Ma rsha Grace
When Students
Create Curriculum
In an era of prepackaged curriculums
and state-approved standards,
teachers can help their students
generate their own curriculums.
T
here we were: 120 students and 35 preservice
teachers creating curriculum together. At the
beginning of each semester, we were scared.
By the end of each semester, we were confident.
For two years, I have participated in a partnership
project with a nearby elementary school to design
courses of study on students’ interests. In this project,
my university preservice teachers have the opportunity
to work with a group of two to three children for one
and one-half hours a day, one day a week. We give up
the teacher’s manuals, the mandates, the curriculum
The teachers of student-generated
curriculums need to be mature,
experienced, confident, resourceful,
and lifelong learners.
guides, the list of state-approved learning outcomes, and
a nebulous factory mentality in favor of engaging
students in the simple process of learning how to learn.
We believe that learning how to learn is much more
important than learning what to learn. Our belief is in
direct contrast to rigid curriculum programs and other
structured reading programs, in which ideas and skills
are predetermined and sequenced by outside authorities. Our authorities are the students and their teachers.
Students use reading, writing, and thinking skills and
build content knowledge into a social constructivist set
of teaching and learning beliefs that value process over
product. This approach is not for everyone, but I have
found it to be successful with many kinds of learners.
A Student-Generated Curriculum
The students in this program work in groups of two or
three with a preservice teacher who is a guide, resident
scholar, and group member. A typical group activity
involves brainstorming and deciding what the group is
E
L
/N
1999
interested in learning. If consensus on
a topic cannot be reached, individual topics are chosen.
For 1st graders, researching a topic might be completed
in one session. For 4th graders, planning, reading,
writing, responding, and sharing might take two to six
sessions with each session lasting two hours.
One group of 1st graders wanted to study bats. The
preservice teacher gathered bat books, encyclopedia
entries, and a model of a bat. For three sessions, the
group read, listened, talked, drew, and savored bats.
They learned that bats do not suck blood from their
hosts. However, one type of bat makes a puncture
wound in an animal and licks the oozing blood. When
they learned this piece of information, some of the
glamour went out of the term vampire bat, but the
students quickly replaced their fascination with bloodsucking bats with the pride of being able to tell other
people about this amazing information.
A group of 2nd graders wanted to study eyes. The
preservice teacher brought in books on eyes and a gross
of cow eyeballs from the local butcher. Gloved and
armed with dissecting knives, the group dissected,
poked, prodded, and weighed the eyeballs—and, of
course, removed and looked through the lenses. This
group of three students quickly turned into a group of
25, each of whom waited patiently for
a turn to participate.
Two 5th graders chose to study flowers. Their preservice teacher provided flower-identification guides,
a flower press, flower seeds, garden books, and a flower
scrapbook. The girls studied their resources, picked
flowers, pressed them, mounted them, and made a
formal presentation.
One 5th grader studied panda bears: where they
lived; what they ate; and how they gave birth, lived, and
died.
He presented the information that he learned to his
peers.
These examples are remarkable learning experiences
only because the students themselves made the important decisions about what to study, how to study it, and
how to demonstrate to others what they had learned.
They were not merely engaged in a student-centered
curriculum; they were engaged in a student-generated
curriculum.
We teachers did what all good teachers do: We
offered options, resources, guidance, and participation.
We modeled and demonstrated what
curiosity looks like, what the curious
mind does when it seeks to know, and
how satisfaction comes from intellectual
and academic curiosity. We demonstrated how to think about the world
through science, history, geography,
math, art, literature, and literacy. We
demonstrated that knowledge is interconnected and is available from
multiple perspectives.
Teaching Against the Grain
The social-constructivist approach to
teaching is a lonely one because most
teachers prefer, or are forced, to stick
to the preplanned curriculum. For
support, I rely heavily on scholars who
advocate constructivism, such as Jerry
Harste (Harste, Watson, & Copeland,
1993; Harste, 1994) and the 1997 panel
at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association
(AERA) that featured Ann L. Brown and
Marlene Scardamalia (Bereiter et al.,
1997). Of course, the scholar who is
most notably recognized for his work
with social-constructivist philosophies is
Lev Vygotsky (Dixon-Krauss, 1996), the
Russian psychologist.
Social-constructivist teaching and
learning is nonconformist, open to variation in the outcome of what has been
learned, and more reliant on teacher
authority than on state authority. It also
requires that the educators who teach
student-generated curriculums
be mature, experienced, confident,
resourceful, and lifelong learners.
Frank Smith compares the differences
between the social-constructivist and
the typical state-approved views of how
learning occurs (Smith, 1998). He states
that the classical view on which socialconstructivist teaching is based says that
learning is continual, effortless, independent of reward and punishment,
never forgotten, inhibited by testing,
and dependent on the growth of the
learner. Smith points out that the official
view of learning, in contrast, says that
learning is occasional, hard work,
dependent on reward and punishment,
easily forgotten, ensured by testing, and
dependent on memorization. Teachers
and communities willing to explore the
constructivist approach to curriculum
development will need to constantly
review the differences between classical
and official views of learning.
What Students Want to Learn
After working with more than 200
preservice teachers in this curriculumgenerating process, I have seen every
conceivable learning situation and topic
emerge. Some students have earnestly
requested to study video games, Ninja
Turtles, and Play-Doh. Others have been
resistant and reluctant learners whose
curiosities about their world have been
either underdeveloped or squashed by
frustration.
