Neo-Confucianism Is a Philosophy Which Was Born TEST1

K-12 Curriculum and Instruction: Changing Paradigms in the 21st Century

This is not your grandfathers' economy or his educational paradigm however; today's curriculum still appears as such and therein lays a very significant and challenging problem that presents to today's educators and leaders. According to Sir Ken Robinson, "We have a system of education that is modeled on the interest of industrialism and in the image of it. Schools are still pretty much organized on factory lines -- ringing bells, separate facilities, specialized into separate subjects. We still educate children by batches." (Brain Pickings, 2012) Make no mistake in the opinion of Robinson who believes that divergent thinking most emphatically is not "…the same thing as creativity" because according to Robinson in his work proposing a new educational paradigm. Indeed this is also spoken of in the work of Zeng-tian and Yu-Le in their work "Some Thoughts on Emergent Curriculum" presented at the Forum for Integrated Education and Educational Reform (2004). The emergent curriculum has as its focus the "dialogue and cooperation on the basis of emergentism" stated to be representative of the "basic characteristics of the curriculum development and major direction in the future. It is the product of the critical reflection of the predefined curriculum, the objective demand of constructivist conceptions of knowledge and the basic content of curriculum returning back to the life-world." (Zeng-tian and Yu-Le, 2004)

II. Background

The Oxford English Dictionary states that curriculum is "specifically a regular course of study or training, as at school or university." (Clandinin and Connelly, 1992) This is a simplistic definition however, the "idea of curriculum is every changing." In order to understand precisely what curriculum is the understanding of the historical context and development journey of the curriculum. It is held by post-modernists that there should be flexibility in the curriculum allowing for planning throughout a course of study and that this planning should take place cooperatively between students and teachers focused on the benefit of students. (Doll, 1993, paraphrased) Schwab (1998) held that there should be a balance found and that this balance should be between: (1) subject matter; (2) learners; (3) the milieus; (4) teachers; and (5) curriculum making and that failure to coordinate between these would mean an imbalanced curriculum that would result in harming education in its entirety.

III. Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study is to examine the present day curriculum and how it aligns to the needs of students or alternatively, fails to align to the needs of students, in the area of meeting the actual needs in knowledge and skills for students to enter into the 'real world' after their educational endeavors. In other words, this study will attempt to gauge how well today's curriculum serves to enhance the future endeavors of students as they aspire to enter the workforce.

IV. Significance of the Study

The significance of the study is the knowledge that will emerge from the study and that will be available for application in the area of curriculum development and reform.

V. Research Questions

Research questions in the researched proposed in this study includes the following stated questions:

1. Does the present curriculum meet the needs of students following graduation?

2. Where does the curriculum fail to meet the needs of students in regards to entering the workforce?

3. What framework should any new and untraditional curriculum be constructed upon in terms of outcomes for students?

VI. Literature Review

The work of Emergy, Braselmann, and Gold (1964) states that the relationship between jobs and education is quite clear. The threat of automation on the uneducated and unskilled is clear. IN an age of specialization nd skill, nobody wants an illiterate." At the time that this report was written there was a high rate of illiteracy among black individuals in the Southern U.S. states and these individuals were at risk socioeconomically because their education and skills were lacking to meet the demands of employers. Because of this there were high levels of poverty among the black race as well as among individuals of the white race who lived in poverty conditions. These conditions were exacerbated by the fact that these individuals were not on the receiving end of education that prepared them to enter the workforce. It is noted in the study that the plantation economy had at that times moved into the 20th Century industrial world and how individuals in the South, due to ineffective education and training, had been left behind the progress of the industrial age. Indeed, the time has come again according to many researchers for another shift in paradigms in the area of curriculum development. According to Sir Ken Robinson, every country in the world is presently in the midst of a reform of public education and there are two reasons for this:

(1) The first is economic; and (2) The second is cultural. (2011)

Robinson states in regards to the economical reason that "people are trying to work out, how do we educate our children to take their place in the economies of the 21st century. How do we do that? Even though we can't anticipate what the economy will look like at the end of next week. As the recent turmoil has demonstrated. How do you do that?" (2011) In regards to the second reason or that of the cultural concerns Robison states "Every country on earth is trying to figure out how do we educate our children so they have a sense of cultural identity, so that we can pass on the cultural genes of our communities. While being part of the process globalization, how do you square that circle?" (Robinson, 2011) The problem, according to Robinson is "they are trying to meet the future by doing what they did in the past. And on the way they are alienating millions of kids who don't see any purpose in going to school." (2011) Robinson relates that in the past, if a student attended school every day and then worked hard and attained a college degree then the outcome was certain in that the individual was assured a job. That is simply not the case anymore as "You are better having a degree than not, but it's not a guarantee anymore. And particularly not if the route to it marginalizes most of the things that you think are important about yourself." (2011)

