Philosophy of Curriculum Essay

My philosophy of curriculum as it pertains to this course and through my brisk eyes at the end of the course, points to the constructivist-style curriculum as the most logical, meaningful, purposeful, intellectual, and veritable exemplars to model after. Focusing on a more tuitional definition of constructivism, the meaning is intimately affiliated with experience. I believe students come into a classroom with their own experiences and a cognitive structure based on those experiences. These preconceived structures ar valid, invalid or incomplete. The learner will explicate his/her real structures only if unsanded tuition or experiences are connected to cognition already in memory. Inferences, elaborations and relationships between old perceptions and new ideas moldiness be personally drawn by the student in articulate for the new idea to become an integrated, useful part of his/her memory. Memorized facts or information that has non been connected with the learners prior experiences will be quickly forgotten. In short, the learner must actively construct new information onto his/her existing mental framework for meaningful learning to occur.So what is the support structure for a constructivist learning impersonateting and how do they discord from a classroom based on the traditional or instructive model? The current American classroom, whether grade school or college level, tends to tally a one-person show with a captive save very much comatose audience. Classes are usually driven by teacher-talk and depend to a great extent on textbooks for the composition of the course. There is the idea that there is a fix origination of association that the student must come to know. Information is shared out into parts and built into a whole concept. Teachers serve as pipelines and seek to transfer their judgements and meanings to the passive student. There is little room for student-initiated questions, independent thought or interaction between s tudents. The end result is that the instruction set forth for the learner is solely memorization of the facts and no conceptual reconditeness and understanding (Erickson 30).In a constructivist setting, knowledge is not objective math and science are viewed as systems with models that describe how the world might be rather than how it is. This is an example of the differences between the world of the declarative and procedural knowledge and thinking to understanding the critical empirical and explanatory principles within the curriculum. The fibre of the teacher is to organize information around conceptual clusters as seen in a concept map and in Gowins Vee, in bless to help pose questions and unusual situations to engage the students interest. Teachers look the students in developing new insights and connecting them with their previous learning. Ideas are presented holistically as wide of the mark concepts and then broken down into parts. The activities are student centered a nd students are encouraged to ask their own questions, carry out their own experiments, mend their own analogies and come to their own conclusions and then eventually applying the new engraft knowledge and information to brand new situations.Becoming a constructivist teacher is a difficult change since most teachers are prepared for breeding in the traditional manner. It has taken me these past two school eld to shift my paradigm and adopt a new one but it does work if you are dedicated to putting in the time and effort to building your own curriculum built around the standards and back by the foundations that have been laid by Piaget, Dewey, Novak, Gowin, Erickson and the many others. These psychologists and experts in the mind and education have contributed to the following characteristics of what I believe is a representation of a constructivist teacher1. One of many resources that the student may learn from, not the pristine source of information.2. Engage students in expe riences that challenge previous conceptions of their existing knowledge.3. accommodate student responses to drive lessons and seek elaboration of students initial responses. Allow student some thinking time after posing questions.4. get on questioning by asking thoughtful, open-ended questions. Encourage thoughtful banter among students.5. Use cognitive terminology such as classify, analyze, and earn when framing tasks.6. Encourage and accept student autonomy and initiative. Be unstrained to let go of classroom control.7. Use raw data and primary sources, along with manipulative and interactive physical materials.8. Dont  associate knowing from the process of finding out.9. Insist on clear human face from students. When students can communicate their understanding, then they have truly learned.In summary, constructivist training offers a bold departure from traditional didactic classroom strategies. The remnant is for the learner to play an active determination in absorbi ng knowledge onto his/her existing mental framework. The ability of students to apply their school-learned knowledge to the real world much more valued over memorizing bits and pieces of knowledge that may calculate unrelated to them. Curriculum designed with the constructivist approach requires the teacher to relinquish his/her role as sole information-dispenser and instead to continually analyze his/her curriculum cookery and instructional methodologies. Clearly, the constructivist approach opens new avenues for learning as well as challenges for the teacher trying to implement it but isnt it worth it? I believe it is worth every ounce.