{"id":2705,"date":"2012-11-12T08:59:44","date_gmt":"2012-11-12T08:59:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/?p=2705"},"modified":"2012-11-12T08:59:44","modified_gmt":"2012-11-12T08:59:44","slug":"an-end-to-curriculum","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/2012\/11\/12\/an-end-to-curriculum\/","title":{"rendered":"An end to curriculum"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last \u00a0Friday\u00a0the BBC<\/a> reported on a leaked government paper about the revisions to the curriculum in England. \u00a0The BBC begins ...<\/p>\n

A draft copy of the new secondary curriculum for England, leaked to the Times Educational Supplement (TES<\/a>), has drawn criticism from subject experts. \u00a0The draft document, also seen by BBC News, is just 30 pages long. \u00a0The leaked draft appears to confirm ministers' plans to give teachers more freedom over what they teach, providing them with only short lists of topics.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This has provoked criticism from all sides as the TES and BBC note.<\/p>\n

I was particularly struck by what Mary James had to say. \u00a0Here's the TES \u00a0...<\/p>\n

Professor Mary James, who was part of the government's national curriculum expert panel, was broadly supportive of the slimmed-down curriculum, saying that she hoped teachers would \"rise to the challenge<\/em>\" to develop relevant lessons. \u00a0But she described the decision to copy its aims from those set out in the draft primary curriculum published before the summer as a \"mistake<\/em>\". \u00a0\u00a0\"The fact that, in this draft, the primary aims are simply borrowed suggests that insufficient thought has been given to these<\/em>,\" Professor James said. \u00a0\"They should not be mere decoration. \u00a0Any choice of curriculum content should be driven by a clear view of what purposes (educational, cultural, social, economic) the curriculum is expected to serve<\/em>.\"<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Well, quite \u2013 a point<\/a> that I, and countless others, have made endlessly. \u00a0My last<\/a> comment on aims was this:<\/p>\n

Deciding what to teach implies choosing \u2013 but who is to choose, and how, and what is to guide choice? <\/em>Curriculum is concerned with how we think about the social purposes of education, and always involves a selecting from culture (Lawton) \u2013 and hence is political, contested and labile. <\/em>Methodology is to method as curriculum is to what is taught \u2013<\/em> a conceptual frame that guides (and restricts) choice.<\/em><\/p>\n

High-level aim statements can provide such a conceptual frame \u2013 and the 5 aims set out by the expert panel are examples of this. <\/em>Having aims such as the expert panel\u2019s 5th one:\u00a0to promote understanding of sustainability in the stewardship of resources locally, nationally and globally,<\/em> confers three possible benefits:<\/p>\n