The majority of students, however,
can’t talk fast enough in telling us what
they want to learn. They want to study
Jesse James, dinosaurs, poetry, architecture, archaeology, zoology, Africa,
origami, flying, science experiments (by
far the most popular request), puppets,
Thomas Jefferson, Shel Silverstein, skeletons, kites, and beads. Their interests
are entirely unpredictable, and the
preservice teachers quickly learn that
there is no such thing as a topic more
suitable for boys than for girls or for 1st
graders than for 4th graders. Anyone at
any grade may like nothing, everything,
or all things in between.
Ten Key Considerations
Providing opportunities for students to
generate their own curriculum requires
risks and courage. Teachers must underA
S
stand the profound difference between
the classical view of learning and the
official view of learning. They need to
address 10 considerations to orchestrate
a successful constructivist classroom
in which students create their own
curriculum in a literature-based
program.
1. Garner support and start small.
Teachers who use their students as
curricular informants must have the
support of administrators and parents.
Teachers must keep administrators
informed about their plans and progress
and communicate with parents in open
houses, newsletters, and dialogue. The
most important thing to share with all
stakeholders is the student work: what
students have learned and produced
and what their plans are for future
learning.
2. Use library resources. Creating
curriculum in a contemporary classroom requires library books and
nonprint media. Befriending school and
local librarians is a first, major, and
ongoing step. Without these resources,
constructing a student-generated
curriculum is not possible.
3. Give up the guides and get ready
to model. Teachers must be willing to
teach without the aid—and the restriction—of curriculum guides or mandated
objectives. Implementing a studentgenerated curriculum means a temporary, and conceivably permanent,
reprieve from following the curriculum
experts. Teachers must be able to
model what a curious learner does:
explore topics of interest from a variety
of perspectives, ask questions, connect
new learning with old, and share what
he or she has learned.
4. Develop assessment tools. Assessments must be accomplished through
students’ performances, demonstrations, experiences, explanations,
C
D
writing, portfolios, and self-evaluations.
End-of-unit worksheets, lists of isolated
spelling words, multiple-choice exams,
and true-false tests will not be helpful in
gauging students’ academic and literacy
growth in a constructivist curriculum.
5. Allow for the noise. Teachers and
students must accept that they will be
working in a classroom environment
that is not quiet. The classroom will be
busy, interactive, mobile, and probably
messy. Strict end-of-the-day rituals for
organizing and cleaning will ensure that
everyone’s work area is in usable condition for the next day.
time and persistence. It requires a firm
belief that the process can succeed.
Create a support system of other
teachers who are interested in the
constructivist concept. Without a
support team, this kind of curriculum
can be a daunting and lonely task. And
schedule at least 90 minutes of uninterrupted work time for your students.
8. Be a learner. This kind of
curriculum requires everyone in the
classroom to be a learner. Be willing to
learn about subjects that interest the
students. But recognize that no one
person can be interested in every topic
preservice teachers quickly learn that there is no such thing
ment what is working and what could
be improved. Use photos, videos,
formal observations, written summaries,
and student feedback to evaluate the
learning. Use the data to make the
program more efficient. Share the data
with the students and their parents. Let
them draw their own conclusions. Their
ownership of the classroom is the key
component to a successful classroom
under construction.
Constructing curriculum with
students is a lively process that can lead
to high levels of independent learning
and great leaps of individual knowledge.
Giving students the freedom to explore
their world confidently and routinely
is one of the most important learning
experiences that schools provide. ■
as a topic more suitable for boys than for girls or for
References
Student interests are entirely unpredictable, and the
1st graders than for 4th graders.
6. Schedule record keeping. At the
end of each day, students must log in
what they worked on and what they
plan to do the next day. The log entry
could include books used, ideas shared,
problems encountered, successes
achieved, and stray thoughts for future
reflection. This record keeping will let
the teacher know exactly what’s going
on in the classroom. It will demonstrate
that time spent on constructivist
learning activities is time well spent.
7. Don’t panic; a routine will come.
Teachers must give themselves time to
develop a routine. An atmosphere of
impending doom will not allow full
enjoyment of the constructivist process
or full opportunity for the process to
work. Generating a curriculum takes
E
L
/N
that students find fascinating. It is a rare
teacher who finds both origami and
Jesse James intriguing and worth
studying. Sometimes you must feign
enthusiasm and simply wait for the next
set of topics to find its way into the
classroom.
9. Communicate unanxious expectations. Constructing curriculum from
students’ perspectives is both worthwhile and stressful. Replace anxious
questions with confident questions.
An anxious question is, What if the
students aren’t learning anything? A
confident question is, What ordinary
evidence is readily available to document
what the students are actually learning?
10. Gather data weekly. No more
than once a week, thoroughly docu-
1999
Bereiter, C., Scardamalia, M., Bransford, J.,
Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., &
Salomon, G. (1997, March). Midcourse
critical examination of constructivist
learning. Session at the AERA Annual
Meeting, Chicago, IL.
Dixon-Krauss, L. (Ed.). (1996). Vygotsky
in the classroom. White Plains, NY:
Longman.
Harste, J. (1994). Curriculum in a new
key [video]. Stillwater, OK: Whole
Language Umbrella.
Harste, J., Watson, D., & Copeland, K.
(1993). Moving into and moving with
whole language [video]. Stillwater, OK:
Whole Language Umbrella.
Smith, F. (1998). The book of learning
and forgetting. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Marsha Grace is Associate Professor at
Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi,
College of Education, 6300 Ocean Dr.,
Corpus Christi, TX 78412 (e-mail:
mgrace@falcon.tamucc.edu).