task one comments

A few thoughts about what I read. I agree with Wiggins in that it really is futile to try to teach everything of importance. In my mind, there really isn't such a thing because what is important will be different for every person depending upon their path of life, especially as an adult. Since the majority of our school education is before we are actually adults, its impossible to know at the time what is important for each person. Had I even had an inkling that I would become a teacher, I believe I might have viewed more of my education as important since I would be required to teach it to others. As a student, even I didn't really know what was important since I didn't know what I'd become and have to use. I still remember my geometry teacher trying to tell us the importance of learning geometry for our careers but that went by the wayside for me because I was still unclear on what I was to do with my life. Although I judge Applebee's article as complex and difficult to follow, I got the gist that instead of learning facts or bits of information, we need to engage students in inquiry and discussion to make them ready to participate in conversations (a.k.a. life) with others of the same culture.
I related best with Wraga's Connected Curriculum. When I was in undergrad, the emphasis was on an integrated curriculum. If the theme was spiders, all subjects were to revolve around spiders in some way. Perhaps that is why it makes so much sense to me but for me, it solves another problem--time to teach all the content. I'm required to teach Kentucky Core Content and the standards are numerous. Teaching each subject in isolation would be impossible, just as Wiggins said. I'm currently teaching life science, in particular, how animals change and grow in science and I'm excited by the fact that their reading theme is Nature Detective and the stories are all about plants and animals. Through their reading content, they'll also learn more about animals than I could possibly teach them in science. But I also agree that we can't just teach facts. The facts are important but they aren't the end result. Facts should lead towards questions that we can teach our students how to find the answers.
Since it is impossible to teach everything, I do believe that it is important for experts in the fields to clue teachers, parents, and students in to what would be most beneficial for us to know for life experiences so there is a need for curriculum standards. Teachers can then determine what materials and strategies will help their students meet those standards.
I guess I don't really buy into the idea that we once again need a new approach to curriculum because it seems that the only real trend in education is change. We never seem to stick long enough with anything to see if it is effective. Maybe the most effective one is the one we stick with! I've only been out of school for 15 years and I've already been through cycles of phonics vs. whole language, integrated and not, basals vs. trade books. Although I see value in research, it often seems as if even the research is contradictory or "depends on the circumstance." I'm not saying that we shouldn't keep trying to improve whether it is curriculum or methods. It just seems that oftentimes we move on to the next best thing before we've really given the first a shot.