Posted by: Bill | November 16, 2009

More evidence for curriculum (maybe)

Admittedly, I am making a bit of a logic jump in that title, but this is my blog and journalists do it all the time. Also, it’s fun. D-Ed Reckoning has a post about the School of the Future in Philadelphia. Three years in to this experiment, things are not going well when viewed from pretty much every educational angle.

He discusses many of the issues such as technology implementation, disinterested students and unions, but as my 13 loyal readers know, my favorite is curriculum.

“We naively thought, I guess, that by providing a beautiful building and great resources, these things would automatically yield change. They didn’t,” said Jan Biros, associate vice president for instructional technology support and campus outreach at Drexel University and a former member of the SOF Curriculum Planning Committee.


  1. Without the fundamental 3 R’s of “reading, riting, and rithmatic “, giving students “tools” that require those fundamentals to use productivily is a total waste of time and resource. (Surprise, Surprise).

    We need to get back to the basics in primary education, and yes hold back failures until they learn/earn promotion. Getting results, not “they went thru the process” should be the criteria for passing to the next level.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: