The Royal Society of Edinburgh wrote a report `Curriculum for Excellence - Numeracy, Science and Mathematics, and wider Issues` published April 2008.
Not known for it radicalism, the Royal Society`s working group is scathing in its criticism of Curriculum for Excellence. They begin, politely enough, by welcoming the aims and values of the new curriculum, particularly the intention to develop interdisciplinary themes.
They go on: "There appears to be no recognition in the documentation that there is a structure to human knowledge that has been built up over centuries, and is the means by which we understand the world." They point out that the "outcomes" do not contain this knowledge and cannot alone be used to develop a curriculum. They ask: "Where will the bedrock of understanding come from whereby the next generation of scientists or even of scientifically aware lay-persons be developed?...How and where will science be learned?"
The Appendix is worth perusing as they question some of the detail. Anybody responsible for setting up the "experiences" and "outcomes" should cringe with embarrassment on reading this.
No doubt, there will have been a few adjustments made to the curriculum after this review, but it does not inspire confidence in the creators of CfE and does raise the question: what were they attempting to do?
http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/cms/files/advice-papers/2008/CfE_science_maths_numeracy.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment