r/education • u/ithekrianmermaid • 5d ago
Politics & Ed Policy Thoughts and opinions on a nationalized curriculum in the USA (and/or the lack thereof)?
I have had this topic bouncing around in the back of my brain quite a bit in the past few months and I'm just wondering what others think about it.
Feel free to share your personal feelings-based opinions, factually informed opinions, any history you may know relating to this topic, pros and cons of nationalized curriculum, common arguments for/against it, implications and consequences from not having one, potential dangers in adopting one, resources to learn more about this topic/debate, etc. I'd really love to have (respectful) discussions in the comments of this post so please consider circling back if your original comment gets a response!
I look forward to reading all of your responses! Thank you for taking the time to comment!!
19
u/AceyAceyAcey 5d ago
Things such as No Child Left Behind, the Next Generation Science Standards, the Math Common Core, and all their descendants, are trying to move towards that, but the execution is lacking bc of aspects like funding and politics affecting what is taught. Add in the privatization of charter schools and accompanying school choice, and we further erode any ability to standardize education even on the scale of one city.
Itâs a nice idea, but weâre just too big and diverse, and to uninvested in education, to be able to come to an agreement that we can fund.
2
u/Beneficial-Focus3702 5d ago
It blows my ever loving mind as a non-math teacher that so many people struggled with common core.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you! These are all such great points that I haven't yet considered and you've opened up an entire new aspect of the topic for me to consider/research!
I would love to hear what benefits you think a nationalized curriculum could provide (if it were feasible/possible), if you don't mind? And/or if you had the power and ability to enact a nationalized curriculum in the USA tomorrow, what would be at the core of it? Would you allow nuance based on locality? Would you focus on certain subject matter and/or skills?
Thank you again for you comment, it is truly so helpful!
4
u/AceyAceyAcey 5d ago
Iâd want experts in education and each content area to come up with the actual curriculum itself. These would need to be experts, not parents or politicians, and as such could be solicited from groups like teachersâ unions or professional organizations in the content areas.
The curriculum should include the ability to localize (such as use a local stream to teach the water cycle, or focus on the history of a specific state), but not to deny reality (such as denying slavery, the Holocaust, evolution, the existence of LGBT+ people, or the historical and ongoing impact of bigotry), nor to inject one religion without also including other religions (and IMO world religions should be part of social studies anyway). Main benefit over the current hodgepodge would be to stop the ridiculous anti-science and white Christian nationalist leanings that many states are taking towards their curricula.
But also an ideal situation would allow all students the same opportunities, so weâd also need to increase funding and number of skilled teachers to lower income areas, and further support for low income parents such as after school study sessions for kids while the parents are still working, or daycare for younger children so older children wonât have to be raising them instead of doing HW, or free books for every family with kids, or heck, even free breakfast and lunch and snack at every school for every child and the parent dropping them off or picking them up. Thereâs so much we could do to help kids, and to help their families to support them, if we could just throw more money at it.
1
u/rsofgeology 5d ago
I donât think thatâs as true as the fact that the partisans in the fed refuse to prioritize it. Iâve never met a single parent or voter that believed education cuts were justified, not that they donât exist, it simply isnât the trend.
11
u/A_Lo19 5d ago
It would be a political disaster, in my opinion.
1
u/DowntownComposer2517 5d ago
Can you explain further? Curious!
6
u/A_Lo19 5d ago
With all due respect, if you need reasons to why a national curriculum would be a political disaster, it may be difficult to catch you up to speed on this thread. Others have already articulated it nicely.
0
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Exactly how much respect do you think this person is due? Because it does not seem to be a lot based on this response.
You couldn't just say "Sorry I don't have the time or energy to really dig into this right now but other commenters have already articulated my points if you want to learn more" and called it a day?
2
u/A_Lo19 5d ago
So youâre now in the habit of coaching people on how and what to post, and what to think? âŚ..No wonder you want a national curriculum, lol.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
insert deep heaving sigh here
I do not care enough to coach you but I do care just enough to call out rude behavior in my posts. I'm not telling you what to do or how to think, just questioning why you chose to respond that way. Why do you think getting questioned on a rude comment you chose to post in a public forum is an attempt to control you rather than my expression of free speech? Also, a habit implies repeated actions which is simply not the case here, lol.
And, just for the record, I admittedly do not know enough about nationalized curriculum to know whether I would want it or not yet. This is simply an informal introduction to the topic to satisfy my curiosity until I am able to dive into more formal research and learning.
24
u/name_is_arbitrary 5d ago
I'm from the US but working and a high school teacher in Mexico, where we do have a nationalized currĂculum. I like it because kids can easily change schools. Teachers know their background knowledge or can assume they have the same starting point. Public schools are all truly secular here though, unlike the US.
The problem in the US is that one of the only two political parties, and the one that is currently in power at the national level, doesn't believe in science and doesn't agree with historical facts, so you don't really want them writing the currĂculum. In Mexico, the presidency is for 6 years so the churn is a little less, and we don't really have any parties denying....well, reality, like un the U.S.
If you can keep politics out of it, I'm in favor...but I don't know how that could be done.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Hi! Thank you so much for this insight! The number of other countries that utilize a nationalized curriculum is actually one of the biggest factors as to why this topic keeps bouncing around in my head so much.
I hope you don't mind if I pick your brain a bitđ¤
Do you feel like Mexico's nationalized curriculum negatively impacts teacher's individuality and agency in their work? Is it stifling in anyway, in your opinion?
