Individual Presentation or Panel Title

Controlling the Curriculum: Inservice Teacher Education as Product Implementation Training

Abstract

The curriculum has long since represented a site of struggle (Kliebard, 2004), not only with regards to its role in the sanctioning of official knowledge (Apple, 2000) but also in terms of the contested means through which it is disseminated in schools – the most prominent form of which occurs through the use of textbooks (Apple, 1988, 2000). Attempts to exercise control over the curriculum have taken countless forms, but much less recognized has been the role of inservice teacher education to function as a method of both influencing teachers’ instructional practices and externalizing processes of generating stronger control over the curriculum. One of the evolving ways in which efforts to maintain tighter control over the curriculum is currently occurring through the use of required professional development for inservice teachers, as a result of the seemingly common practice of bundling professional development sessions with the sale of curricular materials and programs marketed to schools and school districts. By approaching inservice teacher education in this way, these types of professional development sessions for practicing teachers are constructed in a manner automatically more likely to have greater similarity with forms of product implementation training than with the kinds of collaborative, inquiry-based learning demonstrated to provide lasting benefits for both teachers and their students. Concerns about the publishers of commercially produced instructional materials and programs as the expert generators of knowledge related to the curriculum need to be raised given issues stemming from the positioning of teachers as subjects of technical training.

Presentation Description

In this study, I note how attempts to exercise control over the curriculum have taken countless forms; however, much less recognized has been the role of inservice teacher education to function as a method of both influencing teachers’ instructional practices and externalizing processes of generating stronger control over the curriculum. One of the evolving ways in which efforts to maintain tighter control over the curriculum is currently occurring through the use of required professional development for inservice teachers, as a result of the seemingly common practice of bundling professional development sessions with the sale of curricular materials and programs marketed to schools and school districts.

Keywords

Curriculum control, Teacher education, Professional development

Location

Forsyth

Publication Type and Release Option

Presentation (Open Access)

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Jun 10th, 2:15 PM Jun 10th, 3:30 PM

Controlling the Curriculum: Inservice Teacher Education as Product Implementation Training

Forsyth

The curriculum has long since represented a site of struggle (Kliebard, 2004), not only with regards to its role in the sanctioning of official knowledge (Apple, 2000) but also in terms of the contested means through which it is disseminated in schools – the most prominent form of which occurs through the use of textbooks (Apple, 1988, 2000). Attempts to exercise control over the curriculum have taken countless forms, but much less recognized has been the role of inservice teacher education to function as a method of both influencing teachers’ instructional practices and externalizing processes of generating stronger control over the curriculum. One of the evolving ways in which efforts to maintain tighter control over the curriculum is currently occurring through the use of required professional development for inservice teachers, as a result of the seemingly common practice of bundling professional development sessions with the sale of curricular materials and programs marketed to schools and school districts. By approaching inservice teacher education in this way, these types of professional development sessions for practicing teachers are constructed in a manner automatically more likely to have greater similarity with forms of product implementation training than with the kinds of collaborative, inquiry-based learning demonstrated to provide lasting benefits for both teachers and their students. Concerns about the publishers of commercially produced instructional materials and programs as the expert generators of knowledge related to the curriculum need to be raised given issues stemming from the positioning of teachers as subjects of technical training.