Yes- two fish comparisons in one week. This week, since Doll brought up the Metaphor and Narrative Mode, I thought I would try my own metaphor to “help us see what we don’t see” and see if this open, dialogue-engendering method helps me live or experience the curriculum theory to a higher degree (Doll, 1993,p. 169).
I believe it was Confucious who stated “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” This would seem simple then. Just teach a man to fish and his family eats - no problem there. Except that it goes deeper than a simple skill. Whenever it comes to learning, there are various curriculum theories with endless questions. Do we want the fisherman to catch salmon or trout or bass? Do we want them to use technology like fish-finders and fancy boats? Should they fish on their own or should it be a collaborative process in which they ‘discover’ fish together with some buddies? What about the infrastructure concerns? Does the government let you fish in this particular body of water at this particular time of year with this particular lure? Can you even afford the fishing license? Is catching fish even ethical? Above all, do we really need to fish? Who says that there aren’t better protein food sources out there? What do the fish think?
I realize that any fishermen reading this metaphor would like to gaff or drown me for just turning fishing into an undesirable and stressful endeavour. I apologize as perhaps many things in life don’t need to be broken down using a systemic cluster matrix. So why does curriculum need to be analysed in such detail? How do I know if a certain theory is right for me? So in true curriculum theorizing fashion, I am going to dive in and break down each aspect of education and how it relates to fishing to help explain the entire process.
Catching a fish is like achieving your goals in education. You set out with a purpose, objective or outcome and hope that you can achieve it. (Obviously, the word hope does not exist in the vocabulary of most involved in the education process. No teacher, parent or administrator hopes that the kids will learn. This isn’t Vegas. Chance has no place in education.) If you catch a fish or if you learn something, you succeed. In fishing, you can set the goals. You can choose whether you are going to catch your limit of fish or hope for a single fish or merely enjoy the breathtaking views as you drift on a tranquil mountain lake. Either way, there is a goal that you set out to do. Establishing your objectives in education are the same. Eisner describes objectives as, “the specific goals that one hopes to achieve through the educational program that is provided” and should be in performance terms (1985, p.109). For example, the fishermen will catch a fish. It is easy to measure and doesn’t have any interpretation problems. Notice I didn’t write that the fishermen will appreciate the art of fishing as that would be hard to assess meeting that objective.
Let us begin our fishing trip with the fisherman as it is at the centre of the entire process. In the education process, this would be the student as without them, there is little use for boats and road and hooks. The student is immersed in the process as reading about fishing in a book is merely transmission based. Fishing is a true transaction piece where the student needs to be capable of intelligent problem-solving and reconstructing knowledge in a stimulating intellectual environment (Miller & Seller, 1990, p. 6-7). Fishing is best experienced by the student.
Of course, very few fish are caught without supplies. Our body is not equipped (or fast enough) to catch fish with our bare hands so we require considerable funding. This is comparable to the government, ministry, district, or school influences on the educational process. Some schools are funded to the point where they have one-to-one laptops, endless resources, adequate staffing, etc. that aid the student in meeting their goals. Does a spacious boat with a smooth, quiet motor, extra fishing rods and top of the line gear mean a more prosperous fishing trip? Not necessarily but I don’t think I need to get into a comparison between the rich and poor schools to show you that it doesn’t hurt. Even the governments choice as to where and when you can fish and with what supplies can be compared to their own choices of where students go to school and when it is in session. They dictate the hours of instruction just like how you can’t fish from dusk until dawn. So why does the government have the say in what gets caught? Same reason that they control the schooling, they are looking out for society’s best interest. Overfishing would have disastrous effects on local economies just like having a weak educational system could. We as citizens rely on the government to make the sensible, intelligent, holistic and right choice when it comes to managing our children and our fish. Of course, as I write that I am reminded of some fish humour that contradicts that statement. What did the fish say when it swam into a wall? Dam!
Curriculum varies so much that I believe it is like guiding the hook to the right place in the water to find a fish. Everybody has their secret fishing spot that they go to time and time again because they once had success there. Goodson points out that there is a wide variety of curriculum theories and that no one is considered the ultimate or ideal. It is a personal thing.
