Reflection:
My Curriculum Leadership Platform was created early in my journey through my graduate work in my Foundations of Curriculum and Instruction course with Dr. Vonzell Agosto at the University of South Florida. The ideas that I take into practice are that of Social Reconstruction. This course and namely this project enabled me to put a tangible concept to some beliefs that I held. Sometimes, one knows that they have strongly held beliefs, but they do not always know how to articulate those beliefs or how to package those beliefs into a rational proclamation. My heart and passion reside in working in "Turn-Around" schools or in schools that serve the needs of low socioeconomic areas. I have always held onto the fundamental belief that relationships and understanding are key to moving students toward higher levels of achievement. I believe that students don't learn from people they don't like and they certainly don't learn from people that "don't like them."
My Curriculum Leadership Platform looks at Social Reconstruction. The following excerpt from my paper outlines the foundation of the ideaology of the Social Reconstructionist.
Excerpt from my paper:
W. C. Bagley, in the Education Process, points out that many parents send their children to school because “…they have a desire for the advancement of their children and overall improvement in the quality of life for their children.” (Bagley, 1905) It is my purpose to respond to the needs of these parents and the learners. I take a Social Reconstruction Ideology when analyzing the struggles of all at-risk schools. Schiro outlines the Social Reconstructionist ideologies as a means to identify inequities among gender, race and socio-economic status. He also proceeds to express that this ideologist would approach decisions from the perspective of maximizing benefit and satisfaction to all learners. Social reconstructionists also view education as the pathway in which change should occur. (Schiro, 2008)
Often times, the culture of an at-risk or a failing school is one whereby the most fragile learners are coupled with the least skilled individuals. This dynamic needs to change. Many times this pairing is a result of any number of things. These schools are nestled in high poverty areas, the children’s needs are not easily met and the mobility rates among students as well as teachers are high. As I began inquiry discussions with teachers, it became apparent that many young teachers use struggling schools as a springboard to another position in the district where the job won’t be so “difficult.” We are doing a disservice to these learners by giving them a substandard educational experience. It is unhealthy to the learners, the families and on a larger scale, the community. We are perpetuating a cycle of ignorance and poverty by not intercepting and changing their educational experience. I believe an element of academic malpractice is surfacing due to this toxic pairing.
So ...what do I believe? We have to value and understand the unique skills and assets that students that come from homes of poverty have. Teachers have to recognize that the knowledge they are tapping into does not reside within the framework of a basal or a textbook, but rather in the life experiences of the learners they are teaching. Children that come from homes of poverty may bring an innate skill set and real world application and the ability to problem solve that may be different than their financially provileged counterparts. They may also bring unique family values into the classroom that are likely to enhance the culture and community of the school if properly appreciated and channeled.
The heart of this work is to get children to realize their potential, to see the value they bring to this world and to provide them with opportunities to explore their own dreams. Children should know they have the ability change this world. This work begins with understanding, collaboration, and relationship building.
