Jan 21 Class: Not a summary but some pointers

We are beginning to "collect" some necessary names and concepts.
These should become automatic in your thinking about curriculum:

Kliebard for his three metaphors of production, travel and growth.
Tyler for his four focusing questions from 1949.
Ben Peretz for her concept of Curriculum Potential.
Eisner and Vallance for their five approaches to curriculum: production, academic rationalism, etc.

I tried to survey curriculum design in one hour. Tyler's questions set the stage; Oliva's 16 step model is simply an expansion of Tyler. The ABCD objectives model (audience, behavior, conditions, degree) is a tylerian focus. Two other dimensions were left unfinished. In the next class, I will provide an overview of a postmodern approach by William Doll and a tongue-in-cheek examination of how curriculum texts are produced. Doll eschews a step by step approach and suggested four characteristics that need to be part of every curriculum. (More on that next week.)

The excerpt from Camelot is presented as an example of curriculum defined as the passing on of the heritage of the past. Also significant is the "postmodern" juxtaposition of King Arthur with Sir Thomas Mallory. Arthur lived in the fifth-sixth century; Malory died 1471. The content of the conversation between the two reaches across time. (Sounds like a TV episode of Medium.)

And finally, we began our exploration into Marshall McLuhan. The over-riding question here must be "What in the world does Marshall McLuhan have to do with curriculum theory?"
One answer, so far, is that he believed strongly that everything is interrelated. Obviously, curriculum, too. A second answer is in his definition of medium: extensions of man. Media are not merely machines and information technologies. Media means anything that extends our senses. Gloves, clothes, houses, ... and even curriculum.