Curriculum Design and Assessment

Despite all the claims of educational researchers and the growth of the “knowledge society” (Hargreaves, 1999), secondary schooling may prove resistant to the influence of any school improvement moves with its age-graded, subject-based curriculum, and lesson-by-lesson schedule under a lot of pressure of examinations. Many experiments and claims made as a fresh start in schools with different ways of learning usually provide quick success demonstrations of desired results, but there is always a tendency to fade after an initial golden age. These schools soon look like any other school or vanish altogether (MacBeath and Moos, 2004a; Giles and Hargreaves, 2006; MacBeath et al., 2009). It is argued that the structured nature of the curriculum design, with high dominance of subject knowledge and examination results, make it a big challenge for learning to follow a co-constructivist and innovative approach in school (Coleman and Earley, 2005). Furthering their point, they argue that the most dominant model in schools is the reception model where teachers are considered more knowledgeable and in control, and learners remain passive and dependant. The same is in practice in Pakistani schools where teachers are considered the gatekeepers of knowledge (Khan et al., 2009). It has been argued though, that learners at schools need to experience a

92

curriculum in which they recognize themselves and relate it to the world in which they live (MacBeath et al., 2003) but finding room within a structured curriculum is a big challenge.

In a comparative study among teachers in Pakistan and the UK, curriculum design and dominance of exam results as an important performance indicator, is identified in both of the countries as the main barrier to any innovation and flexible approach in teaching and learning (Javed, 2004). Recent research by Galton and MacBeath (2008) has found a similar conclusion. Their study highlights pressures experienced by teachers who try to adopt co- constructivist approaches that work against the grain compared with fixed priorities and structure of the reception model. In examining the interplay between different stake holders‟ abilities to learn from each other and ambitious classroom practices, they state that there are certain aspects whose prevalence may be pivotal to bring change in the existing practices. Some of these include decision-making with a participative approach of leadership within school, leadership skills at different levels in school and the willingness to collaborate. And one of the most important factors is the support and flexibility within the curriculum to accommodate and appreciate the diversity of learners (Galton and MacBeath, 2008). Does the curriculum have this flexibility in terms of context sensitivity in schools, particularly in secondary schools which are usually under stress because of the pressure of examinations? Are learners free to learn the life skills instead of focusing on examination skills? Spencer‟s (1861) thought that he put forward more than a century ago, still remains a dream:

“How to live?- that is the essential question…in what way to treat the body…the mind. To manage our affairs…To bring up a family…to behave as a citizen….To utilize those resources

93

for happiness that nature supplies…how to live completely…To shape up for complete living is the function which education has to discharge” (Spencer, 1861 cited in MacBeath et al., 2007: p.131).

They consider this type of education and learning as the most effective. His concept of „complete living‟ and learning „how to live completely‟ as he introduced in the nineteenth century, is closer to the idea of shared leadership and learning in the concept of LfL. Does the curriculum of the twenty first century schools enhance this concept? Or do many of the concepts, such as critical thinking, and networks in schools, present in the literature fade away with pressure for coverage of the syllabus and curriculum contents? Comparing what Spencer (1861 cited in MacBeath et al., 2007) highlighted as a crucial change required in school education and what literature suggests today, it seems quite alarming how little educational arrangements have changed over the past 150 years. While educational reforms claim to bring many changes to the approach to education these are still not appreciated for being consumer oriented (Galton and MacBeath, 2008). What should the practitioners in schools do? Can they collaborate with each other to bring improvement in school? How can they create a learning environment in schools with a co-constructivist approach? Do students feel happy and satisfied with the existing teaching and learning practices in schools?

There is evidence that school is a turn-off for many students. Csikszentmihaly et al. (1993) find in an international survey, exploring the success and failure factors among teenagers, that for the vast majority life at school alternates between failure and apprehension. Similar

94

findings were reported in Andersson‟s (1998) research cited in Broadfoot (2007). The research finds that only 30% of students were happy in school out of the total 1200 students who participated in the survey, and consider that being in school is a meaningful and contributing experience to their self-esteem. Other research also highlights similar widespread student disaffection, lack of interest and alienation (Elliott and Shin, 2002). Pollard and Triggs, (2000: p.152) express a student‟s feelings who participated in their study that reflects how difficult students find it to relate to what is „taught‟ in schools to their context and realities:

“At the end of the day, I'm going to get something out of this - a good job, but some of the others just think 'oh no, another day at school” (a student quoted in Pollard and Triggs. 2000: p.152).

Javed (2004) argues that a paradigm shift in teaching and assessment practices is required in schools with a developmental approach involving all of the learners and catering for the context sensitivity. What is assessed in exams? Assessments, standardised tests, GCSE, GCE and the senior school examinations and results seem to be the most important words in the dictionary of secondary school education in many parts of the world including Pakistan, where private schools follow the British curriculum and examination system and the public schools have a similar pattern under the local education authorities and examination boards (Farooqi, 2011). Galton and MacBeath (2008) find in their studies that the rigidity and structured nature of these examinations is a constant source of stress not only for the students and their families but also for the teachers. The participants in their study complain of a loss of confidence, loss of creativity and spontaneity and an increase in stress caused by the pressure of assessments

95

and examinations. A similar response was found in a comparative study among teachers in Pakistan, UK and Ireland (Javed, 2005) where the majority of them consider the pressure of examination a major constraint for them to promote a „real learning environment‟ in schools. They think that examinations assess very limited abilities of students who are working under pressure during that time. However, there is evidence in the literature that schools that have a high agenda for paying attention to learning preferences of the learners always have enhanced effectiveness and achievements (Frost, 2006 and 2009; MacBeath et al., 2007). Ellis and Tod (2009) argue that if schools want to establish a learning environment, the emphasis from measurable and quantifiable test results, that raises accountability issues among teachers and school leaders, will have to be reconsidered by all involved in the process of education at school.