The problem according to Robinson with today's educational system is that the current educational system "…was designed and conceived and structured for a different age…" and stated to have been conceived "…in the intellectual culture of the Enlightenment, and in the economic circumstances of the Industrial Revolution. " (2011) Prior to the middle of the nineteenth century, Robison notes that there were not public educational systems because people objected to it on the basis that "…it's not possible for many street kids working class children to benefit from public education. They are incapable of learning to read and write and why are we spending time on this? So there was also built into the whole series of assumptions about social structuring capacity. It was driven by an economic imperative of the time, but running right through it, was an intellectual model of the mind, which was essentially the Enlightenment view of intelligence." (Robinson, 2011)

There was a belief that there were two types of people:

(1) academic; and (2) non-academic. (Robinson, 2011)

This type of reasoning, according to Robinson "is deep in the gene pool of public education. And the consequence of that is that many brilliant people think they are not, because they've been judged against this particular view of the mind. So we have twin pillars, economic and intellectual. And my view is that this model has caused chaos in many people's lives. And it's been great for some - there've been people who benefited wonderfully from it, but most people have not. Instead the suffered this. This is the modern epidemic, and it's as misplaced as fictitious." (Robinson, 2011) Robinson holds that it is this that has resulted in "…the plague of ADHD. Now this is a map of the instance of ADHD in America. Or prescriptions for ADHD. Don't mistake me I don't mean to say there is no such thing as attention deficit disorder. I'm not qualified to say if there isn't such a thing. I know that a great majority of psychologists and pediatricians think there's such a thing. - but it's still a matter of debate. What I do know for a fact is it's not an epidemic. These kids of being medicated as routinely as we have our tonsils taken out. And on the same whimsical basis and for the same reason medical fashion." (2011) According to Robinson today's children are living in "the most intensely stimulating period in the history of the earth. They are being besieged with information and parse their attention from every platform, computers, from iPhones, from advertising holdings from hundreds of television channels. And we are penalizing them for getting distracted. From what? Boring stuff." (2011)

Robinson states that the instance of ADHD "has risen in parallel with the growth of standardized testing. And these kids are being given Ritalin and Adderall and all manner of things. Often quite dangerous drugs to get them focused and calm them down. But according to this attention deficit disorder increases as you travel east across the country. People start losing interest in Oklahoma. They can hardly think straight in Arkansas. And by the time they get to Washington they've lost it completely." (Robinson, 2011) The model of education is a system of education "…which is modeled on the interest of industrialism. And in the image of it. I'll give you a couple examples. Schools are still pretty much organized on factory lines. On ringing bells, separate facilities, specialized into separate subjects. We still educate children by batches. You know, we put them through the system by age group. Why do we do that? You know, why is there this assumption that the most important thing kids have in common is how old they are. You know, it's like the most important thing about them is their date of manufacture." (Robinson, 2011)

Robinson states that in the interest of learning it is necessary to start somewhere besides from this "production line mentality which is "…essentially about conformity. Increasingly it's about that as you look at the growth of standardized testing and standardized curricula. And it's about standardization. I believe we've got go in the exact opposite direction. That's what I mean about changing the paradigm." (Robinson, 2011)

Robinson relates that there is a recently study that was conducted on divergent thinking and states that divergent thinking "isn't the same thing as creativity" as creativity is "the process of having original ideas which have value." (2011) Divergent thinking, according to Robinson "isn't a synonym, but it's an essential capacity for creativity. It's the ability to see lots of possible answers to a question. Lots of possible ways of interpreting a question. To think, what Edward de Bono publicly called laterally. To think not just in linear or convergent ways. To see multiple answers and not one." (2011) Robinson states that the challenge presenting is the need to "think different about human capacity" to "get over this old conception of academic, non-academic." (2011) Secondly, Robinsons states it is necessary to "recognize most great learning happens in groups. The collaboration is the stuff of growth. If we atomize people and separate them a judge them separately, we form a kind of disjunction between them and their natural learning environment." (2011) Third, Robinson state the culture of our institutions is a critical matter in terms of the "habits of institutions and the habits that they occupy." (2011)

The Emergent Curriculum touted by Zeng-tian and Yu-le has specific characteristics that are experiential in nature and specifically those of:

