves to reach out and connect with you!