Hi, all:
I chose to assess the MA World History Curriculum Standards (secondary level). I have significant academic grounding in US History, so I thought it might be a worthwhile exercise to explore another alternative --- and I ended up learning as much about my own knowledge retention levels as about the curriculum itself (which will influence my practice later on, I assure you).
What I found most enriching were the sections on teaching students to evaluate history on its own terms - not just by our current norms - (this reinforces the critical, nonjudgmental dialogue we strive for, in addition to pushing students to think at the college level), and also the sections on "non-European" history. These topics naturally lend themselves to rich discussion in a multicultural setting, and although I came into the Donovan program singularly focused on teaching US History, it is exactly these sorts of exercises that force me to reevaluate myself and my own objectives as a future urban educator. My one area of concern: the most overwhelming mention of non-white achievement came from sections on nationalism. Keeping authors we've read in mind, I think this could be the "problem area" on which to expand at the curriculum level. Also, I was surprised to see that some "pathways" (MA DOE term) staggered the US History and World History units so that parts 1 and 2 of each subject were not taught sequentially (e.g. World History 1, World History 2, US 1, US 2). Can anyone speak to why this is done?
Ryan
No comments:
Post a Comment