(1) Creativity; and (2) Life. (2004)

According to Zeng-tian and Yu-le (2004) The emergent curriculum can be implemented through the following conditions for the purpose of:

(1) enhancing "…the curriculum consciousness of teachers and students; and (2) To establish "you" orientated conceptions about the teachers and students and to form the subject-orientated conceptions about the curriculum evaluation." (p.1)

Robinson states that he defines creativity as "…the process of having original ideas that have value. Divergent thinking isn't a synonym but is an essential capacity for creativity. It is the ability to see lots of possible answers to a question, lots of possible ways to interpret a question, to think laterally, to think not just in linear or convergent ways, to see multiple answers, not one." (Robinson, 2012) The point that Robinson is attempting to drive home is that curriculum in today's school is not aligned with the real world but is effectively stuck in a curriculum designed during the age of industrialism. It is a curriculum very much outdated and frankly, ineffective in properly educating today's youth and fails to prepare them for the real world following their educational years.

Bronson and Merryman (2010) write in the work entitled "The Creativity Crisis" published in Newsweek that the accepted definition of creativity is "production of something original and useful…to be creative requires divergent thinking (generating many unique ideas) and then convergent thinking (combining those ideas into the best result)." Scholars are stated to have been tracking child the children that completed the tests given by Ted Schwawrzrock in 1958 and who completed the tasks and they have been "recording every patent earned, every business founded, every research paper published and every grant awarded. They have as well "tallied the books, dances, radio shows, art exhibitions, software programs, advertising campaigns, hardware innovations, music compositions, public policies (written or implemented), leadership positions, invited lectures, and buildings designed." (Bronson and Merryman, 2010) It is reported as "shocking…how incredibly well Torrance's creativity index predicted those kids' creative accomplishments as adults. Those who came up with more good ideas on Torrance's tasks grew up to be entrepreneurs, inventors, college presidents, authors, doctors, diplomats and software developers." (Bronson and Merryman, 2010) Torrance's data was recently reanalyzed by Jonathan Pluckier of Indiana University and the correlation to lifetime creative accomplishments is reported to be "more than three times stronger for childhood creativity than childhood IQ." (Bronson and Merryman, 2010) Torrance's tests, just as intelligence tests are reported to have been "…taken by millions worldwide in 50 languages. Yet there is one more crucial difference between IQ and CQ scores. With intelligence, there is a phenomenon called the Flynn effect -- each generation, scores go up about 10 points. Enriched environments are making kids smarter. With creativity, a reverse trend has just been identified and is being reported for the first time here: American creativity scores are falling." (Bronson and Merryman, 2010)

This was discovered by Kyung Hee Kim at the College of William & Mary in May, following the analysis of approximately 300,000 Torrance scores of children and adults. Findings stated by Kim include "…creativity scores had been steadily rising, just like IQ scores, until 1990. Since then, creativity scores have consistently inched downward. "It's very clear, and the decrease is very significant," Kim says. It is the scores of younger children in America -- from kindergarten through sixth grade -- for whom the decline is most serious." (Bronson and Merryman, 2010)

The work of Andrew Seaton states that there is expanding awareness that education "must extend its traditional goal of students mastery of subject-centered scholastic knowledge, to include the development of individuals who can prosper in complex and changing social, cultural and economic worlds." (2002) Seaton reports that the "inner intent of reform efforts being made and advocated widely, could be characterized by several key principles stated as follows:

(1) emphasis on exit outcomes (prospering in the real world);

(2) active learning for intellectual quality (constructivism);

(3) personal responsibility for own learning and behavior (genuine engagement);

(4) individual meaning and relevance (not one-size-fits-all);

(5) real-life purposes, roles and contexts (integrated curriculum);

(6) links with community for mutual capacity building (productive partnerships in a learning community); and (7) extension of pedagogical repertoires (teachers moving from 'sage on the stage' to 'guide on the side'). (Seaton, 2002)

It is reported by Seaton that there is great difficulty among teachers, schools and systems in "resolving some of the contradictions between these principles and practices on the one hand, and pressures of accountability and traditional school culture on the other." (2002) It is observed states Seaton in the work of Thompson and Zeuli (1999, pp. 345-6)

"…that perhaps the most striking thing about teachers' efforts to learn and put into practice current reform ideas is that 'it is possible - indeed, fairly common - to get a great deal right and still miss the point… of the reforms'. After all, the effort to change teachers' mindsets and practices takes place within a set of cultural, structural and accountability constraints that often remain largely unchanged. The most crucial value determining the quality of relationships and the nature of learning environments (including policy environments) is the way in which power operates in them." (Seaton, 2002)

It is stated in the work of Foucault (1977, p. 14) that, "The problem is not one of changing people's "consciousness" or what's in their heads; but the political, economic, institutional regime of the production of truth." (cited in Seaton, 2002) It should not be surprising then, according to Seaton that "the history of curriculum change is a history of little change (Glatthorn & Jailall 2000, p. 97), or, as Woodrow Wilson put it so nicely, 'It is easier to change the location of a cemetery, than to change the school curriculum' (quoted in Bailey, 2001). Attempts at curriculum reform that fail to make it possible for power to operate in fundamentally different ways in learning environments will fall victim to the inertia of the traditional, industrial age educational paradigm." (Seaton, 2002)

Seaton questions how the patterns of power that presently determine the experience of students in school and that construct the student's image of self, others and the world affect this view of the student. Seaton states that the strongest messages received by students are not "communicated through the explicit curriculum and its content. Rather, the messages are part of the hidden curriculum. They are part of the form that curriculum takes. Curricular form determines what students can and cannot experience, and the ways in which they can and cannot act, and in the words of Aristotle, 'It makes no small difference whether we form habits of one kind or another from our very youth; it makes a very great difference, or rather all the difference' (quoted in Hunt, 1990, p. 121 cited in Seaton, 2002) Seaton states that one example signifies the "widely observed crisis of middle schooling" in that research studies have confirmed the observation made commonly that students between the ages of 10 and 15 years of age are "switching off." (Barrett, 1999, p.6 in Seaton, 2002)

Seaton states that the needs of young adolescents that have been identified in nationally developed statements includes the need to have "opportunities to negotiate learning that is useful now, as well as in the future. Empowerment. One of the guiding principles of middle schooling in Australia is that it should be 'Learner-centered. Coherent curriculum is focused on the identified needs, interests, and concerns of students, and with an emphasis on self-directed and constructed learning." (Barrett, 1999, p. 9 in Seaton, 2002) Young children additionally have such needs and the work of Erik Erikson, child psychologist made it clear that when children ages 3 to 6 are enjoined the freedom to make selection of activities that are meaningful these children "tend to develop a positive outlook characterized by the ability to initiate and follow through." (Seaton, 2002) Alternatively, when they are not allowed to do so these children tend to "withdraw from taking an active stance and permit others to make decisions for them." (Seaton, 2002) The primary task of middle childhood, or those ages 6 to 12 is to "achieve a sense of industry" which is associated with "creating goals that are personally meaningful and achieving them. If this is not done... some of the following problems originate during middle childhood... A negative self-concept; feelings of inadequacy relating to learning; feelings of inferiority in establishing social relationships; conflicts over values; a confused sex-role identity; unwillingness to face new challenges; a lack of initiative; dependency." (Corey, 1996, p. 105 in Seaton, 2002)

Learned dependence and experiences of alienation are stated by Seaton to be such that are "becoming more prevalent, high drop-outrates, increasing levels of youth depression and suicide, drug abuse, anti-social behavior, poverty, welfare dependence and homelessness. Many of the problems manifesting so dramatically in the late primary and early secondary years and beyond, clearly have their origin in the curricular forms students traditionally experience, and do not experience, from the beginning of schooling." (Seaton, 2002) Seaton notes that an example of how "patterns of power embodied in curricular forms influence student construction of self, others and the world" is demonstrated in a recent study that examined the interrelationship between thinking styles and learning. The findings of the study illustrate how students who are higher academic achievers are "those who prefer to work individually, who show adherence to existing rules and procedures and who do not enjoy creating, formulating and planning for problem solution." (Cano-Garcia & Hughes, 2000, p.413 in: Seaton, 2002) Seaton notes the importance of the fact that researchers hold that "it is untenable to think that students possess inherent, invariant learning styles, or that learning is a decontextualized process… [Our current curricular forms] reward with good grades those students who assume an orientation towards merely reproducing the meaning of learning materials." (Cano-Garcia & Hughes, 2000, p. 424-5 in Seaton, 2002) Seaton notes that Eisner (1991) held that the evaluation practices including testing, reporting and assessment are "the most powerful forces influencing the priorities and culture of schools, the hidden curriculum." (2002) Evaluation practices express to students and teachers alike what it is that counts and how these practices are employed, what these practices address and what these practices fail to address "and the form in which they occur speak forcefully to students about what adults believe is important." (Seaton, 2002 citing: Eisner, 1991, p.81) It is clear that the endeavor to achieve a "learning society of innovative, creative, collaborative problem solvers, then progressing more students to complete Year 12 will not be enough. It is essential that we change the dominance of the traditional curricular form." (Seaton, 2002) According to Seaton who cites Kreisberg (1991) the possibility exists for the creation of learning environment and communities characterized by operation of power in ways that are more productive and effective than the "traditional culture of schools. There is another dimension, or form, or experience of power that is distinctively different from pervasive conceptions." (Kreisberg, 1992, p.61 in: Seaton, 2002) As such power would be conceived in terms of capacity rather than from the view of domination.

