Comparison
The official, printed syllabus known as the "Explicit Curriculum" describes the topics, material, and criteria that students should study.
In incorporating an implicit and null education system, on the other hand, we acknowledge that learning is not limited to the classroom. The core standards, beliefs, and attitudes that are implicitly taught via interactions in the classroom—even if they aren't explicitly stated—are referred to as the implicit curriculum. This makes it clearer to us how schools transmit beliefs and social expectations with instructional strategies. For example, how educators manage behaviour or encourage group projects teaches children about social norms and how to get along with each other.
The Null Curriculum is everything that is not covered in the official curriculum and has the potential to exclude information that might affect students learning.' learning. This emphasizes how essential the material that is excluded from a curriculum is. For example, a school's decision to exclude certain classes from a curriculum communicates to its students that concerns are seen as less significant, which may have an impact on their knowledge and appreciation of certain subjects.
Your explanation of the explicit, implicit, and null curricula was really insightful. However, I’m curious to hear your thoughts on whether and how the BC curriculum aligns with or diverges from Eisner’s concepts, particularly regarding the implicit and null curricula. Do you think the BC curriculum adequately addresses these aspects?
ReplyDeleteBrandon, please add the **EDIT that Malihe suggests to bring this post from a 1.5 to a 2! Thanks
ReplyDelete