Conversation as curriculum

In my last blog post Content as curriculum? I lamented the current state of formal education and pointed to linear, content laden and outmoded curricula as a contributing factor. The post provoked a number of comments, some supportive, some antagonistic to my position, and one who perhaps played the man rather than the ball. Both sides fought their corners well, each arguing from a stance on the fundamental nature of teaching and learning, and the specific role that school plays in education. Some comments pointed out that resources, teacher styles, assessment methods and time were important factors in determining the relevance and efficacy of curricula in schools. But (and here I will continue to be provocative) I feel that some are missing the point completely. The point I am making is that content based delivery of the curriculum, and its traditional compartmentalisation of subjects constrain the understanding of students, and fail to prepare them for a dynamic world of work and life that is constantly changing. Today we have a vast array of technology at our fingertips, and - although I admit this is seldom enough to make informed decisions and knowledgeable actions on its own - combined with the appropriate skills and literacies, individuals will have the ability to apply creative solutions to problems they may encounter on a daily basis. My approach to any reformation of school curriculum would be to bias it toward procedural (knowing how) knowledge that can be applied in pragmatic ways to constantly changing conditions.

In his 1996 book Curriculum as Conversation, Arthur Applebee argued that much of the school curriculum of the time was based upon 'false premises and reflect a fundamental misconception of the nature of knowing. They strip knowledge of the contexts that give it meaning and vitality, and lead to an education that stresses knowledge-out-of-context rather than knowledge-in-action. In such a system students are taught about the traditions of the past, and not how to enter into and participate in those of the present and the future.' (p. 3) It is clear that in the 15 years since the book was published, little has changed. I have asked this question before, but I will ask it again. Are we preparing students for the past, or for the future?

In order to prepare students for the future, we need to understand that contexts are changing rapidly but much curriculum content does not, and can thus quickly become obsolete. We can therefore no longer afford to rely solely on content, and need to present more situated learning opportunities. Situated approaches to learning involve an emphasis on context, not just on content, and the best way to experience appropriate contexts is to do it for real. Carl Young (2004) relates the story of a language teacher who used pure conversation as the basis for all her teaching. Although this sounds like a no-brainer - an obvious method for language, which has conversation at its heart - it is actually quite profound. I believe similar dialogic approaches can and should be applied to the teaching of all subjects across the curriculum. My former colleague Alan Bleakley (2009) takes this a step further, arguing that much of education is sadly still based on power differentials between teacher and student, and calls for a more horizontal, democratised form of education where students have equal say in the process. Bleakley echoes the earlier work of Paulo Freire (1970) who pointed out that: "Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students." Bleakley goes on to elaborate that 'democracy in education requires interplay between the individual and the collective through authentic dialogue - as the reconstructionists suggest, constructing curriculum as an extended and complicated conversation.' (p. 300). To achieve this requires teachers to assume a role as learners, while students are allowed to become teachers, to facilitate the free and open dialogue that will constitute conversation as curriculum. Freire again: "Authentic thinking, thinking that is concerned about reality, does not take place in ivory tower isolation, but only in communication. If it is true that thought has meaning only when generated by action upon the world, the subordination of students to teachers becomes impossible."

It seems clear to me that to encourage open and frank dialogue in a formal learning environment, the power differential between teacher and student must be removed. When teachers wish to promote democratic learning, students are given license to challenge and encouraged to discuss, debate, argue. Passive consumption of delivered knowledge is replaced by full engagement with the subject matter through conversation. The conversation around the topic becomes the new curriculum, enabling each student to act as an open minded, independent thinker who can defend his or her position without resorting to dogmatic assertions based on partial understanding or incomplete knowledge. The best teachers encourage all students to participate and value all contributions, incorporating as many as possible into an extended conversation around the topic.

In the digital age, conversation as curriculum can be extended beyond the classroom through the use of social media and other communication technologies. Conversation for learning across a number of platforms suggests that two or more discussions can occur simultaneously. It may be impossible to change the curriculum we are tasked to deliver. However, teachers who appreciate the merits of conversation in a truly Socratic mode will redesign lessons to incorporate learning activities to reflect it.

References

Applebee, A. N. (1996) Curriculum as conversation: Transforming traditions of teaching and learning. London: University of Chicago Press.
Bleakley, A. (2009) Editorial: Curriculum as conversation. Advances in Health Science Education, 14 (3), 297-301.
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed London: Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative
Young, C. A. (2004) Conversation as curriculum: Learning to teach English in rural America. The English Journal, 93 (6), 82.

Image by Simon Phipps


Content as curriculum? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.