Education Term Paper: Critical and Creative Exploration of Curriculum

Critical and Creative Exploration of Curriculum
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Critical and Creative Exploration of Curriculum
Introduction
As espoused in the curriculum, learning is conceptualized via diverse approaches, including the rhizomatic curriculum and learning conceptualization method. Rhizomatic learning constitutes an approach to learning where learning is anchored on the viewpoints of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari in a thousand plateaus (Kairienė, 2020). There have been tremendous changes globally, such that learning and curriculum are no longer rigid concepts but are now more exposed to adaptability, flexibility, and interconnectivity. Rhizome Theory presents a unique opportunity to explore the multiple facets of learning and curriculum that meet the circumstance dictated by 21-century merging needs and changes. The Rhizomatic theory in curriculum and learning is a useful concept that enables us to view learning processes and content as alive, changing, dynamic, adaptive, flexible, highly interconnected, and responsive.
Overview of Understanding Curriculum Concept
The Rhizomatic Theory provides an avenue for an in-depth and critical understanding of the curriculum. According to this theory, the curriculum does not have any beginning or end, leading to a dynamic, open, personalized learning network created by learners who meet their perceived and real needs (Kairienė, 2020). The concept of the curriculum is fundamental in education. It is the critical foundation that underpins the existence of the education system around the globe. It functions to provide a framework upon which contents of learning and means of learning are enshrined. Curriculum embodies knowledge and skills, and its associated way detailing the transfer of such knowledge and skills to the targeted groups. It entails the interaction between the learners, structure, and the content itself. But the concept of curriculum denotes confusion regarding its interpretation. Some might perceive the curriculum as the content which instructors or teachers teach students. Institutions, districts, or certain jurisdictions may see the word curriculum to mean standardized works that teachers are supposed to disseminate to learners within given confines. The curriculum comprises collections of lessons, assessments, and other academic content that school, district, program, class, or teacher need to teach learners and evaluate progress. The curriculum should be guided by purpose statement, outcome statement, essential resources, strategy framework, verification, methods, and course content.
The concept of curriculum is elusive. Its elusive nature is consistent with Calderon-Berumen & O'Donald (2017) observation that the current living context is full of inconsistencies and paradoxes. Such ambiguities require individuals to be in constant change. Our identity is so complex, which is automatically replicated in our curriculum. Many have poked holes in the curriculum, citing various inconsistencies and faults. The majority of critics of the curriculum often point to the curriculum's inability to respond to contemporary global challenges, and others think that the curriculum is centered excessively on examination and tests. Others would feel that the curriculum does not provide individual learners space to tell their stories, express their narratives, and unravel their personal experiences. Instead, they think that the curriculum is a restrictive framework that is arguably intolerant and rigid. The learning process has always been a matter of contestation, and some have blamed it for malfunctioned curriculum. The inability to understand what constitutes the curriculum's meaning at an advanced level is part of the problem. The formal definition of the curriculum is just the tip of an iceberg because there is a bulk of underlying details and concepts on this theme. More often, we tend to misunderstand the meaning of the curriculum. Lack of adequate understanding leads us to depart from the curriculum's realities, wholesomeness, and humanness. The curriculum is authentic and is characterized by faultiness that necessitates change, tolerance, openness, and negotiation.
Truthfulness and Authenticity of Curriculum
In many instances, the curriculum has been defined in the context of authenticity. The authenticity aspect may denote reality, factuality, originality, and accuracy of the curriculum. The meaning of authenticity may often rely on the context in which it is used. Authenticity is often socially constructed to infer implicit ideas related to power, power, authority, and reality, but it must be noted such understand is quite fluid and elusive.
The curriculum is inextricably linked to our society. It is a sophisticated matter that cannot be resolved in one sitting. An educator who administrates curriculum wears many caps. MacKenzie-Dawson (2019) notes that education is a mother, a daughter, a partner, and a teacher of teachers. MacKenzie-Dawson is implying that curriculum is vas and holistic practice. It does not exist nor operate in isolation. The educator is not a perfectionist; he or she still retains the human features, traits, and shortfalls. An educator reflects shame due to various misdeeds, including irresponsible alcoholism. Thus, in the curriculum context, educators are not the sole drivers and administrators and preservers of the curriculum; instead, it is about the whole community, including the administrative authorities, the government, the parents, the private sectors, and learners.
Curriculum denotes imperfection, and the moment we acknowledge such imperfection, we shall have a better understanding and strive to move towards a meaningful relationship with each person, stakeholder, and the curriculum content and processes (MacKenzie-Dawson, 2019). The idea of imperfection provides authenticity to the curriculum that it is not an ultimate solution to global problems, but through its blueprints and directions, it becomes possible to manage the earthly challenges. The curriculum is not about rigidity but flexibility and adaptability. The recognition of curriculum challenges is the primary motivators to initiate change and fix shortfalls as earlier shown that curriculum authenticity lies in its imperfection.
We must acknowledge that authenticity may elicit the concept of vulnerability, such as the risk of rejection. (MacKenzie-Dawson 2019) affirms that people may have a hesitancy to show inherent vulnerabilities. Just like MacKenzie-Dawson cannot advertise her alcoholism, it is the same way people may not accept authenticity. MacKenzie-Dawson’s alcoholism behavior shapes her lens and experience, and addition influences how she teaches. It is impossible for her to detach herself from experience but must embrace the sense of belonging and relational engagement. Her behavior, inherent personal weaknesses, and environment of whatever context represent a replica of the curriculum. It is trough authenticity that curriculum may embrace pedagogical negotiations, active engagements with the community, and facilitating a move towards the praxis
Following closely on the concept of imperfection is the idea of transformation. Transformation is not a complex theory, but it is about recognizing fragilities, downsides, or weaknesses and resolving these faults through collaboration, honesty, since, and genuine efforts. Such transformation requires leadership and interpersonal relationships that acknowledges and embraces the multiple facets of imperfection (MacKenzie-Dawson 2019).
