Word.

Pondering thoughtful curriculum and the conversation of learning…

When I employ the Socratic method in the classroom, I know that I have an agenda. I have a plan, expectations, and anticipated paths the inquiry into a subject will take; what do we do, as educators, when the answer to our question is unexpected and turns the inquiry in a new direction? If we fail to acknowledge the unexpected thought, we shut off a potential avenue for discussion. Don’t we want the students to speak up if they have questions? This kind of thoughtfulness is exactly the kind of behavior we profess to encourage, yet too often it is sacrificed in the interest of “covering the material” or making sure that we are “prepared for the test.”

Applebee points out that if we embrace a constructivist viewpoint in which the student’s experience shapes the knowledge, rather than consider knowledge as something that can be memorized by rote, the goal of successful instruction is the engagement of the student in an exchange of ideas, a conversation leading naturally from discussion and interconnected course materials (1997). The goal of the successful instructor is to encourage students to make the connections between materials themselves, and to provide the environment in which this process can successfully happen.

I tend to teach literature from a historical perspective, trying to frame individual works based on the events in society and the lives of the writers. This has the benefit of a built-in context and implied connectivity between the various pieces of literature. I have found, however, that students need to have the conversation guided to relevant current explanations or examples that connect their life experiences to those of past authors. This helps with Applebee’s concept of relatedness in curriculum, but what do we do about quantity and quality?

I found the idea of quality and its relationship to curriculum very interesting. So much of what we teach is part of the traditional view of the literary canon. In embracing diversity and displaying sensitivity and awareness for the differences in society, we have added material to the lists that we need to consider, without regard for time constraints or fallout. Depending on the cultural mores of our communities, there will be varied reactions to the addition of various works to the curriculum. I feel that if the addition furthers the inquiry and adds to the conversation, it is beneficial. When we give students the opportunity for free exchange of ideas, they sometimes squander the chance; however, there are those occasions that seem to light a fire under them, and drive them to further exploration and inquiry. Quality material enhances these interactions, and provides students with grist for the inquisition mill. Context seems to be a driving factor for my students. If I can show them a vignette, paint them a picture, or guide them to a kernel of information that enhances their understanding of a work, then I have succeeded. If the qualities of a text can provide fodder for discussion, moving their inquiry forward, then we have made real progress, and helped to shape their envisionment of the literary canon. This canon has a form, true, but how they react to that canon can make or break the student’s academic career. Without quality, an openness to inquiry and interpretation, and patience, thoughtful curriculum cannot grow.

Applebee, A.N. (1997). Toward thoughtful curriculum: Fostering discipline-based conversation in the English language arts classroom (Report No. 1.10). Albany, NY: National Research Center on Literature Teaching and Learning.