And that's the explicit milieu out of which it arose - desire for chalkface-consistency (read uniformity), and the desire for wide access to expertise. There's nothing wrong with that in itself, and the tension with autonomy is a necessary pendulum in every organisation.
1
2
54
Replies
I worry that we have no space left in our schools any more for the old school 'awe and wonder' teacher, of the type I was lucky enough to have. The demands now are almost universally bureaucratic, procedural, mechanistic.
92
131
1K
Essentially we've franchised this out to 'curriculum', which is nothing but efficient at stripping out spontaneity, individuality and teacher themselves (no deviation, and scripts for delivery?!). But it doesn't work. Enchantment is forged in relationship not in PowerPoint
7
9
196
The curriculum over-focus has not (and can not) achieve its stated aim of improvement. It can't because it doesn't even know how to measure that. However, it has (and will) achieve its aims of consistency of input. Which means it was and is always in tension with teacher autonomy
3
5
79
However, the impact has been the reinforcing of a precious error, which is thinking that absolute consistency of input ensures consistent output. It was/is a factory line model of thinking, and whilst there are certain wins to come from it, there are losses to be charted too
2
4
73
Which takes us back to that first tweet - the awe and wonder teacher, lead by interest and excitement, embracing spontaneity, getting to an end point by a squiggly line not a straight one. Neither sequential nor maximally efficient, but one heck of a teacher.
1
3
122
I think we should mourn that loss. I even think (whisper it) we should try and reverse it, that there needs to be a correction on curriculum thinking that recognises what a monumental workload drain it's become for precious little impact. That it is about enchantment, not control
12
6
163