Why is the authenticity of the curriculum relevant? Any progress in the curriculum can be dealt with effectively if we fully understand that curriculum is not the ideal subject, but it is a theme of multiple perceptions, interpretations, foreseeable and non-foreseeable risks, benefits, and opportunities. Without compromise, it is unlikely to reach any consensus. The element of authenticity in the curriculum should dispel the spirit of egoism and selfishness. In this light, (MacKenzie-Dawsonm (2019) cautions about the dangerous catechism of difference, where the educators and stakeholders carry egoistical armor while putting in a disarray effort of creating space for dialogue, for identification, recognition, and a celebration of our difference. We have lost the touch of poetic inquiry that disables attachments but permits us to explore new spaces, reconsidering where we have come from, making and establishing new friends and interpersonal relationships, as well as refreshing what we hold.
An authentic curriculum has implications. It recognizes the learners as individuals who should access multiple pathways of learning that fulfill their personalized learning and provides impactful experiences. It entails a desirable balance between the instructor’s content and self-regulated learning from the students supported by the clarity of expectation and feedback. An authentic curriculum should be inclusive. As earlier seen, none is ‘god’ in curriculum processes or development. Instead, it is centered on the genuineness, goodwill, collaborative efforts, and advice from various relevant stakeholders.
Living Curriculum and Transformative Concept
The curriculum is a societal living concept that is transformative. Curriculum core objectives entail its capacity to transform learners in response to societal and individual needs and an emerging phenomenon in the world. A learner-centered pedagogy, where students are engaged, participative, and can actively deduce meaning, underlies the need for teaching and learning within the context of a transformed curriculum. The nature of curriculum's life and capacity to influence change in response to emerging needs and gaps are well captured in the Rhizomatic Theory of curriculum that provides an extensive scope of understanding. A living curriculum is defined not as the program's information content. Instead, it is perceived as the programs’ learning experience. Living curricula learning experiences have overarching links, integration, and application of theory, skills, knowledge, work experience, and practice. Calderon-Berumen & O'Donald, K. (2017) argued for the formation and promotion of a living curriculum anchored on a person's lived experiences.  The authors paint an understanding of identity as a complex and multilayered construct that a person can constantly revise and adjusts and contends the need to provide all persons the opportunity to express who they are and explore their space in the world. It will allow an individual to claim a place in the world and actively participate in the political and democratic process.  Embedded within a ‘living curricula’ is Ako's concept, a Maori word, which implies learning, study, instruct, and teach or advice (Marshall & Wilson, 2012). Ako considers language, identity, and culture, as crucial aspects of where students come from and the formation of partnerships in sharing knowledge and expertise (Marshall & Wilson, 2012). The authors not only consider curriculum is transformative and changing, but more importantly, it is living.
Learning processes
Learning processes should able Rhizomatic Theory principles, where the learning process can produce and develop in a connectible, adjustable, detachable, and presents with multiple points of entries and exits. Questions can be posed in such a process, including why we teach, how successful learning appears, how a successful learner appears, and how learning can be structured to facilitate successful learning?
The learning process and content are concepts that are centric to the curriculum. These concepts' core objectives involve their ability to arm the learners with the necessary knowledge and skill that would facilitate better adaptability and survival in the globe. The curriculum is expected to transform learners .when students engaged in learning, some of my transform while others do not. According to Willis, Abery, & Leiman (2013), there are three critical learning processes. First, the first way entails knowledge transmission to learners. Learning via transmission is a form of instruction where knowledge and skills are transmitted from the teacher to the learner. This approach is teacher-centric method in which the teacher is the primary source of knowledge, the evaluator, and the fundamental owner of the information, skill, or content. In a knowledge transformation approach, the teacher disseminates knowledge in a predetermined order of content. The learners, in this case, are expected to demonstrate achievement by replicating or reflecting the transmitted information or skills (Phillips, McNaught & Kennedy, 2010). This method is often characterized by standardized tests that examine the degree to which the student's has captured the knowledge and skills passed by the teacher to the learners.
.The second process involves gaining go knowledge and skills through experiential engagements. The experiential learning process is also called transactional teaching, where situations or circumstances are created, allowing learners to interact with content with a view of constructing a skill and knowledge. This learning process is a product of constructivism philosophy. The learners are rarely the recipients of knowledge from education. Instead, the learners are actively engaged in building and constructing knowledge and skills by leveraging the experience and new knowledge. The type of learning is espoused in epistemology as constructivism. Constructivism is the idea that learners develop knowledge for themselves, and he or she continues to nurture the capacity to interpret and construct meanings as learning continues.
The concept of constructivism as engraved in curriculum and fronted some has been a subject of intense criticism within the confines of epistemology (Clark, 2018). Critics argue that constructing knowledge as experiential, transactional, and building or developing it could imply that there is no prior knowledge, why is quite faulty thinking. In other words, constructivism could be interpreted to mean that there is no ‘known’ knowledge. Does it imply that knowledge is a product of our experiences, true or false? However, there are guiding principles to the constructivist theory. It considers learning as an active process that deploys sensory inputs and creates meaning out of them. It stresses the point that the environment extensively models learning. The capacity to construct meaning fro...