Furthermore, he states that, “the link between theory and policy is seldom perfect or direct,” so even if we are fishing in the perfect spot it doesn’t mean we will catch anything (Goodson, 1994, p. 26). There can be hypotheses as to what will work but the intended consequence isn’t always met.
Everyone also has their favourite depth. I always troll at distinct depths like 23 feet, 32, 44, etc. as I don’t think that fish congregate at set depths. We are all entitled to our opinion though, even unsuccessful fishermen. Wirth, who argues that schooling follows a technocratic ideology or systems analysis techniques, states that there is an intention to conceive a science of education analogous to the science of mechanical production (Goodson, 1994, p. 27). Following his model, there must be some sort of formula to calculate the relation between salmonid swimming speed, underwater currents, H20 temperatures, and recessive genes in the fish species based on the parents mating grounds. Can we really apply this Taylorismesque mentality to something as varied as human subjects? Students are so dynamic and individualistic that we cannot simplify everything. In fishing, there is no set depth that fish swim at and there certainly isn’t a set speed. Maybe this is why there are fishermen who get skunked and why educational reform will never die.
Even when you are at the right speed, depth and location and the hook is right in front of the fish’s mouth, it may not bite. WHAT! Like fishing, you can have everything set up perfectly and the student doesn’t learn. Was it not engaging enough? Was their prior knowledge not scaffolded properly? Was it a full moon for fish or Halloween day for children (or even worse – the day after) that somehow blocked the learning? In several readings, I have repeatedly found the tendency to omit the importance of the learner in the process. The behavioural aspect of learning needs to be considered and we should recognize that even when everything is in order, learning may not take place.
One aspect of the process that can’t be overlooked is the fishermen’s friend. No I am not talking about the throat lozenge but rather the role of the teacher in the whole process. The fishermen who just read a book and self-teach themselves can expect to run into some problems. Fishing is more apprentice and master based and I can say that my apprentice was my father and I couldn’t have learned what I did without him. A great friend in the boat will assist the fishermen and not take over. “As teachers we cannot, do not, transmit information directly rather, we perform the teaching act when we help others negotiate passages between their constructs and ours, between ours and others” (Doll, 1993, p.180). For this I believe, a student has not learned until they have experienced the rush of catching a fish. The teacher is the guide on the side which by no coincidence is similar to the fishing guide. Leading the student to the fishing spot and providing feedback on lure choice and how to cast or reel in. The teacher should not be overlooked in the process and has a considerable impact on the learning that takes place.
What fishing trip is complete without assessment or evaluation? Is there a test? No and yes. If you don’t catch anything, you have failed (but you had a beautiful ride in a boat). Every fisherman knows that they will be assessed on the quality or quantity of their fishing trip. How many fish? How big were the fish? Two important questions that often lead to less than truthful answers, I know. One time I caught this massive fish that fought like crazy and pulled my boat around but it got away. But the size of the fish is the motivation for every student. The quest for the big one. Luckily, we can measure a fish whereas measuring learning or curriculum theories is more difficult. There may not be a right way. Everyone has their theory and it is just that – theirs. Can we measure that? We do measure learning and I will direct you to my other post on the blog that deals with the idea. I will mention that there is a distinct ranking amongst fishermen and many will exaggerate the size of their catch to move up those rankings.
In conclusion, I am reminded of another quote that says, “a bad day fishing is still better than a good day at school.” Or something like that although to me it is wrong. A bad day fishing equals not meeting your goals or objectives and to me this is not acceptable. In education, failure can’t be an option. This is why we strive so hard to change and improve our curriculum. Theorist after theorist have studied the process and attempted to find any problems and then correct them just like every fisherman reflects on his day and aims to do better next time. In both cases, mastering the process is virtually impossible due to the individualistic nature of the beast. We cannot predict the multitude of variables in either case but at the end of the day, we must focus on the success of the learner throughout the process and just enjoy the fish for dinner.
oicture courtesy of: http://www.bigfishtackle.com/photos/data/509/2-97.jpg
References:
Doll, William E. Jr. (1993). A Post-Modern Perspective on Curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
Eisner, Elliot W. (1985). The Educational Imagination on the Design and Evaluation of School Programs. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Goodson, Ivor F. (1994). Studying Curriculum: Cases and Methods. Toronto: OISE.
