Some thoughts on Eisner & Vallance, Conflicting Conceptions of Curriculum
1. Conflicting Conceptions of Curriculum. Note the five conceptions of
curriculum and begin to get a feel for these. What are the three curriculum
fallacies? Are these indeed fallacies? What might be consequences to the
curriculum of committing each fallacy?
2. Consider the notion that the function of education is to prepare youth for an
occupation. Occupations are varied. But, more than this, it appears that factors
other than schooling might well influence occupational success. What might
these factors be? To what extent can schooling prepare for occupations, and to
what extent should it? Should the school system attempt to deal with
occupational disparities other than those related to training and achievement:
How might this be done? (Melting pot or vertical mosaic)
3. Chapter 8— “Relevance and the Curriculum” by Metcalf and Hunt in Conflicting
Conceptions of Curriculum. “Relevance” is often appealed to as a criterion for
educational aims, but its meaning is somewhat ambiguous, perhaps. What do
Metcalf and Hunt propose? To what group is their proposal said to be relevant?
To youth now? To youth in adult life? Or is the alleged relevance merely another
way of saying that this is what we think they ought to learn? Perhaps, then, the
authors’ proposal serves society’s interests more than it is relevant to “rebellious
youth.” What do you think, and what parts of the chapter lead you to your
conclusions?
4. There are two papers in Conflicting Conceptions of Curriculum which fairly
represent what Eisner and Vallance have termed “academic rationalism.” First,
be sure than you have a firm grasp on this curriculum conception, and what it
implies. Then read through the papers by Schwab, and by Hirst and Peters. (The
latter will probably seem a bit out of context, coming, as it does, from a book).
5. What is the structure of the area of knowledge which you teach? How would you
go about exposing the structure? What does Bereiter have to say about your
likely success?
6. Much work has been done on extending the academic rationalist’s point of view
into the matter of integration in the curriculum. Consider what integration might
mean for the academic rationalist. What is common about knowledge?
7. The extract on Skinner’s behaviorism, from Winfred Hill. R.E. Sliverman,
“Using the S-R Reinforcement Model” in Eisner & Vallance. Is Skinner’s
approach a theory? What is negative reinforcement? How are Skinner’s views
incorporated in the small program on statistical testing?
8. What are the fundamental viewpoints of humanistic psychology? What are some
significant features about the theories? What role does the teacher occupy
according to Maslow and Rogers?
9. The area of curriculum implementation and curriculum change presupposes that
existing practice is in need of change. This, in turn, presupposes that judgments
have been made which must have been based on criteria. Such criteria probably
derive from thoughts about the nature of education and curriculum. How, then,
should we define education and curriculum? Also, ought we to define these?
10. Check the literature on curriculum implementation. Is it the case that curriculum
packages tend not to be used as designed in the classroom?
11. What are the theoretical bases of curriculum? Why might it be (or not be)
important to consider theoretical bases before one considers designing a
curriculum? What might a curriculum theory consist of? By what criteria ought a
curriculum theory be judged as adequate?