Cited as a useful model in this initiative as posited in the work of Seaton is the "Key Abilities Model" which is characterized by its provision of guidelines for curriculum programming, assessment, reporting, learning and teaching and school organization, to create rich learning environments which closely reflect the known principles of effective learning and teaching, and promote meaningful and engaged learning connected to the world. " (Seaton, 2002) This model is reported to be helpful in assisting with formulation of mandated learning outcomes and at the same time provides support for and tracking of the development "of six transformational or exit outcomes, six Key Abilities needed to prosper in complex and changing social, cultural, and economic worlds." (Seaton, ) Stated as the six Key Abilities are the following:

(1) multi-literacy's;

(2) problem solving;

(3) creativity;

(4) community participation;

(5) self-management; and (6) knowledge of self, others and the environment. (Seaton, 2002)

This model makes identification of a Spectrum of Key Abilities or "genres and procedures which are associated with traditional disciplines and subjects and which are general enough that they might be employed in a wide variety of both directed and negotiated activities. Along with officially required curriculum outcomes, these Key Activities may constitute the elements of a school curriculum program, and the easily assessable indicators of the Key Abilities." (Seaton, 2002) This model makes provision of a structure that is coherent in the assessment and reporting of the learning and performance of students through compulsory schooling years. (Seaton, 2002, paraphrased) Schools can map students progress through the attainment of the six Key Abilities. Seaton proposes four distinctive forms of Curriculum which are stated to be "more strategic, or pedagogical, than fundamental" and such that each of these four forms of Curriculum "overlaps and complements the other." (Seaton, 2002) Each of the four forms is stated to have its own specific significance. The four Curriculum forms are stated as follows with an accompanying description of each of the four forms:

(1) Focused Learning: Focused learning and teaching relating to particular mandated learning outcomes and Key Activities that cannot practically be learned and mastered solely in complex, interdisciplinary or real-life contexts.

(2) Transdisciplinary Investigations: Complex, active-learning units, each incorporating a variety of particular mandated learning outcomes and Key Activities from several key learning areas, which individuals and/or groups undertake according to readiness, at the discretion of the teacher.

(3) Community Development Activities: Real-life, on-going, multi-participant projects with consequential, public outcomes, which provide authentic contexts for complex role performance and a wide variety of identified Key Activities.

(4) Personal Learning Projects: Largely student-directed, purpose and problem-based learning activities, in which the topic and the Key Activities to be incorporated in the activity are negotiated for individuals and/or groups. (Seaton, 2002)

While no direct correspondence exists between these four forms and they are all different types of knowledge explicit provision of these four forms provides more adequate support than the traditional form of curriculum and as well provides support for the four levels of knowledge stated in brain research which are those as follows:

(1) Surface Knowledge: the product of rote learning

(2) Technical or Scholastic Knowledge: ideas, principles and procedures that are traditionally regarded as the core content of any subject or discipline, but which 'lacks a quality that makes it available for solving real problems or for dealing with complex situations'

(3) Felt Meaning: 'an almost visceral sense of relationship, an unarticulated sense of connectedness that ultimately culminates in insight', an 'aha!'

(4) Deep Meanings: 'the fundamental purposes and values that make life itself worthwhile' and 'ultimately, the forces that drive the selection and interpretation of life experience'. (ASCD, 1999, f. 5, a. 1, pp. 10-13 cited in Seaton, 2002)

Focused learning activities are such that "cover mainly code breaking type learning, and some specific mandated learning outcomes and Key Activities which are difficult to learn and master solely in context. Focus areas might include aspects of literacy, mathematics, numeracy, foreign languages, fine arts, information and communication technology, sport and physical education. Focused Learning activities might be allocated in the order of 30% of curriculum time." (Seaton, 2002) Seaton notes that any age there are students at various levels of performance and who should therefore "be working on different outcomes." (2002)