Part+4+22-25

**Goodlad, John I. Teaching What We Hold to Be Sacred.** Deanna: This article was focused on the importance of teaching students about democracy and, more importantly, teaching them the values, beliefs and practices of democracy and how to be a quality democratic citizen. Goodlad emphasized the importance of making sure that the principles of social justice and equality are careful taught within schools – to all students. He made the point that some students, such as those from poverty, only really learn about their culture and their community because the schools that they attend are mostly populated by students of similar backgrounds. It becomes imperative then for teachers to teach students about the world as a whole, and not just about their community, so that these students can learn to become outstanding citizens and hopefully achieve something better than what they have right now. As educators, it is not our job to only teach our content to students; it is also our job to shape them into people who have been given the tools for success and understand what the “real world” is all about and how to survive in it.

Becca: In this essay, Goodlad argues that schools need to teach students democratic responsibilities such as the ideals of humankind and the freedoms that should exist within a democratic society. He also argues that schools need to assist in teaching the civil and civic responsibilities of a democratic citizen. Unfortunately, schools fail to teach students these values and instead promote the caste system within the classroom. Goodland suggests that standardized tests generate these caste systems and keep them running. From the way the test is written to the purpose of the tests, minority students are put at a disadvantaged. The test scores in many ways determine a student's success. Therefore, students who struggle with these tests are put at a disadvantage and placed lower in the caste system. While advances have been made towards social equity and teaching diversity within schools, minority students still face many disadvantages and struggle to raise above these caste systems. Schools need to re-think the morals that are being taught and ask, are we promoting social equity and equal opportunity or are we just regurgitating the caste system already in place? Schools need to stray away from promoting things like greed and material status and "promote the concept of one humankind and add the concept of diversity in addressing such democratic essentials as liberty and justice for all."

Dustin: The focus of this article was on the importance of schools teaching students in a democratic manor in order to get rid of the caste systems that have been established within the United Sates. The article started off by talking about one Allison Davis, the first ever professor to be hired by a white University. The article discussed his trials as the first black professor, and his research on how schools create castes by not allowing students to learn about anything other than their own culture. This comment really caught my attention, and even though it’s based on research from half a decade ago, I think it may still apply today in some ways. One of these ways is sports. I came from a upper-middle class suburb, and my high school had all kinds of sports teams, some of which schools for poorer communities may not have including hockey and golf. My school also had a writing club and a politics/point-of-view club. It is limiting to other schools to not have these clubs.

Alex: “Our answer, we know, is education. But education, despite our honoring the concept, is not in itself good” (136). I think that this quote addresses a whole bag of issues. Many of us have heard politicians, friends, family members, celebrities, intellectuals and many more say that the answer to the majority of the world’s social and economic issues lies in education. This is certainly an lovely answer that lies somewhere in the realm of ideal. I can’t disagree with it, but as this quote points out that in order for “education” to be a good thing, it must include some important things. This essay asserts that the primary goal of any educational institution or their “central mission” is “education the young in the democratic ideals of humankind, the freedoms and responsibilities of a democratic society” (135). This, according to the essay, demands that morality be part of education. Specifically, that we teach and model a casteless system—a system of social equality. Unfortunately, there are many fundamental things within the world of education that are contrary to this hope. Testing, for example, stratifies and segregates students. They define those who are worthy and those who are not. The draw the lines of the caste system the truly opposes what democracy is supposed to be about. The educational system, something that exists to instill the goals of democracy, is actually working to do just the opposite. The author asks us to move “beyond social caste” (136) in schools because school is the place where change begins—this is where “the struggle for justice, equity, respect and human diversity” must be strongest.