Miller, J.P. & Seller, W. (1990). Curriculum: Perspectives & Practice. Toronto : Copp Clark Pitman.
I believe it was Confucious who stated “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” This would seem simple then. Just teach a man to fish and his family eats - no problem there. Except that it goes deeper than a simple skill. Whenever it comes to learning, there are various curriculum theories with endless questions. Do we want the fisherman to catch salmon or trout or bass? Do we want them to use technology like fish-finders and fancy boats? Should they fish on their own or should it be a collaborative process in which they ‘discover’ fish together with some buddies? What about the infrastructure concerns? Does the government let you fish in this particular body of water at this particular time of year with this particular lure? Can you even afford the fishing license? Is catching fish even ethical? Above all, do we really need to fish? Who says that there aren’t better protein food sources out there? What do the fish think?
I realize that any fishermen reading this metaphor would like to gaff or drown me for just turning fishing into an undesirable and stressful endeavour. I apologize as perhaps many things in life don’t need to be broken down using a systemic cluster matrix. So why does curriculum need to be analysed in such detail? How do I know if a certain theory is right for me? So in true curriculum theorizing fashion, I am going to dive in and break down each aspect of education and how it relates to fishing to help explain the entire process.
Catching a fish is like achieving your goals in education. You set out with a purpose, objective or outcome and hope that you can achieve it. (Obviously, the word hope does not exist in the vocabulary of most involved in the education process. No teacher, parent or administrator hopes that the kids will learn. This isn’t Vegas. Chance has no place in education.) If you catch a fish or if you learn something, you succeed. In fishing, you can set the goals. You can choose whether you are going to catch your limit of fish or hope for a single fish or merely enjoy the breathtaking views as you drift on a tranquil mountain lake. Either way, there is a goal that you set out to do. Establishing your objectives in education are the same. Eisner describes objectives as, “the specific goals that one hopes to achieve through the educational program that is provided” and should be in performance terms (1985, p.109). For example, the fishermen will catch a fish. It is easy to measure and doesn’t have any interpretation problems. Notice I didn’t write that the fishermen will appreciate the art of fishing as that would be hard to assess meeting that objective.
Let us begin our fishing trip with the fisherman as it is at the centre of the entire process. In the education process, this would be the student as without them, there is little use for boats and road and hooks. The student is immersed in the process as reading about fishing in a book is merely transmission based. Fishing is a true transaction piece where the student needs to be capable of intelligent problem-solving and reconstructing knowledge in a stimulating intellectual environment (Miller & Seller, 1990, p. 6-7). Fishing is best experienced by the student.
Of course, very few fish are caught without supplies. Our body is not equipped (or fast enough) to catch fish with our bare hands so we require considerable funding. This is comparable to the government, ministry, district, or school influences on the educational process. Some schools are funded to the point where they have one-to-one laptops, endless resources, adequate staffing, etc. that aid the student in meeting their goals. Does a spacious boat with a smooth, quiet motor, extra fishing rods and top of the line gear mean a more prosperous fishing trip? Not necessarily but I don’t think I need to get into a comparison between the rich and poor schools to show you that it doesn’t hurt. Even the governments choice as to where and when you can fish and with what supplies can be compared to their own choices of where students go to school and when it is in session. They dictate the hours of instruction just like how you can’t fish from dusk until dawn. So why does the government have the say in what gets caught? Same reason that they control the schooling, they are looking out for society’s best interest. Overfishing would have disastrous effects on local economies just like having a weak educational system could. We as citizens rely on the government to make the sensible, intelligent, holistic and right choice when it comes to managing our children and our fish. Of course, as I write that I am reminded of some fish humour that contradicts that statement. What did the fish say when it swam into a wall? Dam!
Curriculum varies so much that I believe it is like guiding the hook to the right place in the water to find a fish. Everybody has their secret fishing spot that they go to time and time again because they once had success there. Goodson points out that there is a wide variety of curriculum theories and that no one is considered the ultimate or ideal. It is a personal thing.
Furthermore, he states that, “the link between theory and policy is seldom perfect or direct,” so even if we are fishing in the perfect spot it doesn’t mean we will catch anything (Goodson, 1994, p. 26). There can be hypotheses as to what will work but the intended consequence isn’t always met.
