Education has long been termed as the universal “key to success”. This is attributed to the fact that it is only through good education that we equip ourselves with the best skills both mentally and physically so as to yield positive results in our journey for success. In today’s aggressive business world, it takes more than mere raw skill and intuition to curve a notch in the market. A solid educational background proves invaluable and enables one to remain competitive in an environment that is constantly being flooded by skilled personnel.
In addition to this, the dynamic nature of the business world and the need for employees who are all rounded and well versed in every aspect of the business, that is; an employee who can take the business to another level, set the business on a success trajectory and recognize risk factors to avoid collapse is a major factor to be taken into consideration.
While there are various avenues through which students can attain their education, having a core curriculum is pivotal in ensuring that they equally acquire relevant information that may help them compete effectively in their future endeavors. To this regard, this study shall delve into the benefits that can be accrued from learning from a core curriculum.
A detailed analysis of supporting relevant literature shall be provided and the arguments raised by the opponents of this system of learning debated. To this end, an informative discussion in support of the core curriculum system of learning shall be provided.
The argument for core curriculum education
The essence of teaching a core curriculum is to ensure that students get the same information regarding politics, life, sciences, and arts in an organized and predetermined manner. Hirsch, as quoted by Coppola insists that students ought to be taught specific information about a given subject (29).
The fact is, every subject has a lot of information and at times, some of the information is not relevant or applicable to the lives of the students. As such, Hirsch advocates for a core curriculum because it conforms to the principle of schooling which is; to impart general knowledge to all students so that they can become more competent and literate members of society.
On the other hand, Stevens tends to disagree with these assertions and in his defense, he states that: “Allowing curriculums, textbooks and tests to be the defining, driving force behind the education of a child is a hindrance in the home as much as in the school (3).” In his article, the author proposes that the best way to acquire valuable knowledge is through “unschooling” (natural learning).
By definition, Stevens describes this system of learning as one characterized by a high degree of practical activities and instincts. He further states that it involves doing real things and following one’s interests. According to him, these interests, in turn, leads to the subjects being taught in core curriculum systems (history, art, music, mathematics among others.
However, his assumptions are misplaced and half-truths according to Hirsch. The author states that no matter how talented a student is in mathematics, he/she cannot learn how to formulate equations or solve complex questions through osmosis (87).
The author further contends that curriculums are well thought out such that they enable the student to progressively acquire the skills and knowledge required to tackle any problem through the application of core knowledge. With this in mind, it stands to reason that while natural learning may seem appealing to some, the use of curriculum presents the students with better skills and knowledge that can be used to understand their environments better.
In addition, Hirsch asserts that learning is mainly hinged upon the efforts employed by the student during the process (87). In this regards, he refers to attention and repetition as necessary components to successful learning. Therefore, drills and practice are a prerequisite in the learning process.
In addition, he contends that the teacher’s role in directing and monitoring such efforts is pivotal in ensuring that the learning process is secure. These facts further highlight the weaknesses of natural learning. This can be attributed to the fact that without constant supervision and a proper learning environment, students are likely to get distracted or avoid tasks that are seemingly hard.
In addition, Hirsch reiterates that equipping all students with more knowledge constitutes higher competence levels and a fairer society. Using the theory of opportunity, Hirsch contends that knowledge is a great foundation on which equality can be attained — as such, teaching students a similar curriculum gives them equal opportunities in life regardless of where they originate from.
The author believes that through a common curriculum, disadvantages students can benefit equally thus acquiring the necessary skills (such as comprehension) needed to facilitate academic achievements, political and economic participations and better financial status. In his point of view, he believes that learning through a common curriculum improves the student’s reading and learning levels, thereby reducing the achievement gaps experienced in most parts of the world.
In a contrasting argument, Graf disapproves the mainstream learning system (core curriculum learning) stating that it focuses mainly on the development of the student’s thinking capacity and ignores other core attributes such as the feeling and willing development. In his point of view, Graf believes that the extensive reading and grilling experienced by children during the first few years in school subjects them to excessive mental demands which invariably affects their health even during their adulthood.
To further support his argument, he refers to studies conducted between mainstream students and Waldorf students. The results from these studies indicated that while the mainstream students excelled in most of the subjects during the initial years of grade school, children following the Waldorf system surpassed them in later grades. This not only proves that core curriculum systems are ineffective but also highlights the detrimental effects the system has on the holistic development of the children.
Despite the sense in this argument, core curriculum systems do a better job in preparing the students for the real world that the Waldorf system. As Hirsch states, I am gaining knowledge creates more room for knowledge. As such, despite their weaknesses, main stream students are better equipped to adapt to different situations than their counterparts utilizing the Natural learning or the Waldorf learning systems.
Conclusion
Arguably, the quest for knowledge is not an easy task. It requires commitment, attentiveness, practice, and most important of all, great tutoring. Despite its weaknesses, the core curriculum system of learning has proven to be the most applicable mode of attaining social justice and equality in an unforgiving, ever-changing world. As such, in a bid to guarantee their success, parents should ensure that their children follow this system.
Works Cited
Graf, Josef. Considerations regarding Waldorf Education. 2009. Web.
Hirsch, Eric. Why general knowledge should be a goal for education: common Knowledge. 1998. Web.
Stevens, Earl. What is Unschooling? 1994. Web.