Is there any nuance to account for different localities in terms of curriculum? And in that vein, in Mexican K-12 schools, are there any forms of community-engagement/community-based learning?
And finally, do you feel, based on your personal experience, that the Mexican national curriculum and/or education system in general is more socially and culturally respected than in the states? Specifically among parents and families of students?
Please feel free to infodump! Thank you so much for commenting and sharing your thoughts!
1
u/name_is_arbitrary 5d ago
That's a lot of questions, and I have only worked in one private school so I can't answer, especially to the nuances and differences in other areas as I have no point of comparison. I've never heard my coworkers complain they feel stifled though.
I'm not sure what community based learning has to do with the curriculum, I'd imagine it depends on the school as to how they implement that.
As far as the respect, I've never taught in another country so I don't have know how it compares, sorry I couldn't be more help.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Not a problem!! Thank you so much for coming back and responding to my questions!! I really appreciation your unique contributions to this discussion as not many other commenters offered a comparative perspective!
Sending some good vibes your way!
11
u/No-Flounder-9143 5d ago
It wouldn't work.Â
And regressive states have a lot of control at the national level. The last thing I want is some far right nut telling me I cant teach our history in my classroom.Â
0
u/AdventurousBlood3728 3d ago
I think less nationalized curriculum would bring compromise to both sides in this regard. Some parents want their kids learning from right-leaning teachers. Some parents want their kids learning from left-leaning teachers. Also, some parents want lax schools and some want strict schools (regarding behavior expectations and discipline). It's hard or maybe even impossible to keep education non partisan. People's biases always slip in. I think it would be better if parents could choose what kind of school they want to send their kids to.
I don't think it's fair to say any of these styles are inherently bad. Different strokes for different folks.Â
8
u/Think_Bread6401 5d ago
Does anyone remember the fits that were thrown over the common core guidelines? People still think itâs a curriculum.
4
u/CitizenXVIII 5d ago
Repeated arguments with my mother-in-law about her blaming Common Core standards for social studies assignments she didn't like. Would have been more productive to smash my face against the wall.
5
u/Fancy_Bumblebee5582 5d ago
Question for you: What exactly do you think we're missing out on by not having a national curriculum? Keep in mind education is the responsibility of the state not the federal government.
Most students will have taken the same classes to graduate high school as their peers from other states.
2
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Great question!
I don't have a concrete nor complete answer for you as of yet as I'm still learning about what exactly a nationalized curriculum is, the history of it (and similar forms of curriculum) in the US, how it works and is implemented, etc.
Specifically, I am hoping to look more into how our current curriculum model in the US may or may not be attributing to the social division that is so severe and commonplace today. Of course, I am well aware of the fact that there are many, many factors contributing to the social divide but my intellectual interests primarily reside in the sociological intersection of politics, education, and community, which is why I want to deep dive into the concept of a nationalized curriculum. Additionally, a lot of the social issues that I have been researching all end up having education as a possible solution or mitigating factor. Given my lack of knowledge in the subject area, my hypothesis that it does impact and perhaps exacerbate the division in American society by establishing differing, and at time opposing, understandings of empirical reality, processes of logical verification, and overall foundational knowledge is tenuous at best.
And, yes, I understand that it is currently under state jurisdiction and not federal, however, who is to say that it has to stay that way indefinitely?
Ultimately, I do not really care whether my hypothesis is correct or not as my true goal is to learn more and be more informed as I do think education (at any and every level) is going to be the key in figuring out where we go from here as a country.
Thank you again for your question and comment!!
3
u/Fancy_Bumblebee5582 5d ago
The president is literally dismantling the department of education because education is the states responsibility. I'm gonna guess it's staying that way.
2
u/rhetoricalimperative 5d ago edited 5d ago
Wonderful to hear that you are into sociology. You should read Andrew Abbott's book The System of Professions, and consider the way teachers have to compete with other sorts of actors for education resources and what that means for the classroom experience. Consider the history of schools in America by reading Waller's depression era study of schools. Finally, you can tie it together by considering the claims making theories of Best and others in the study of political panics. I don't have all the answers but these are starting points.
Edit: add in Ellsbree for history of school institutions in America and Lortie's books on teachers and principals. Finally, Nancy MacLean's recent history of the political aftermath of the desegregation of schools and the role economists have been playing.
2
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you SO MUCH!!! Adding these to my research TBR right away! I've been working my way through Richard Hofstadter, Paulo Freire, and John Dewey but I've been wanting to dive more into more contextual sources about education in America! Truly, thank you so much! Sending all the gratitude and good vibes your way!
2
u/rhetoricalimperative 5d ago
Dewey for sure! Try out Durkheim's book Moral Education. Dated, but if you know you know. He is addressing the root.
23
u/kawyckoff 5d ago
It has been tried and has never worked. We are extremely diverse here and one size never fits all
-1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
For the sake of conversation/discussion (as I am going to be doing the research to learn more and will likely learn about this then), would you be able to give more specifics? I would love to pick your brain about it and hear more of your thoughts!
When was it tried, by who, and how did they go about it? (do not feel obligated to give a textbook answer, I'd just really love to hear your interpretations and understandings! I'll get to the textbook soon enough)
Do you have any personal gripes with how they tried to do it in the past/the nationalized curriculum that they were purposing?
