Clarifying and Critiquing the Curriculum Studies Field: From Canon Project to Curriculum Leadership Institute


Tue, Mar 25, 2008. Sponsor: Division B-Curriculum Studies, Section 6: Studies in History and Philosophy
  • William Schubert (University of Illinois - Chicago): A Report on the American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies’ (AAACS) Curriculum Canon Project
  • James G. Henderson (Kent State University): Interpreting Professional Development for a Curriculum Leadership Institute
  • Kathleen Ruth Kesson (Long Island University - Brooklyn): The Currere Narrative: Deepening Democratic Wisdom As a Professional Development Standard for Educators
  • Donald Blumenfeld-Jones (Arizona State University): Critical Questions for These Two "State of the Field" Projects
  • Patrick Slattery (Texas A&M University) Chair & Discussant

Abstract:

This symposium contains four paper presentations which are critically reviewed by the session’s chair/discussant. The first paper will be a progress report of the American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies’ (AAACS) “Canon Project.” The second paper, which incorporates the work of the Canon Project, presents the theoretical framework for a professional development text that is a key component in the creation of an on-line Curriculum Leadership Institute. The third paper addresses the narrative research being used to create this professional development text. The fourth paper discusses the first three papers with reference to the current state of the curriculum studies field. Finally, the current President of AAACS will critique all four papers.



Straightforward "3rd person" reporting / notes on the session:

@@@ this section should present third person--information that would be generally agreed, & not depending on personal point of view (like the Wikipdia encyclopedia articles) If something entered in this section proves to be controversial, it can be moved to another section (see below).

Include summaries of presentations by the panelists, discussants, and audience contributions.

Personal Perspectives & Commentary:

x
commentary by Firstname Lastname
You might have your own ideas on the topic of a page here--ideas that might not be the kind of straightforward factual material that would go into the more anonymous collaborative "3rd person" text.

Unlike Wikipedia, where entries are supposed to be neutral and impartial reference articles written from a 3rd-person and "objective" point of view, this curricupedia is a place where both uncontroversial factual information of that kind, and 1st-person commentary, can both be included on the same page.

These different kinds of text should be differentiated, however. One way to do this is to use this kind of box or table (technically, a table with two rows and one column) for entering 1st-person contributions to the page. To do this, just copy everything from the x above the table to the x below the table. Then, right below the lower x, paste what you have copied there. Then replace the name in the header row with your own name, and replace this text with your own 1st-person contribution to the page.
x
-
@@@ unlike the Wikipedia "Neutral point of view" (NPOV) policy against partiality, it's probably better to encourage individual contributors here to contribute their partial perspectives without obligation to also achieve "neutrality" by including all other recognized perspectives (the Wikipedia policy also disallows perspectives that have not yet established a certain level of recognition). However, personal perspectives should be separated from what's in the section above for "straightforward exposition." Arguments and comments that may not be generally accepted should be identified by name by the contributor. While everyone should feel free to make edits to improve other sections of the entry, people might be more hesitant to edit text that is identified as someone's personal writing (except for correcting typos, etc.). The DISCUSSION tab above the page can be used to start discussions of opinions expressed in this section.

@@@ If you have enough to say, and if you're comfortable starting a separate entry with your views on a topic presented in its own general entry, you can create a link in the general entry to the page that you will write with your own views. Links of this kind could be entered at an appropriate point in the entry (maybe in parentheses), or noted in a bulleted list, with a brief indication of the author & content, at the bottom of this PERSONAL PERSPECTIVES section. An advantage of separate pages for such entries is that the DISCUSSION page for each separate page can be entirely devoted to the ideas generated by that page. If you have ideas that you would like to post on a blog or some other web space of your own, you could present your ideas in a post there, and link to that post from the wiki entry here, perhaps with a line like one in the bullet list below.
Examples

See also

  • @@@
  • @@@
  • @@@ other entries in this wiki related to the subject of this entry

External links

  • @@@
  • @@@
  • @@@ links to other websites outside this wiki

Notes

  • @@@
  • @@@
  • @@@ footnotes (if any) to the main text of this entry

Further Reading

  • @@@
  • @@@
  • @@@ bibliographic references

@@@ Please enter tags for this page (below): keywords that users can use to search for entries related to the tag (e.g., "NotableSourcesTemplate" is entered as a tab for people to use if they want to see all of these template pages).
@@@ Use the history log field when you change a previously existing page, to briefly note in the log what change was made in this edit.

Go to Curricupedia alphabetical CONTENTS page