While I reading chapter 6, I began to wonder how long/old this system of developing curriculum is. It's like the system keeps recyling itself-same-old, same-old info but with "new" learners. Then these "new" learners still the problems of the previous students. I'm sure I can write beautifully organized syllabus or such, but doesn't mean my kids will be more intelligent because of it. The syllabus types primarily focus on specific skills/tasks which supposedly the students learn, but what about the application aspect of what was learned? They don't seem to make the lessons real (ie authentic). In our previous discussions, we've talked about "engaging, meaningful" lessons that are "relevant" to students' lives. When does that happen in these types? I am amazed at how the
"new" way can be a revision of the "old" way. In education, the pendulum is used metaphorically-so is it swinging back or is it going the other way?
Anna
No comments:
Post a Comment