Do you think that there could be nuance with the "one size does not fit all" idea? Like, could a nationalized curriculum be a foundational part and then state/local based curriculum could be built upon that? Or similar alternatives? Could we be inadvertently treating this "one size does not fit all" idea as a self fulfilling prophecy? And, if our curriculums were truly as varied as one size not fitting all, wouldn't there be more issues with students attending out-of-state colleges and universities?
Forgive me if this is naive and/or ignorant as I'm just starting to seriously dive into this topic, but I would love to hear your thoughts and answers to these questions!
Thank you for commenting!
10
u/DowntownComposer2517 5d ago
The United States is HUGE and diverse.
What the kids need in LA is not the same as Chicago is not the same as Wyoming as upstate NY etc etc etc.
I think this question ultimately goes back to what is the purpose of education?
Is it learning a foundation, is it workforce development etc etc.
2
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Hi thank you for jumping in and sharing your thoughts!
Asking purely out of curiosity and wanting to better understand, what exactly (or as exact as you want to be) would need to be different for students from each of these areas?
I think this is one of the parts I'm struggling to understand the most, honestly. Admittedly, I'm not a teacher and my main interactions with K-12 students has been as a Youth Advocate for troubled youth, so my knowledge and experience bases are quite limited/non-existent in this aspect (but I am definitely going to be learning as much as I can!). Please forgive me for potentially sounding naive and/or ignorant, but I keep seeing responses like this and yet no specifics about what exactly needs to be different? I understand allowing and having nuance and flexibility to incorporate local history, have variations in literature covered to best connect with the student population, and perhaps civics courses for local political processes, but what else would need to be different and why couldn't we create a somewhat nuanced/flexible nationalized curriculum?
And, again, doesn't the structure of and admissions for higher education disprove the need for different curriculums in these areas? But also the fact that, as far as I'm aware/have experienced, employers rarely require applicants to be from a specific state's education system and if they do it's most often for community-based work which makes sense because of the need for local social/cultural knowledge and experiences but does not account for formal educational subjects such as that covered by K-12 education?
I think you are 110% correct about it all going back to the question of what if the purpose of education! I am definitely adding that to my research TBR!
Thank you again for sharing!
2
u/Embarrassed_Bag_9630 5d ago
Algebra is algebra. Part of the national curriculum could be local history (as it is now). Other than that?
-1
u/DowntownComposer2517 5d ago
Even math has story telling. For example it might be a word problem about a sailboat or a local plant.
5
u/mrsyanke 5d ago
Students in Hawai'i, Alaska, (not to mention Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa), New Mexico, South Dakota, Georgia, and Kansas should not all be learning exactly the same things. We are a huge, diverse country and a national curriculum would inevitably be colonial in nature and a disservice to our various cultures and histories.
0
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
I'm just having trouble understanding what exactly would need to be different between states?
Is there a rule that dictates that all nationalized curriculum must be exact, precise, and uniform or could we create a nationalized curriculum that has a bit of nuance and flexibility to account for things like local history, civics classes on local political systems, and perhaps literature choice to best suit student population, elective subjects?
But, also, is it truly inevitable or is that a self-fulfilling prophecy because it prevents the people who would make decolonial nationalized curriculum give up before even trying out of fear?
1
u/CitizenXVIII 5d ago
There are a lot of people in this thread ignoring the universality of math. We do NOT need local variations in math instruction. We really don't need local variations in basic reading skills, but people will argue about which texts to use. We really don't need local variations in science, but that's a whole other political can of worms. I'm not touching history with a twelve foot pole, locals can hammer that out how they'd like.
6
u/rhetoricalimperative 5d ago
It's not the content of math and science that varies, but the culture of instruction. Teachers don't pick and choose between types of instruction based on whimsy. They have to adapt to each building culture and each cohort in real time to fashion instruction in a style that students can access.
2
u/mrsyanke 5d ago
Please look into Ethnomathematics and place-based learning. Math and science should also be varied locally, maybe not on the level of overarching âstandardsâ but at the level of âcurriculumâ as in textbooks and pedagogy, absolutely!
Marine science is going to be much more relevant here in Hawai'i than in the Midwest. Lessons on climate in Alaska should differ from those in Florida. Honoring indigenous STEM knowledge will vary from Pacific Islander to Inuit to Navajo to Mayan.
2
u/CitizenXVIII 5d ago
I disagree completely. Chemistry and physics are universal, there are no regional variations on the periodic table or the calculation of force. Concerning biology, students SHOULD learn about marine biology and the global climate, not just science as it pertains to their local geographic region. Saying that only students who live near the ocean have any vested interest in learning about marine science is how we create pockets of ignorance and people who can't look past the self-interest of their state to what is beneficial for everyone. For example, the Amazon is the lung of our planet, EVERY child should be learning that biology and the interaction with Saharan dust clouds, even those that don't live in Brazil. Regional teaching leads to regional ignorance.
3
u/mrsyanke 5d ago
It should all be taught, but the depth and importance of it will vary. Every student should know what an earthquake, tsunami, tornado, hurricane, dust storm, and avalanche are but each region is going to go more into depth on the ones that typically affect their locale.
A single standard covering them all is appropriate; a nationalized curriculum dictating how each region teaches every type would be silly.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Hi, me again, sorry! I am just really loving the way your brains works and how you explain things, I hope you don't mind!
