Before reading about how curriculum was formed, I assumed it was a combination of efforts from the government, ministry of education, and specialists from different areas of expertise that came together to form curriculum in a manner which related to the context of our lives in Saskatchewan. After going through the reading I quickly discovered this is only a part of what actually happens.
To begin there are many forms of politics which take place during the curriculum making process. Which party is in power of the government matters, as they have certain ideas that set them apart from the opposing parties. These particular beliefs now have the potential to make their way into the curriculum. Furthermore I was amazed to realize that textbook manufacturers also have a form of leverage to use when new curriculums are being constructed. I never took into account how economics could play into curriculum. A large amount of money is produced by these companies and this has influence on the creators. They either have to pay to create a brand new book or form their ideas around an already produced book. In economics there are also investments from large companies into different groups that have the power over curriculum. Who is to say a company might not donate money if certain things aren’t put into the curriculum? This is a reality of the world we live in.
Continuing on there are a number of schools in the province that have an association to religion or faith. Their beliefs also come into consultation when developing curriculum. In the charter of rights and freedoms there is protection over religious beliefs. People from those religious groups may find changes, like the sex education debacle we saw in Ontario, as a violation of that right. Canada has a history of Christian values, besides that are the other religions and minorities groups which also make up Canada. Trying to appease all these groups with curriculum that complies with all their beliefs is near impossible. There will always be complaints about what is and what is not put in place. There are too many differences in our society for everyone to come to a consensus.
What troubles me the most about the formation of curriculum is how those who are affected the most, the students, have little say in what actually goes on. It is made by people who experienced the school system decades ago. The world has changed and what needs to be taught is also ever changing.
It is a big ask for curriculum to be updated yearly, but if it is updated yearly it would be small changes annually, compared to a whole revamping of a curriculum that is near twenty years old, like the social studies curriculum in Saskatchewan. Curriculum seems to be produced behind closed doors without discussion with the public. One could argue a general public poll on what they want might not be the best thing because of biases. There doesn’t seem to be a clear cut way of doing things. I would love to learn more about the process. Looking forward to the curriculum based assignment.
greghetterley 
This week’s topic has illuminated us on flaws of our public policy in reference to Education. When the curriculum can be influenced by large publishers pushing textbook sales– a massive capitalist enterprise. This can be both very good for the many and very bad for the few. What’s good about this is that we get a textbook series throughout our primary and secondary education. We had the”Math Makes Sense” series by Pearson Canada from Grade 7 through 12. Since the series stayed the same each year, the transition was fluid, and we did not have to learn the new format of a textbook each year. Basically, if “Math Makes Sense” makes sense, things are easy; when math doesn’t make sense, things are difficult.
Before I bash a publisher, I’ll say that have not done any investigation into these textbooks, and I am merely speculating.
By following one line of textbooks, we are possibly only getting one perspective the curriculum content. A school division could be promoting whiteness by using a textbook lacking authentic multiculturalism. I say ‘authentic’ because we have all seen how the textbook will be sure to include names and pictures of multiple ethnicities, so they don’t come off as white. As it would appear, they promote multiculturalism directly, but indirectly the content is still pretty pale.
Another point of interest is from our neighbours to the south the how public opinion and politicians can sway the curriculum out of the experts’ influence: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/06/climate/idaho-schools-climate-change.html
Idaho seems to question the legitimacy of climate change and whether it should be in the curriculum or not…
LikeLike