Thank you Liam Noble for alerting me to this video…

Consider the notion of embracing difference in learners, an absence of comparison and the centrality of experience.
Krishnamurti’s profound philosophy of education is in direct opposition to the current industrial model of education than not only works against differences in learners/people but has also systematically removed the philosophical aspect of the training of teachers themselves. Teachers used to be educated themselves to integrate a values such as “difference” within every lesson plan, programme of work and curriculum.Today they no longer have time to devise child/student-centred curricula and are instead shackled to the sick paradigm in the name of so-called quality and accountability. Krishnamurti is a voice in the wilderness but a reminder of the true purpose of education.

The American educational philosopher John Dewey wrote in the early 20th century that “self-realisation is the goal” of education, “creating desire for continued growth”, not the mere acquisition of knowledge and information. This used to be central to teacher-education but chillingly these values have been and continue to be unpopular with government officials, including the highly influential Chris Woodhead (Chief Inspector of Schools in England from 1994 until 2000) who advised that “the words of John Dewey ought to be banned from all teacher-training institutions” (Daily Telegraph, 25 April 1999). Sadly, Head Teachers, Curriculum Designers and teachers themselves are generally corralled into compliance while at the same time the general educational culture is vulgarised by low-level and inexpert discourse in the press and even parents and learners themselves forget the authentic purpose of education and its and humane philosophical themes.

Education, from the latin Educare – to draw out that which lies within.

The Curriculum – all that is taught and learnt…
Core and hidden…
Planned and received…
Formal and informal…

 

Can we have an informed debate please?

We find ourselves in an historic time when education is about to the redefined by the course of political determination, we would be well advised to be mindful of the purpose of education and how teaching and learning occurs. While the nature and content of learning experiences have already changed due to the technological revolution, for whatever reason and whatever political persuasion suits you or I, the presence and provision for a range of subjects and learning processes are possibly about to change through a course of action that will be described as progressive, radical, essential, urgent… or reactive, dangerous and without educational rationale – depending upon your perspective.

Would it not be prudent to be informed? Even if a radical reassessment is necessary, all parties would be better served through deep consideration and evidence-based understanding of the core issues. Vic Kelly understood the curriculum and engages us in a thorough consideration of the psychological, philosophical, political and operational drivers that form the learning culture of schools and colleges. Derived form a latin word referring to a race track, perhaps we should prefer curriculum is less of a race to acquire information, and more a consideration of “all that is taught and learnt”, built upon values as much as operational mechanics and transient values.

A.V.Kelly’s “The Curriculum: Theory and Practice” – click here.