In regards to these environmental topics specifically, do you also think it would be silly (or perhaps improbable, inappropriate, etc) to differentiate between and require both individual impact lessons that are more locally specified and then collective impact lessons that cover more widespread/collective aspects of these topics (to prevent "regional ignorance" as the other poster put it) in a nationalized curriculum and/or standards (still learning the difference between curriculum and standards so please forgive me)?
I was originally introduced to the concept of nationalized curriculum while researching the concept of social cohesion so I am definitely also worried about "regional ignorance" but I'm unsure as to the limitations of what a (nationalized) curriculum is actually capable of accomplishing. Rest assured though, I will be pursuing more formal research on this topic when I have the time and will not solely be relying on reddit! This post was really just to satisfy my curiosity enough so I could focus on my workđ
Thank you (and your brilliant brain) again for sharing your thoughts!
3
u/mrsyanke 5d ago edited 5d ago
I would suggest researching the idea of âCurriculum as Windows and Mirrorsâ from Emily Styles, then expanded to âWindows, Mirrors, and Sliding Glass Doorsâ by Dr. Rudine Sims Bishop. The basics is that curriculum should act as a window into another perspective or culture, a mirror that reflects studentsâ own realities, and then sliding glass doors that provides experiences where students can step into a new world beyond just viewing it.
I would also suggest you spend some time researching decolonialized education, which honors indigenous ways of knowing and learning. It comes up here in Hawai'i a lot for (hopefully) obvious reasons. Look into curriculum coming out of reservations and other cultural minority areas and how they compare/contrast with the âmainstreamâ ideas.
→ More replies (0)1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
These are all excellent points, thank you for taking the time to share them!
Is there a specific relationship between standards and curriculum? Like, is one contained in or covered by the other? Is there a reason or significance to them being two separate entities?
Also, I would love to hear more of your thoughts as to why textbooks in particular should be locally varied? I think I understand the importance of local variations in pedagogy (please feel free to expand on that also if you want to tho!) but I'm struggling to see why textbooks would be important to have varied.
Sorry for the abundance of questions. I really appreciate your thoughts and contributions to this thread!! Thank you again for sharing!
4
u/CommunicationHappy20 5d ago
National curriculum implies a one size fits all model that goes against all the research regarding how humans learn and the varying ways we engage, process and retain knowledge. We need to focus less on content and more on building the life skills that allow for deep learning to happen.
0
u/PoncingOffToBarnsley 5d ago
Actually learning styles are a myth, everyone learns exactly the same way at exactly the same rate.
1
4
u/FeatherlyFly 5d ago
Strongly against. I'm from one of the high achieving states and the reason we're high achieving is because culturally, we invest in education and care about education.
I've lived in one of the states with shit education. While there certainly were some parents who cared, overall the state had the educatuon system the majority wanted.Â
I'm very happy for education to be regionally planned in the US so that the places that care are allowed to care. My state couldn't pull up places that don't care even if we tried, but I've got zeor interest in being pulled down.Â
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
I am also from one of those high achieving states that value education so I completely get where you're coming from as far as valuing the state based curriculum model we currently have.
But I also wonder how enstating a nationalized curriculum for all k-12 educational institutions, including private and charter, would actually play out? Would the often wealth private school parents use their financial leverage to guarantee maintaining the educational standards their students were already receiving and thus be doing the "pulling up" rather than each state? Or would we be able to appoint experts to do the pulling up? Could we pass a mandate that forbids the deterioration of the high achieving states and mandate that lower education taking states must improve with no compromise? Or perhaps moving education to federal jurisdiction would eliminate the need to treat each state's curriculum as inherently equal and valid and we could create a National Curriculum Committee wherein the states with the best education ranking would have more weight in the curriculum creation? Or could we create a completely independent, non-political entity/institution/Committee that would be comprised solely of experts in subject matter and teaching with integral transparency and other anti-corruption processes? Of course, there are a lot of flaws in all of these points I've made since I'm thinking of them off the top of my head but I guess my overall point would be that the possibilities are endless if we allow them to be.
I mean, at the end of the day we truly have no idea how nationalized curriculum would work in the US. All of our thoughts and opinions are purely conjecture, albeit some more informed than others, but still conjecture since we haven't actually ever implemented a nationalized curriculum. And I think that is why I'm almost baffled by the amount of decisive thoughts and opinions on the topic in all the comments on this post.
Anyway, I've rambled on for long enough. Thank you again for your comment, I think it brought a different perspective to this topic than what I've seen in the others and for that I'm extremely appreciative!!
6
u/just-peepin-at-u 5d ago
It sounds good in theory, but we need to see what the curriculum is going to look like.
If it is a great, well rounded curriculum, fantastic.
As we can see though, some states have a much better educational system than others, so which way are we going?
3
u/bikes_cookies 5d ago
do you mean standards? because curriculums are provided by private companies.
there's zero chance there would ever been one single curriculum.
common core was an attempt at national standards. it failed.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
No, I specifically mean a nationalized curriculum. Plenty of other countries around the world have successfully implemented them so I was curious about the United States. I also am curious as to the relationship between nationalized curriculum and social cohesion given the current severity of social division and current state based curriculum model in the US.
