Introduction
The choice of an approach to curriculum is a very consequential decision. It will have a significant impact on the level of students’ skills and literacy. All pros and cons of each of both systems need to be taken into consideration before deciding between core knowledge curriculum and flexible approaches to education. Developing students’ creativity and considering interests of ethnic minorities, the creative approach has proven to be the most effective method for reaching the main educational goal of person’s socialization.
Discussion
The recent tendency to deny the benefits of flexible curriculum putting emphasis on its negative sides was caused by misinterpreting the main principle of the approach. The fact is that developing creativity and logical structure of the curriculum are not mutually exclusive notions. It is possible to offer students creative assignments and touch upon topics which would be interesting and useful for a concrete class logically structuring the curriculum at the same time. Besides providing the students with opportunities to develop their communicative skills and to realize their creative potential, flexible curriculum allows teachers to prepare lessons considering ethnical and cultural characteristics of the students. Core knowledge curriculum approach presupposing acquiring concrete materials during concrete years of study, has got certain advantages as well. Focus on logical structure of the materials would allow students to obtain a comprehensive understanding of disciplines. On the other hand, core knowledge curriculum gives preference to western culture not taking into consideration interests of children who are representative of ethnical minorities. Standardizing the curriculum would limit the educators’ opportunities for satisfying demands of all students using and individual approach, cultivating tolerance to other nationalities and broadening the learners’ scope. It is preferable to leave the existing flexible curriculum alive, considering the logical structure of the courses and general guidelines concerning the level of children’s’ literacy and basic skills after a certain grade.
Creative approach is beneficial for developing students’ analytical thinking and communicative skills which would be beneficial for the process of their socialization. Creative students are able to come up with various responses towards an assignment or test as they are all engaged in diverse thinking and there is no a single answer which is considered to be the right one. The diversification in thinking generates various original ideas which can be sorted out by thorough analysis and in-depth argument; there is a best answer which will be arrived at. When a group of students are put together, the ideas they come up are numerous as compared to when they are put separately. Though Yale researchers found out that “the same number of people generate more and better ideas separately than together” (Bronson “Forget Brainstorming”), the importance of team work skills should not be underestimated. the experience of collaborative work might be useful in children’s professional career. Statistically it has been noted that children who are more creative during there childhood are more successful being adults. The intelligence quotient (IQ) of a child does not necessarily indicate how creative they would be in the future. One in three people is likely to be creative in his lifetime if he/she is more creative in childhood. This is related to the intelligence quotient of a person when he/she was a child. For one to be creative, it is not necessarily to tell the individual to do so. Actually, it would be even senseless. “Such an instruction may just cause people to freeze up” (Bronson “Forget Brainstorming”). Creativity is achieved by giving some sort of encouragement, telling learners that every person is unique and is able to think independently therefore coming up with something that another persons cannot.
While creativity in American schools is dropping, the Chinese are trying their best to improve creativity in their students. Their curriculum is being restructured to emphasize creativity. Though some parts of the curriculum may not help them while they are doing their exams it at least helps them with their creative thinking. The drilling approach that was once used in Chinese in their institutions is being removed and is being substituted by a “problem-based” one. “In most of the city’s primary and middle schools, art, music, and physical education are staples of the curriculum” (Baker). In other words, the Chinese educational system is aimed at harmonious development of personality instead of acquiring certain information blocks and developing basic skills. Beside the experience of this developed country, one more argument for choosing the creative approach are the physiological peculiarities of all human beings. The recent scientific researches proved that creativity is one of normal functions of the brains, while “lack of creativity—not having loads of it—is the real risk factor” (Bronson “The Creative Crisis”). Limiting the students’ opportunities for developing their creative thinking and realizing their creative potential might have negative impact on children’s further development.
Conclusion
Despite certain advantages of core knowledge curriculum approach, the flexible curriculum should be left alive. Creative approach allows considering interests of ethnical minorities, adapting the programs to needs of a certain class and developing the learners’ creative thinking.
Works Cited
- Bronson, Po and Ashley Merryman. “Forget Brainstorming”. Newsweek, 2010.
- Bronson, Po and Ashley Merryman. “The Creativity Crisis”. Newsweek, 2010.
- Baker, Linda. “Chinese Schools Get Creative”. The Christian Science Monitor. 2004.