IMG73 (4)

Martin Blaszk

Martin Blaszk

The answęr lies in the attainment targets that are part of the curriculum.¹ Significantly, these run parallel to the main subject descriptors rather than being an integral part of them, and this division is important. as it creates a point of rcference for teachers rather than a wholly guiding principle. It is noticeable here also that the modality of the subject descriptors no longer exists in the attainment targets, Everything is stated in the simple prcscnt tcnsc, third person plural. leoving the reader in no doubt; this is what the child does wlien she/he is judged to be at this particułar level. In a sensc this also provides another point of similarity between the Hnglish curriculum and its Polisft counterparts, with the differcnce that the Po/ish bases of curricula through wording and layout, place the emphasis on attainment as a guiding principle, while the Engłish curriculum places it on the process of teaching, with attainment as a guide².

Conclusion

At a very basie level, the bases of the curricula like the national curriculum, which throughout this paper have been considered as equivalent documents, are ‘concemed with beliefs, values and theories’³ and can be assumed to embody a number of decisions: those about the objectives of the teaching programme, the content of the course of study, the method of instruction, and decisions about how the teaching programme as a whole is to be evaluated. Notwithstanding this, curricula also take on greater roles than those assigned to them in the brief description above. They are not merely a guiding set of principłes (or an advisory checklist depending on one's viewpoint), rather they are ‘the what’, ‘the how’ and ‘the why' that defines for educational institutions, and for that read teachers, the possibilities and limitations of teaching practice. With this in mind, a docuraent that plays such a defining role needs to be easily accessible This can include its availability but also in the way in which it is written, so that its diverse audience of professionals and lay people can understand what is being said and how it should be interpreted. The Iength of the document is also important. It should not be too brief so as to leave one with the feeling that something has been leli unexplained, or too long, with multiple cross-referencing, so as to make it an onerous łask to ‘grasp’ or navigate. Ali in all, a difficult juggling act to achieve between form and content, so that the one is not undermined by, or seems to contradict the other. In relation to this. Jerome Bruner's advocacy of a common sense approach to curriculum writing and course planning from the late 1950* needs to be kept in mind⁴.

In addition to this, in a very real sense, the curricula looked at above, also provide a description of the kind of person we want to produce at the end of a particułar stage of the educational process. It should come as no surprise then that the Polish and English documents share similar aspirations; both countries do after all belong to the European Union, have to compete in a global market, are technology advanced countries and democracies. However, there are also diflerences between the documents, not so much in the wording

li s not (only) what you say, U s the way that you say U: the new bases of the curricula

85

they choosc to use, but how it is employed and how often. The English document constantly reters to individual developmcnt both in its generał aims and the descriptors for individual subjccts, so that there is a feellng that development of the individual is important. The Polish documents are morę reticent.

All in all, it will be mteresting to see how the bases of curricula fair over the next few yeurs, and how too the proposed new curriculum model for England is dcveloped. Certainly the latter seems to want to move even morę towards placing the child at the centre of the leaming enterprise and subordinating teaching to the ‘needs, interests and aspirations of all chiłdrcn and help them make the best possible progress’²⁵, Perhaps too (and one can only hope) this is the situation Peter McLaren envisaged in the mid I980s w hen he talked of creating a liminal space where 'the teaching act becomes morę like a pilgrimage directed towards experiencing knowledge', rather than ‘ftlling up studenls-as-empty-containers with numerous facts.’²⁶ The English national curriculum, especially with its rhetoric towards review appears to be on the former path, the Polish bases of the curricula are not as dccisive.

Summary

lt’s not (only) what you say, it’s the way that you say it: the new bases of the curricula for preschool and the First class of primary

The latter part of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 have seen changes in the bases of the curricula in Poland and proposals for changes in the English national curriculum. This paper will consider the recently released bases of the curricula in Poland for preschool and the First class of primary, in light of some of the criticism that has been leveled at them. It will also compare these curricula to the English national curriculum, key stage one, in an attempt to outline the factors that have to be considered when creating such a document, including content. wording. quantity and layout, so as to ensure darity and understanding on behalf of the reader. Finally, it will try to draw some conclusions as to what makes a document of this type effective.

²⁵ Transcript conceming...,

P. McLaren, Schooling as a ritualperformance: towards a political economy of educational symboli and gestures. New York 1993, Routledge. p. 248.

1

   English: The national curriculum.... pp. 55-60.

2

   Unfortunately, in practice, the attainment targets have taken morę of a centre stage in English education. The controversy over SATs and how they have come to dominate educational practice is a case in point.

3

   S. Thronbury, An A-Z of ELT., 2006, London, Macmillan ELT, pp. 60-61.

4

‘ Bruner’s write up of the debates that took place at Cape Cod in 1959, to be found in J. Bruner, The process of education. Cambridge 1977, Harvard University Press.