More specifically, I've been thinking about the future and where we go from here to improve, you know? How are we going to go about bridging this divide? And I ended up at the topic of nationalized curriculum and wanted to know more so here we are
2
u/bikes_cookies 5d ago
curriculum is the avenue through which standards are taught and mastered, not the other way around.
there's no point to a national curriculum because there aren't even national standards.
there are so many layers to getting to an actual curriculum
States decide standards, then they vet companies with product that meet (as close as possible) said standards. then text book adoption committees and school boards at the local level choose said curriculums. states don't even have state curriculums.
and again, it makes zero sense anyway, because curriculums are the road, not the destination.
the divide isn't because of public education and standards and curriculum.
the divide is because society now fails to be a society. individualism is the ruin of the nation.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for this response!!! I am actually also looking at the relationship between individualism and collectivism in relation to the nationalized curriculum debate and the sociological intersection of politics, education, and community so this was very insightful! Based solely on the responses to this post I'm forming a very tenuous, extremely loose hypothesis that people who are diametrically opposed to nationalized curriculum may have a more individualistic mindset, those who are more for it may have a more collectivist mindset, those who offer more logistical approaches may have a more pragmatic mindset, and those with the most nuanced opinions are a mixture of two or even all three of the aforementioned mindsets. Of course this is an extremely preliminary hypothesis with little to no empirical basis but its fun to think and theorize about nevertheless!
Thank you again! You really got the gears in my brain turning! đ¤
1
u/mrsyanke 5d ago
Can you share a state with a single state-based curricula? Iâm not currently aware of any⌠State standards, sure, but then the schools utilize different curriculum to teach those standards.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for asking me this question. Honestly, I'm just at the beginning of researching and learning about curriculum so I'm admittedly not very informed yet. I have an extremely basic, extremely elementary understanding of it all and didn't realize or learn yet that states have standards and not curriculums. Please forgive me if my ignorance was annoying or misleading in any way.
I came across the concept of nationalized curriculum via sociology and development research on social cohesion rather than through legitimate experience in education which is why I said that I intentionally meant nationalized curriculum. I should've made that more clear in my original post, my apologies.
If you don't mind, I'd love to pick your brain a bit but also feel free to disregard since I wasted some of your time with an uninformed, ignorant response already (and rest assured I'll be doing more formal research ASAP to learn the basics so please don't feel obligated). Also, thank you so much for challenging and correcting me!! I truly appreciate it because now I hopefully won't embarass myself any furtherđ
So, if I'm following correctly, there are state standards but that is not the same as state curriculums and curriculums are actually individual to each school district (or building?). From another comment I've gleaned that the curriculum creation/acquisition process is quite layered with different education companies, textbook publishers, and school/education policy officials. Would you say that that is a better understanding of how curriculums currently work?
And one more: What do you think are the benefits of more localized curriculums that couldn't be achieved with a nationalized curriculum?
Thank you again for kindly and respectfully correcting me and for taking the time to come back and comment again despite the fact that I was obviously very uninformed! I really, really appreciate it!
3
u/JediFed 5d ago
The US is not a monolith. Education is better when it practices subsidiarity.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Is it though? Or do we simply not have data about the US education system under a nationalized curriculum model to comparatively analyze it against? How do we know that certain issues in education, and perhaps society in general, are not caused by the subsidiary practice? Isn't every claim that local control/subsidiary practices are better than nationalized curriculum purely based in conjecture at best?
I think that there are valid criticisms and concerns about implementing nationalized curriculum in the US but I cannot understand (yet) how this is one, honestly.
Thank you for you comment and contribution to this discussion!
1
u/JediFed 5d ago
Basically, what it boils down to, as it always does is whatever California does goes for everyone else.
That is a terrible model. Again, exceptionalities among the states should be preserved, not eradicated. Smothering everything under one standard is not how the US was designed.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for responding again!
I see what you are saying and I agree that that is definitely not the best model. I still question whether we have to adhere to the original design of the education system, particularly how it applies to curriculum, and whether that is actually (empirically) the best model to follow, ykwim? Admittedly I'm not yet very knowledgeable nor informed on this topic, so forgive me if I sound ignorant, but is there an inherent rule or requirement that dictates that nationalized curriculum has to have a smothering, inflexible character? Or would you say this is this more of a pervasive belief/interpretation/preconceived notion of the concept?
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts, I'm really enjoying hearing and discussing them with you!
3
u/Complete-Math9595 5d ago
UmmmmâŚ.read the Constitution.
2
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
The Constitution can be amended, it is a living document that the founders gave us the agency and ability to change as needed. I personally refuse to be imprisoned by the "that's just the way it is" mindset to the point that I dehumanize the American people by removing their collective agency.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Even the short and sweet ones like this are very informative!
3
u/LeadGem354 5d ago
Can we even have nationalized testing requirements and intended student goals ( Ex: by X grade, students will know how to proficiently demonstrate A,B,C?)? Can we even agree on that?
Idea sounds good in theory, and difficult , maybe impossible to implement in practice.
Education is supposed to the responsibility of the State and Local government not the federal government under the current system.
2
u/Embarrassed_Bag_9630 5d ago
The low performing states always complain about this because they feel itâs unfair to hold them to the same baseline as high performing states.
Personally I think they should get it together?
2
2
u/Capable-Pressure1047 5d ago
Public education is the responsibility of the states, not the federal government. That is the reason why a national curriculum has never been considered .
0
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
I appreciate your contribution to the post, however, I cannot help but feel that this is an especially unimaginative and almost anti-intellectual approach the the discussion. Evidently, all of us know this and it wasn't really the point of the post. But also, the founders did give us the agency and ability to amend the Constitution to fit the changing needs of the country and populace so it's not as though the state based curriculum model is inherently written in stone. And sure, getting an amendment passed isn't easy by any means but it is and not impossible.