Luke: I truly believe that the majority of teachers teach social issues and the civil rights movement because they have to, not because they have a passion for it. I see the issues that are often brought up in schools regarding social equality: Hispanic heritage month, African-American month, Toni Morrison, Cesar Chavez. I feel these issues are addressed in a way that isolates the individuals/time periods, and does not adequately refer to these problems in the present. What if teachers equated the black struggle to the Irish, Hispanic, Middle-Eastern, etc. struggle? How about taking the issues of race out of it, and looking at socioeconomic status as a predeterminer for struggle, or maybe the views on family structure? We talk about equality for all, but do we teach the amazing amount of injustices our society has brought about? It is time for a change in this.

Lauren: Goodlad writes in this article, that the central mission of the educational system should be to teach the young “democratic ideals of humankind, the freedoms and responsibilities of a democratic society, and the civil and civic understandings and dispositions necessary to democratic citizenship.” The issue though, he says, is curriculum is driven by test scores, which creates a huge disservice to students. Youth spend 55% of their time outside of school, so we need to pay close attention to what external factors are influencing our students. Goodlad urges us to teach morality in the classroom, since schools are supposed to focus on the “personal and social development of children.” This can’t be a hidden message we have tucked away in our lesson plans; instead, morality needs to be a huge focus of what we teach our students, with an emphasis on one humankind.  Deanna: Nord brings up a long-standing struggle in his article – whether or not religion should be included in school curriculum. Religion is part of people’s culture and if we are going to teach our students about different cultures and the importance of accepting other people’s beliefs and traditions, then why are we not including religions in our curriculum? Not including religion is a form of discrimination - just like not including women and African Americans in history books or in any curriculum for that matter. The knowledge of different religions makes people more well-rounded and that is what we are striving for after all. We want our students to be cultured and knowledgeable about all areas of life, yet we leave out one very important topic from their education. I think that including religion – factual and not persuasive of course – into the curriculum would benefit students and would make them more aware and accepting of people who are different from them.
 * Nord, Warren A. The Relevance of Religion to the Curriculum**

Becca: This essay focuses on teaching religion within schools within the context of material. Nord argues that refraining from teaching religious ties to curriculum within schools is illiberal (fails to produce a well-rounded education), politically unjust, and unconstitutional. When schools fail to teach religion within context, especially in English and Social Studies classrooms, students fail to see the big picture. The reality remains that religion is part of everyday life and references are made to it everyday. Therefore, if students receive little exposure to religion in textbooks or the classroom, then they will be detached from cultural knowledge in society. Warren makes a compelling argument, a very controversial argument, but a compelling one. He also offers solutions to the problem such as having exclusive religion classes (one in which all students must take), and training teachers to teach these classes. Still, I worry about the objectivity of it all. A school can get in a lot of trouble for promoting one religion over the other, and in many cases the teacher might be religious and unconscionably promote his/her religion. This might result in lawsuits and much more controversy. Overall, I agree that schools do their students a disfavor by withholding the religious context to a text, but I wonder if religious ideas can be taught in a non-biased and objective manor. Also, if religious ideas are taught, laws need to be made protecting schools from the uproar that might develop as a result. Just think about it, a man sued a school system for making students say the pledge every morning. And because they had to say "under god" controversy formed. Imagine the issues that will rise is Muslims learn about Christianity and Christians learn about Judaism. Overall, it is not as simple as Nord proposes.

Dustin: The focus of this essay was the idea of including religion into school curriculum. The essay discussed how it is now widely recognized that religion should be in school curriculum, however that the only place in which it typically appears is in history classes. This is a problem because religion has a great impact on other fields as well, including Literature, Philosophy, Science, and - as the article focuses on - Economics. The author discusses how there is only one minute standard for Economics, and how it instead of sharing with students all of the different influences that religions have on economics, the standards are to teach one theory. This is obviously a problem, as schools should do everything they can in order to provide students with different perspectives on the subjects that are being taught. Only teaching one theory and not even mentioning the fact that there are other theories is a real disservice to students. Not only does it not allow for a democratic learning environment, but it may cause a student to have no interest in something that he or she may have had an interest in. I can say from personal experience that even though Economics was among my least favorite classes in high school, I probably would have enjoyed it considerably more had other theories been taught to me. The fact that this is kept out because of the many influences by religion is absolutely ridiculous.

