Prompt:
⁽¹⁾According to the Levin article, how are school curricula developed and implemented? What new information/perspectives does this reading provide about the development and implementation of school curriculum? Is there anything that surprises you or maybe concerns you?
⁽²⁾After reading pages 1-4 of the Treaty Education document, what connections can you make between the article and the implementation of Treaty Education in Saskatchewan? What tensions might you imagine were part of the development of the Treaty Education curriculum?

⁽¹⁾When reading the Levin article it became obvious to me that curriculum is subject to all of the same stressors as any other piece of political policy. This is something that didn’t really surprise me, but has forced me to think back and reflect on the way that my parents, and many other parents have responded to curriculum changes in the past. I was in high school when the Saskatchewan curriculum moved to the Workplace & Apprenticeship, Foundations, and Precalculus streams. This switch was enough of a change for my parents to completely remove themselves from helping me, or younger brothers, with homework. Just the fact that it was different to what they had experienced made it worse in their minds. I think this situation holds true for many proposed curriculum changes. As stated by Levin (2008) “everyone has gone to school, so just abut everyone has a feeling of being knowledgeable … [of] educational issues” (p. 15). This point Levin makes about the general public’s view of their own educational policy knowledge comes in stark contrast to his earlier point about voters being interested in policy, even when they are not knowledgeable (Levin, 2008, p. 10). I think this dichotomy is worrisome. While people are generally well meaning, if they don’t understand the full scope of an issue, and are unwilling to concede to more knowledgeable parties then issues arise. On the flip side of this, Levin presents a situation where even the experts in specific fields and education in general often can’t agree on the best way to create and implement curriculum. While there is no perfect system for creating curriculum, it seems like the current system comprising of groups of subject experts, curricular experts, teachers, and the general public is the best workable solution we have at the moment.

⁽²⁾I personally did not experience much Treaty Education while in school. The unfortunate truth is, I have learned more about the Treaties in the last two years than I did in the whole rest of my life. I think that this speaks to just how important Treaty Education is though. An understanding of the Treaties, and the responsibilities that come with being part of a Treaty are not something that can just be picked up without some explicit lessons on the subject. One thing that does strike me as odd is the lack of Treaty Education integration in curriculum. The Treaty Education document clearly states “when meaningfully and thoughtfully incorporated into subject areas, Treaty Education moves beyond and idea to become actualized as a belief that benefits all learners” (Saskatchewan Ministry of Education, 2013, p.3). While this is made very clear, if you look through other curriculum documents there isn’t any specific mention about Treaty Education. This lack of inclusion in other curricular documents makes it though to keep in mind and can also make it tougher to include. I think that the tensions surrounding the implementation of a Treaty Education curriculum go beyond the usual ‘being uncomfortable with change’. It is an unfortunate truth that a lot of people — at least people in the rural communities I grew up near — do not see the need for Treaty Education. Whether this belief is due to a lack of understanding, or rooted in something more unsavoury, There are a large amount of people who seemed to push back against Treaty Education on the basis of what it is, and the rhetoric they would have to engage in if their kids were to take part in such a course. While I don’t think this way of thinking is something that we have completely moved beyond, I like to believe that attitudes will change.

References:

Saskatchewan Ministry of Education. (2013). Treaty Education Outcomes and Indicators. Retrieved from https://learn-ca-central-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.com

Levin, B. (2008). Curriculum policy and the politics of what should be learned in schools. In F. Connelly, M. He & J. Phillion (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 7 – 24). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Available on-line from: https://www.corwin.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/16905_Chapter_1.pdf