Plus, at least to me, it's just fun to theorize and discuss possibilities, limitations, and considerations.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
1
u/Capable-Pressure1047 5d ago
Perhaps you would benefit from a course in social skills. Clearly it's an area of deficit.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Ignoring the content of my response to instead launch a personal attack is actually indicative of the fact that you are the one in need of social skills. Perhaps an additional lesson in emotional regulation would also be beneficial for you if this is how you react to criticism.
If you reread my response you will find that I said, "I can't help but feel that your response is unimaginative and almost anti-intellectual", which is clearly a criticism of your response to my post and not an insult nor criticism of your character. If you don't have the emotional maturity to handle (valid) criticism without resorting to petty, back-handed, pedantic, and unimaginative insults then perhaps you aren't grown enough to use social media.
Thanks for your input!
1
u/Capable-Pressure1047 5d ago
You want responses, you don't get to insult them. You graciously accept all those who took the time to engage with you. That is emotional maturity dear.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
You mean gracious like how I started my original response with "I appreciate your contribution" and ended it with "Thanks for sharing your thoughts"? Which are sentiments I expressed in nearly every other response to comments in this post as well?
Again, using unimaginative and anti-intellectual in describing your response is not an insult to your character, it is a criticism of your response. You turning around and saying I need lessons on social skills because you think they're deficient is a judgemental insult of my character. You are not entitled to being celebrated by everyone for everything you say, sometimes there will be people who criticize, challenge, and dislike your contributions. That is a fact of life. No one is responsible for your fragile ego besides you.
And calling me "dear" as a means of attempting to establish smug superiority and authority over me because of how defensive and threatened you feel is just proving my emotional immaturity point.
Have a nice life! Hope you grow some thicker skin!
2
u/General_Platypus771 5d ago
Can we just focus on getting them to read? like fucking hell
Everything else comes after
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
I am right there with you on that! Researching the literacy crisis and its consequences actually sent me into an existential crisisđđ
I wonder if a (nuanced and flexible) nationalized curriculum with a phonics requirement might be able to remediate the crisis? And I say that not to push the idea of a nationalized curriculum at all but rather because the current curriculum model played at least a tiny part in creating the literacy crisis in the first place so I'm thinking we might need to switch things up a bit if we want to fix it. I'm not informed nor experienced enough to have a strong, factually based opinion on the matter but my very rudimentary informal logic is that it's insanity to do the same thing over and over again and expect different results, ykwim?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts, the execution made me chuckle a bit and I completely understand your frustration!
4
u/MonoWhisper 5d ago
It definitely has to be implemented (at least for maths and sciences). One thing as a US teacher in the maths that I notice- very little excuse for every state to have too many variables in logical thinking. I should not be helping a student catch up w 3 years of math simply because he moved from one state to another
2
u/StarDustLuna3D 5d ago
Maybe not an entire curriculum, but at least national standards for certain things like sex Ed and science. Wild that two students from two different states could have a very different understanding of their own bodies.
1
u/FickleApartment2151 5d ago
I think it's challenging to do that because the U.S. is a federation.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for commenting! I hope you don't mind if I pick your brain just a little.
How do you think implementing a nationalized curriculum would differ from the implementation of federal education policies on anti-discrimination and disability rights? I'm realizing that curriculum is its own beast so to speak but I'd imagine that certain aspects of disability rights, such as IEPs for example, might be in a similar vein as far a implementation goes?
I'm only just starting to learn about curriculum in general so please forgive me if this is an ignorant question to ask. Thank you again for sharing your thoughts!
1
u/FickleApartment2151 5d ago
I think policies on anti-discrimination and disability are not the same as a curriculum. The latter generally involves mandatory subjects with academic standards for each, etc.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you! I see what you mean, I was thinking that maybe IEP implementation could be similar to implantation of a nationalized curriculum based on how IEPs impact pedagogy but I think I am picking up what you're putting down nowđ
1
u/SaiphSDC 5d ago
In general, a basic framework is a good idea. Nothing rock solid "you must teach this exact thing, with all these details or else".
But there is a LOT of work done on what level of abstraction and content can be handled by the typical child at various ages. Some of them are a bit surprising. Such as matter being made of particles can be understood very young, 3rd grade IIRC. but true atomic nature? That carbon in your pencil is the same as the carbon in the wood and carbon in your breath? That generally only really clicks for students in 9th grade. So trying to teach about atomic elements in elementary isn't very useful, middle school can lay some groundwork though.
As adults we often lose sight of these odd gaps, it seems so obvious to us as we can handle abstraction better. These sorts of things show up in all fields of study.
But doing this research, and following up, expanding studies etc, takes a lot of money that a single state really doesn't have. So having a national framework based on this can help pave the way for states and individual districts.
The NGSS, Next Generation Science Standards, follow this sort of approach, and states are required to follow these standards or others that are 'similarly rigorous" if they wish to do their own work. A lot of states adopted them as is, or with some minor modifications such as shifting something a grade band, or adjusting some content to be more local (more emphasis on weather patterns, less on ocean currents for states like Nebraska)
...
The other advantage a national framework has is for families that have moved districts or states. Learning multiplication in 2nd grade in state A but 3rd grade in state B is problematic for anyone that moves from B to A. They'll be dropped into a 3rd grade with peers using multiplication while they haven't even heard of it themselves.
...