Alex: In this article Nord focuses on the role of religion in a liberal education. Certainly, there have been many controversies surrounding any talk of religion on the public sphere of education. The separating of Church and State is commonly referenced as a constitutional reason to keep religion out of public education. What Nord suggests, however, is not that religion be taught to students in a religious indoctrinational kind of way, but rather, as a major part of human culture. It is absurd to me to that religion is so avoided as a component of many different areas of study. How can something so culturally present not shape the things students are required to study—history, literature, economics, sciences etc. Religion, regardless of what one believes, is an irremovable part of the world we live in. To leave it out of out studies is no only absurd, it’s, according to Nord, “profoundly illiberal, politically unjust and unconstitutional”. I appreciate Nord’s comments on a liberal education and what it means to think critically about the world we live in. The author also raises the point that the Constitution requires public schools to remain neutral on the topic of religion. This means remaining neutral among religions and neutral between religion and non-religion. They cannot favor religion over non-religion and the opposite is also true. This blatant ignoring of the religious components of study is, according to Nord, a violation of the Constitution. His logic makes sense. Not only does this cutting out of religion water down everything students learn, it also causes many families to feel unwelcome in public education. In order for public schools to provide welcoming environments for all people and sound liberal educations religion must be brought back in. The key is to take everyone seriously. That is the only neutral stance.

Luke:

From an English Literature standpoint, teaching religion is necessary for the understanding of the material. The majority of the work we teach is so baptized in religion that it would be impossible to ignore it. The English and American poets wrestle with God often, and will frequently allude to Biblical stories. Shakespeare's criticism of the church and his anger at its views on sexuality is often his underlying theme. Oftentimes the minority voices we read in class struggle to match their religion with the surrounding culture's religion. I think that the reason religion is often left alone is because of a fear of offending, but as the text says, it is a disservice.

Lauren: Religion needs to be kept out of schools—no ifs, ands, or buts. This was my stance before having read this article, and now I’ve changed my mind… I think. Religion, I believe, should be taught in a way of helping students to think critically and understand reasons why policies were formed and events occurred. In order to give a liberal education as Nord suggests, we need to give students the opportunity to evaluate ideas (even when they were formed by religious beliefs). I completely disagree with Nord’s points that leaving religion out of schools is unjust and unconstitutional. He claims religious parents are being ignored and their “ways of thinking aren’t taken seriously.” How is it even possible to incorporate all faiths into a curriculum based on what parents want their kids to learn? In order to help students think critically about religions, perhaps we should teach them basics of each religion when they have reached a certain age (?). I do like the idea of having religion courses to teach the differences/similarities between each and their impacts on our society and the world.

**Hirsch, E.D. Jr. The Core Knowledge Curriculum – What’s Behind Its Success?** Deanna: In this article, Hirsch writes about The Core Knowledge Curriculum, why it should be used by schools, and why it is successful. It is true that in some schools, curriculum development is limited and unbeneficial to students. It is also true that teachers teaching the same grade and the same school may be teaching different things and focusing on different parts of the curriculum more than others. The part about the mother of the identical twins complaining to the principal because her daughters, in different classes, were learning different things was an example of this. Furthermore, the principal sometimes cannot even articulate or detail what the students in his or her building are learning. I believe that curriculums should be similar across the board so that all students, no matter their race, gender, poverty level, etc., are all learning the same important things. Making sure that students have the same knowledge base will aide them in the future, make the “playing field fairer and allow everyone the opportunity to succeed.

Becca: In this essay, Hirsch discusses the need for a common curriculum a fundamental basic knowledge. He argues that in order to think critically and truly understand and make sense of material, students need a great deal of prior knowledge. He goes on to say that schools need to have specific standards in which the benchmarks are clearly outlined for each grade. This way students are exposed to crucial material that helps them understand readings and references at a higher level. Overall, teachers need to help students establish core knowledge before they expect them the think critically. With this knowledge, students can draw on other information to question ideas or make connections between ideas. Hirsch makes a very compelling point about the need to instill this basic knowledge in the mind of students. I agree that in order to ask students to think critically about material they need to fully understanding it. And, in order to understand the material they must draw from prior knowledge. As for a common curriculum that teaches the same material, there is both good and bad to that. For one, by teaching the same material, teachers know what information students were exposed to in the past. On the other hand, how do schools determine what information remains more significant and worthy than other information. In general, Hirsch proposes several interesting arguments worth analysis and thought. Dustin: This article focused on how the Core Knowledge guidelines have helped improve schools - particularly Mohegan School in the South Bronx. The author discusses that Core Knowledge works because it takes into account how students learn, namely the fact that students can only learn so much because the learning process is a process. It also outlines that standards need to be clearly defined for teachers. The author also discusses that learning deficits are cumulative, and that if they aren't tackled early on they will just continue to add up. Overall, I can see how a clearly defined curriculum such as Core Knowledge may be helpful, but I don't feel as if Core Knowledge is too different from other standard curriculum - instead I feel as if it's more the motivated staff that helps. And it may be that the curriculum is motivating the staff to do a better job.

Alex: This essay obviously focuses on the successful results schools have attained having used the Core Knowledge Curriculum. One particular school addressed in the essay is Mohegan School, an elementary school located in the South Bronx. This particular curriculum is described as more specific in nature, covering fewer “essential” topics specific to grade-levels, and as allowing students to engage more deeply with the material, developing higher-order, critical thinking skills. These essential topics make the up “core knowledge” that the writers of the curriculum have identified. I certainly agree with the fact that current curricula include far too many topics and that students, as a result, are only able to gain a surface level of knowledge, if that. This strategy fights that by allowing students to spend more time on a fewer number of topics. I also like the fact that the guidelines are far more specific and consistent across grade-levels. The point the author makes about knowledge being cumulative, I think, is an essential one. One of the major problems in education today is that many students are passed on to higher grades without the knowledge they are supposed to have. This specified curriculum is supposed to make sure students have a deeper understanding from which they can build as the move on to higher levels. Overall, I like most of the ideas presented here, but I also feel like it could be terribly restrictive.

Lauren: In this article, Hirsch focuses on school success when using the Core Knowledge Curriculum. It’s obvious our current benchmarks/standards are too overwhelming to teach. There are too many benchmarks to achieve, and many of them are quite broad and confusing. I like the strategy to cover fewer standards that will allow students to gain a deeper understanding of the material. Teaching students too many things only allows us to scratch the surface of a topic, so when we take more time with fewer standards, we can help students think critically and engage with the curriculum. I am seeing the need for core knowledge in my classes now, as my students are below reading levels and have a hard time making connections.

**Noddings, Nel. Teaching Themes of Care.**

Deanna: Noddings brings up an important topic overlooked in many schools today – especially secondary schools. Developing students into caring and competent people should be a major goal for educators. This ties in nicely with the previous articles we’ve read about teaching our students how to be quality citizens and teaching them important morals and values. By teaching our students about meaningful events in the past and about human compassion, we can model this important quality that we want our students to develop. Also, we as educators need to model how to be a caring and competent person so that our students follow our example. “Teachers can be very special people in the lives of children, and it should be legitimate for them to spend time developing relations of trust, talking with students about problems that are central to their lives, and guiding them toward greater sensitivity and competence across all the domains of care.” I love this line and think that it is entirely true and in order to do this we must know our students and genuinely care about them.

Alex:

“Caring is not just a warm, fuzzy feeling that makes people kind and likable. Caring implies a continuous search for competence. When we care we want to do the very best for the objects of our care” (149).

This statement, I feel, gets at the heart of what this essay proposes. As educators we must teach themes of care. The author claims that these themes address “the core of human existence” (148) and that they “connect students to great existential questions. What is the meaning of life? Are there gods? How should I live?” (149). These questions are truly at the core of what human life is, and what are we to teach about if not the essence of the human existence? This beginning quote is important because it address not only that we //should// care and teach care to our students, but //what// care actually is. The type of caring this essay proposes that “humans [should] be helped to lead lives of deep concern for others, for the natural world and its creatures, and for the preservation of the human-made world” (149). If this isn’t important I don’t know what is.

The essay the goes on to talk about creating lessons based around a broader theme from an interdisciplinary standpoint—including teacher’s from different content-areas, each adding their expertise to this greater human topic. The essay gives the example of a college course themed around “The Search for Meaning” that was taught by three professors: a university chaplain, a psychiatrist and an economist. This team of experts helps to create rich, intellectual material for students to engage in. Not only will they learn about economics, psychology and religion, but also how these things relate to the greater questions in life. Students often ask, “What is the point of this? When will I ever use this?” These questions are legitimate, and much easier to answer when teaching is done around themes of care.

Luke:

Finally, someone who believes that education is not just about teaching facts and ideas, but it is about forming young minds into good people. I use good intentionally, not as most schools would regard their students as good, hardworking, excellent test-taking kids, but as individuals that will make society a better place. But what is a better place? I know that there is much debate over social justice right now, and whether it is the responsibility of the state or the individual. I think that by instilling the compassion and care that this article recommends, the debate becomes a moot point. If schools, families, and society as a whole were to instill a system of caring for one another, there would be no need to have government intervention as everyday people would volunteer to look after those in need.

Becca: This article discusses ways to teach the characteristic of caring in the classroom. Through establishing interdisciplinary units and integrating morality and character development into a given curriculum, schools not only teach content but also promote citizenship. The article also discusses possible problems that may arise from the teaching of controversial issues such as theft and immigration. Overall, this article holds value and presents a very compelling argument. As teachers, is it our job to simply teach students content and facts, or do we have the bigger responsibility of teaching our students character and morality? I fully believe that education must go beyond textbook information and into self exploration and character. We are teachers because we care about all aspects of a student's education and want our students to grow into successful and caring individuals. Sadly, for many students, school remains the only place where they felt cared about. It also is the only place where they are taught how to be a compassionate and successful member of society. It just blows my mind that nation wide legislation fails to address character education and instead everything is content based and factual. Teachers who don't care and never teach their students to care are doing kids a major disadvantage. To me that is a failing school.

Lauren How refreshing to read about teachers who want to teach their students how to care! I agree with this article that being a teacher is more than reading from a book and grading papers. We all (I hope) are becoming teachers to help mold young people and create caring, informed citizens of our society. I remember more from my class on team-building and character development in high school than any other class, and the things I learned there have stayed with me. Integrating morality and character into a curriculum is essential…it can’t just be something a teacher feels they want to inject every now and again if it’s convenient. It should be mandated and cherished.

Dustin: This article was far and away m favorite from the readings this week: it was about incorporating the concept of care into curriculum. While the author - Nel Noddings - realizes that it is far too idealistic to expect the curriculum to change to be care-based, the author argues that there are many good reasons to incorporate different ideas of caring into the current curriculum. Noddings says that teaching caring in the classroom can help students relate to one-another, help students explore existential questions, introduce students to knowledge they wouldn't learn otherwise, and connect students to subject standards. I believe these are all great points, and that they tie into some of the previous articles that we have read about making a curriculum that motivates students to achieve. If a teacher elects to teach why people care about grammar (so that one can write a professional document, so that one can properly convey and interpret meaning in the English language, so that writers can write) or literature (because // Langston Hughes’s short story “Thank You M’am” teaches us to help people in all situations) students are much more likely to connect to the subject that is being taught. //