Quick question to get us started. I am writing a book on the role of the arts (particularly drama) within the current preference for a 'knowledge rich curriculum'. What are your thoughts on that and what springs to mind when you hear that phrase 'knowledge rich curriculum'. My instinct is that the arts world is more (negatively) reactive than proactive in their stance. Am I right? Would love to hear your opinions on this!
The phrase "knowledge rich curriculum" leaves much open to interpretation and discussion. As a place to start, The Glossary of Education Reform includes entries for both curriculum and hidden curriculum. Curriculum, according to the Glossary, "typically refers to the knowledge and skills students are expected to learn, which includes the learning standards or learning objectives they are expected to meet; the units and lessons that teachers teach; the assignments and projects given to students; the books, materials, videos, presentations, and readings used in a course; and the tests, assessments, and other methods used to evaluate student learning."
However, the Glossary does not have stand-alone entries for the words knowledge or skill(s). Rather, there are 51 entries including the word knowledge and 68 entries including the word skill(s). Content knowledge, for example, "refers to the body of knowledge and information that teachers teach and that students are expected to learn in a given subject" and "generally refers to the facts, concepts, theories, and principles that are taught and learned in specific academic courses, rather than to related skills—such as reading, writing, or researching—that students also learn in school" (emphasis added). However, the entry then discusses the debate between knowledge and skills almost exclusively in terms of teaching. Only at the end of the entry is learning included.
Still, knowledge, in and of itself, is not defined. How does one know something? Is it only by empirical experience? If one has never lived in a climate where it snows, can that person only know about snow and not actually know snow? Do we only know with our five senses? How, then do we know abstract math and other implied worlds?
As a linguist, in my experience learning a language is tested by one's ability to communicate with others in French, German etc - in speech and writing, and reading texts. A good memory is crucial to this. Also one needs a reason to learn a foreign language eg
travel, shopping, passing an exam, making friends, appreciating drama and literature.... Daphne Hope this may reach you Margaret
Dear Anne, thank you for your in depth grappling with those key terms and how interesting that the "debate between knowledge and skills [is] almost exclusively in terms of teaching". Have you heard of Polanyi's book on tacit knowledge? It's a text that seems to be referred to by so many different disciplines. I haven't read it myself but I love the phrase 'tacit knowledge' - for me that's what embodied learning is - concretising knowing through the use of the body. I look forward to further debate!
I have come across the term 'tacit knowledge,' and I have even but I don't believe I have read any of Polanyi's work. However, I just searched for information about him, and I definitely have him on my "to read next" list! Thank you!
Thanks Daphne - I did receive this. I appreciate your contribution and I think you hit on an important point when you mention having a motivation for learning a new language - or for any new learning or skill most likely!