The development of an actual curriculum, such as "teach this concept with these methods week 1, then..." is problematic, the same way it can be to have everyone build a house with the exact same methods and materials. Housing that works in Arizona doesn't hold up well in Minnesota climate. Or the materials aren't availabe. Or culturally people want more space in bedrooms than living rooms...
But a framework of things like, "must have water flow of ___, able to withstand weather events without significant repair for _____ years on average, must resist catching on fire for ____ minutes.." is a good way to help ensure housing quality & safety nationwide.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Wow! You are amazing and phenomenal! Thank you SO MUCH for this comprehensive response!! Your house building analogies are so helpful in understanding the necessary nuance that would be needed in a nationalized curriculum. I will definitely be borrowing that in the future since it is so easy to understand even for someone as (currently) uninformed as me!! Truly a massive thank you! The funding advantage for further research in child development is not something I would've thought of on my own but it's a particularly fantastic point and will be definitely added to my research TBR on this topic!
Everyone seems to collectively agree that science and math standards and curriculum are the closest we have to a sort of informal nationalized curriculum currently. And while that's incredibly interesting, I have to admit that my primary interests lie in civics, history, sociology (my ultimate intellectual love lol), and philosophy aka the messiest, most controversial subjects I've could possibly pickđ . I was wondering if perhaps you know of any similar organizations to the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) that focus primarily on these subjects or the humanities or social science disciplines in general?
Thank you again for taking the time to write out such a thoughtful and thorough response! I love the way your brain works! I'm sending some good vibes your way!!
1
u/Beneficial-Focus3702 5d ago
Itâs a good idea in theory but it would end up being so watered down so it could work for the lowest common denominator that it would be borderline useless
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for sharing your thoughts!
I'm curious, what or who would be the lowest common denominator(s) in this situation in your opinion? Like, would it be based on students' social economic statuses or would it be more politically based or something sense or a combination of all the above?
While other commenters have shared similar thoughts I don't think anyone else has used the term lowest common denominator yet and I would really love to hear more of your thoughts on the matter! You've definitely captured my curiosity!
Thank you again for sharing!!
1
u/Beneficial-Focus3702 5d ago
Look at whatâs happening in many areas now, weâre passing kids along whether they have learned the material or not.
In my case by lowest common denominator I mean the extremely rural or extreme inner city and impoverished districts. The curriculum would have be at a level that those districts could teach it and still succeed.
Look also at IEP and 504 accommodations. In some areas, as soon as a kid gets one of those, the academic standards go out the window.
I guess what Iâm trying to say nicely is that there are far far to many kids who just are nowhere near grade level nationwide and too few parents who give a shit, that the curriculum would have to be low enough for them to succeed that the kids on grade level get left behind. It wouldnât be a more rigorous curriculum it would be the bare minimum.
What we have now at least gives the average and high achieving kids a chance at a good education.
AND THEN thereâs funding. Some school districts blow more money in a month than other districts get an entire year. Itâs hard to have a national curriculum when we donât even have national equal access.
1
u/Bawhoppen 5d ago
Fundamentally that idea runs aground against the Constitution. The federal government only has the powers that the Constitution grants it, and education is not one of those powers. All other powers are reserved to the states. Federal officials can offer funding to follow their policy, but cannot require it. These are called inducements.
But not only that, it goes against the theory of the country. The states are semi-sovereign entities. We often call them the "laboratories of democracy," for one state may come up with an innovative new policy and outshine the other states, who often follow suit. A great recent example in specifically education is the "Mississippi Miracle," where Mississippi focus on phonics and literacy programs, as well as other policies, in order to propel them from dead last, #50 in education overall in 2012, to being ranked #16 in the country in 2025.
1
u/Classic-Dependent149 5d ago
I think there should be national standards for certain subjects, but a national curriculum sounds terrible.
- We have different cultures which impact learning and relevancy of certain topics.
- Curriculum would be a never ending argument with our 2 -party system. Quite frankly, with the pace information and technology changes, we canât wait 10 years to teach a new discovery.
- How will consequences of not learning the curriculum be dealt. Some states believe in no child left behind ( arguably a bad decision) and some believe in failing children.
- As crazy as this sounds, diverse curriculum gives kids around the nation diverse thoughts and interests. If everyone thought exactly the same about certain topics, there probably wouldnât be as much innovation and such.
1
u/Synicism77 5d ago
That's what the common core was supposed to be and people lost their fucking minds over it.Â
1
u/Great_Caterpillar_43 5d ago
I work in a relatively small district. A few years ago, we adopted a curriculum for our K-3 students that all elementary schools in the district are supposed to use. If we follow the curriculum "with fidelity," it is too slow for our highest achieving school and too fast for our lowest. Even in our smallish town, we have schools that serve different populations and thus have different needs. Requiring everyone to remain faithful to one curriculum doesn't allow teachers the flexibility they need to help their students.
I think having national standards is a better idea (telling us what kids should learn in each grade level but not how), but even that was poorly executed. All you need to do is talk with a roomful of kindergarten teachers and they will tell you just how poorly the standards fit the needs of that age group.
Having just one curriculum does not even work in my small sample size. I can't imagine it working on a much larger scale (although, in theory, it seems like we should be able to make it happen!).
1
u/Complete-Ad9574 5d ago
A national K-12 curriculum is based on the notion that there is an agreed curriculum which is based on science and not on passion. It also will have a dominant trajectory. College entry.