Everyone also has their favourite depth. I always troll at distinct depths like 23 feet, 32, 44, etc. as I don’t think that fish congregate at set depths. We are all entitled to our opinion though, even unsuccessful fishermen. Wirth, who argues that schooling follows a technocratic ideology or systems analysis techniques, states that there is an intention to conceive a science of education analogous to the science of mechanical production (Goodson, 1994, p. 27). Following his model, there must be some sort of formula to calculate the relation between salmonid swimming speed, underwater currents, H20 temperatures, and recessive genes in the fish species based on the parents mating grounds. Can we really apply this Taylorismesque mentality to something as varied as human subjects? Students are so dynamic and individualistic that we cannot simplify everything. In fishing, there is no set depth that fish swim at and there certainly isn’t a set speed. Maybe this is why there are fishermen who get skunked and why educational reform will never die.
Even when you are at the right speed, depth and location and the hook is right in front of the fish’s mouth, it may not bite. WHAT! Like fishing, you can have everything set up perfectly and the student doesn’t learn. Was it not engaging enough? Was their prior knowledge not scaffolded properly? Was it a full moon for fish or Halloween day for children (or even worse – the day after) that somehow blocked the learning? In several readings, I have repeatedly found the tendency to omit the importance of the learner in the process. The behavioural aspect of learning needs to be considered and we should recognize that even when everything is in order, learning may not take place.
One aspect of the process that can’t be overlooked is the fishermen’s friend. No I am not talking about the throat lozenge but rather the role of the teacher in the whole process. The fishermen who just read a book and self-teach themselves can expect to run into some problems. Fishing is more apprentice and master based and I can say that my apprentice was my father and I couldn’t have learned what I did without him. A great friend in the boat will assist the fishermen and not take over. “As teachers we cannot, do not, transmit information directly rather, we perform the teaching act when we help others negotiate passages between their constructs and ours, between ours and others” (Doll, 1993, p.180). For this I believe, a student has not learned until they have experienced the rush of catching a fish. The teacher is the guide on the side which by no coincidence is similar to the fishing guide. Leading the student to the fishing spot and providing feedback on lure choice and how to cast or reel in. The teacher should not be overlooked in the process and has a considerable impact on the learning that takes place.
What fishing trip is complete without assessment or evaluation? Is there a test? No and yes. If you don’t catch anything, you have failed (but you had a beautiful ride in a boat). Every fisherman knows that they will be assessed on the quality or quantity of their fishing trip. How many fish? How big were the fish? Two important questions that often lead to less than truthful answers, I know. One time I caught this massive fish that fought like crazy and pulled my boat around but it got away. But the size of the fish is the motivation for every student. The quest for the big one. Luckily, we can measure a fish whereas measuring learning or curriculum theories is more difficult. There may not be a right way. Everyone has their theory and it is just that – theirs. Can we measure that? We do measure learning and I will direct you to my other post on the blog that deals with the idea. I will mention that there is a distinct ranking amongst fishermen and many will exaggerate the size of their catch to move up those rankings.
In conclusion, I am reminded of another quote that says, “a bad day fishing is still better than a good day at school.” Or something like that although to me it is wrong. A bad day fishing equals not meeting your goals or objectives and to me this is not acceptable. In education, failure can’t be an option. This is why we strive so hard to change and improve our curriculum. Theorist after theorist have studied the process and attempted to find any problems and then correct them just like every fisherman reflects on his day and aims to do better next time. In both cases, mastering the process is virtually impossible due to the individualistic nature of the beast. We cannot predict the multitude of variables in either case but at the end of the day, we must focus on the success of the learner throughout the process and just enjoy the fish for dinner.
oicture courtesy of: http://www.bigfishtackle.com/photos/data/509/2-97.jpgReferences:
Doll, William E. Jr. (1993). A Post-Modern Perspective on Curriculum. New York: Teachers College Press.
Eisner, Elliot W. (1985). The Educational Imagination on the Design and Evaluation of School Programs. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company.
Goodson, Ivor F. (1994). Studying Curriculum: Cases and Methods. Toronto: OISE.
Miller, J.P. & Seller, W. (1990). Curriculum: Perspectives & Practice. Toronto : Copp Clark Pitman.
No comments:
Post a Comment