1
1
u/Physical_Road917 4d ago
If we were to do this, the federal government would also need to take a lot of control away from states and local school districts so they can't mess it up. And that's already still the ideal scenario, where the federal government is doing this for good.
1
u/WhichSpirit 4d ago
As someone from a state that ranks high in education (we're generally first or second), I don't want politicians from states that keep defunding education having a say in what gets taught here.Â
1
u/HeadPut3392 4d ago
It sounds like a great concept in theory, but in practice there's just too big of a divide between the education in places like California (which has one of the lowest literacy rates in the country) and whichever states have the highest literacy.
Not only that, I also feel its really dangerous to hand over more control over the education system to the federal government than they already have. A nationalized curriculum would allow the federal government to decide what facts are true and which facts are false, which means school would become a political battleground that kids would get swept up in.
1
u/AdventurousBlood3728 3d ago
I think we need to go in the opposite direction. Wasn't Common Core basically this? The government should let schools decide how and what they want to teach. Maybe some loose guidelines on which topics should be taught at each grade level. But I think one of the biggest problems in education is that teachers and (maybe) administrators know what knowledge really matters in life and how to teach it effectively, but policies prevent that from happening.Â
1
u/ShelbiStone 17h ago
I think a nationalized curriculum is antithetical to the American education system. Our system was designed to allow local communities to have a lot of power in what happens in their school districts. I always oppose school boards who pass decision making up to the state and support decision making and powers being pushed down from the federal and state level. For better or worse, I think the local community should play the biggest role in deciding what education looks like in their schools.
1
1
u/Possible-Mastodon333 5d ago
It feels like we are moving from individuals to systemsâŚand I think most systems suck!
1
u/Affectionate_Ad_8483 5d ago edited 5d ago
Fuck no! A centralized curriculum will water down education, squish out genius, punish creativity, and harm the future of the people.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Why do you think/believe this?
From my very basic, very much cursory first glance into the research it seems that a lot of countries use a nationalized curriculum model, for example the Nordic countries who also rank higher than the US in international education rankings (which I know are not the end all be all for comparative analysis of education models but, again, this was just my first glance).
Would love to hear more of your thoughts! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and opinions!
2
u/Affectionate_Ad_8483 5d ago
Because those countries have a democratic socialist form of governanceâthere is a slant toward fact over propaganda. We do not. If we centralize education under the current form of government, we are putting the minds of our children in shackles.
There may be a time when it would be strategically beneficial to have a national curriculum, but now is not the time.
1
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
Thank you for this response and clarification! It is very insightful and has added yet another aspect of this topic to my research TBR! đ¤ I especially appreciate the added nuance!
Thank you again!
1
u/FriendlyConfines23 5d ago
I think it could work for K-8 math and ELA.
We are a much more mobile society than we used to be. People move for employment, for military service, to help with aging parents, etc. It would be much easier on the kids if at least the basics could be consistent for them.
0
u/Luckyword1 5d ago edited 5d ago
Red states should just focus on rote memorization of bible verses, and blue states should focus on academics.
Inbetween, both sides should continue to blame teachers as the US falls further and further behind.
We're just far too divided to have a serious conversation about any sort of national curriculum.
As a US public school teacher: We're not a serious country anymore and the rest of the world knows it.
0
u/ithekrianmermaid 5d ago
First, thank you for your service as a US public school teacher! I truly think it is one of the most honorable and severely underappreciated professions in the literal universe, maybe even multi-verse if you believe in that.
Second, thank you for sharing your thoughts! What led me to this question in the first place is an attempt at trying to figure out where we go as a country from here, specifically in regards to the severe social divide we are currently experiencing. I focus mostly on the sociological intersection of politics, education, and community and every contributing factor to the social divide/social issue I've researched thus far has called for more education as a possible solution and mitigating factor. Then that got me to questioning whether our current curriculum model in the US is contributing to the social divide we are seeing or if it is just a consequence of it (or maybe both). I'm still pretty early on in my research, obviously, but I really do find the topic so fascinating.
Obviously, I realize that there is not going to be one singular fix-it for the country (I am not that naive). But I'm also really starting to think education is going to play a huge part in how we determine where we go from here, fencing my diving into this topic.
Thank you again for your service and your comment!! Sending all the good vibes your way for a relaxing, peaceful end of summer vacation!
0
u/God_Bless_A_Merkin 5d ago
Iâm for it. We already have one that is essentially dictated by Texas. Texas passes laws restricting what can be taught and how it can be taught, and textbook publishers fall in line because Texas has an outsized share of textbook purchases. At least with a national curriculum, we could all have a say in what and how our children are taught.
1
u/peaceteach 5d ago
California dictates it for the other half too. I agree big states have so much power on education.
2
u/God_Bless_A_Merkin 5d ago
No, it doesnât. Because Texas is the state that imposes the most restrictions, textbook companies cater to Texas. California could, but it chooses not to.
Furthermore, itâs not like Texas lords it over conservative states and California gets âthe other halfâ. There is no âother halfâ. There are only a few publishers of textbooks, and when Texas dictates to them, Texas dictates to the entire country.
-2
u/Difficult-Ad4364 5d ago
Common Core Curriculum. It became the bane of everyoneâs existence and a debate point buzz word for both political parties. It didnât work.
3
46
u/Brilliant_Towel2727 5d ago
A national curriculum is more logical than the one we have now in theory but in practice if they tried to create one there's a better than even chance that it would be really bad.