Curriculum For Wales

 This is a GUEST POST by Mr James Wise

 

“And I then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute, and is there a way you can do something like that by injection inside, or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs, and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it'd be interesting to check that.”

Donald Trump, April 2020

 

Perhaps one thing the above quote illustrates is that the quality of our thought is dependent on the quality and quantity of what we know. If we know lots about a certain topic, then we are more able to think about that topic in a sophisticated way. We are more able to analyse, critique and problem solve if we have a breadth and depth of understanding of what it is we are analysing, critiquing or attempting to solve. On the other hand, if we know very little about a topic then, well, we may end up suggesting people drink bleach.

As we plan a curriculum driven by the Four Purposes, the question of knowledge and understanding is central. The more pupils know, the more informed they become. The extent to which pupils become capable, ethical, creative or healthy largely depends on the application of what they know and understand. Indeed, Curriculum for Wales guidance emphasises how the realisation of the Four Purposes will be supported by “specific experiences, knowledge and skills”, with knowledge being defined as an “understanding of a discipline”, skills as the “application of knowledge” and experiences as “the combination of knowledge and skills”.

In other words, the extent to which the pupils pursue the purposes largely depends on their acquisition and application of knowledge, which would mean that the commonly held interpretation of Curriculum for Wales as a ‘skills based’ curriculum, is very much a misunderstanding (as this helpful blog from Welsh Gov points out). Certainly, the very notion that skills can sit outside of a knowledge base, that they can be cultivated in one area, say maths, and then extracted and utilised elsewhere, say in French, is highly questionable. As Dylan Wiliam argues here, and Prof Donaldson himself states here, the skill doesn’t exist without the contextual knowledge. The skill of solving a mathematical problem relies on knowledge of mathematics. That skill cannot be readily transferred to another context in order to solve a problem, for example, translating a text from French into English, as that would clearly require the application of a different knowledge base. In essence, the skill cannot be separated from the knowledge underpinning it. To draw on the thoughts of Michael Fordham, that would be like trying to separate the cake from the ingredients.

Could we make a similar point about the Four Purposes? Can a pupil’s creativity, capability or confidence be transferred from one context to a completely different one? Does capability in Maths mean capability in French? Does confidence in PE mean confidence in Art? Does creativity in Music mean creativity in English?

Clearly, just like skills, the Four Purposes are very much context dependent. If we want a pupil to be a confident mathematician then knowing a lot of maths is key. If I want a pupil to become a capable historian, then knowing a lot about history – substantive and disciplinary – is key. Therefore, as we design our curricula within the Curriculum For Wales framework, with the purposes acting as our beacon, the question of knowledge, and how pupils’ interact with and experience that knowledge has to be central. The pursuit of the purposes is dependent on it.

But what knowledge? Whose knowledge? Is all knowledge of equal value? Are some things just more important and more valuable to understand than others?

What is certain is that curriculum time is strictly finite. We can’t teach everything. In deciding to devote learning time to one thing, we are simultaneously taking learning time away from something else. We have to make decisions, and they can’t be arbitrary. We should be able to justify those decisions. Why ‘this’ and not ‘that’? Why teach this ‘now’ and not ‘then’? But how are we going to arrive at those decisions? And who should actually be deciding this?

Help is at hand, to an extent. The statements of What Matters are there to “guide the development of curriculum content” and descriptions of learning, arranged in progression steps, give teachers “scope to…select content”. But the specifics of that content, of what pupils actually learn, largely remain decisions we need to make. Ironically, there’s a danger that if we rigidly follow the What Matters statements and descriptions of learning as a way of selecting content then we could end up designing a curriculum that is somewhat ‘tick-box’, criteria-led, lacking coherence, with an inevitable focus on accountability (“Where’s your lesson on ‘How we engage with social influences shapes who we are and affects our well-being’”?)  The very things we are trying to move away from.

Perhaps keeping the purposes as our end goal, and building our curriculum around the knowledge and skill we feel is of most value and most importance is our best bet. We can then use What Matters statements and descriptions of learning as guides that we check-in with to ensure we’re on the right path, rather than as the drivers themselves.

But that still leaves the question of what exactly to teach. If the extent to which pupils realise the Four Purposes depends on the quality and quantity of the knowledge and skill they acquire, we need to ensure that what we teach is valuable and plentiful. So, where can we find seams of valuable, useful and important knowledge? Perhaps the subjects, the “tools teachers have for helping pupils make the step from experience to higher forms of thoughts” (Michael Young) is where to start. This is where the fruit of human thought and toil has accrued.

But haven’t we moved beyond subjects to Areas of Learning and Experience? What about the “integrated approach” and “meaningful links across different disciplines” that Curriculum for Wales seemingly champions? Certainly, the appreciation and understanding of links across or between ‘learning’ is certainly a sign of wisdom, depth and flexibility of thought, and is something to aspire to for all of our pupils. But are those connections where we should begin? Can we understand the link between A and B until we have a decent understudying of what A and B actually are? Or, will an increased understanding of A and of B to begin with lead to a greater, more meaningful understanding of that connection later on? To echo the thoughts of Martin Robinson, perhaps the way forward is to begin within the borders of subject disciplines, building understanding, and then to look-out and link across, in a more authentic manner. 

Unfashionable as it may seem, maybe subject disciplines, and the knowledge contained within them could be the places to start. Again though, the question of what knowledge and whose knowledge still stands. Which books to study in English? Whose interpretation of history? Which scientific discoveries or mathematical concepts? Add to this the question of how much of this valuable knowledge we have time to actually teach, and then how to begin to connect it in a meaningful way, and it can start to feel like the sort of ‘mad riddle’ that would exasperate regal Cockney hardman Danny Dyer.

I’ll keep this post short, with a view to exploring a possible way forward in the future, but perhaps some simple curriculum design principles could help us help us with these decision;

Breadth; a broad range of subjects, a breadth of concepts and content within those subjects as well as a breadth of voices and perspectives.

Value; concepts and content that are of most importance, most use and of most value to our pupils, not just academically but culturally too.

Coherence; sequenced and taught in a way that allows pupils to make meaningful connections between their learning, not just within a subject but across subjects and AOLEs.

I’ll attempt to explore and elaborate on these principles (and how they complement the Curriculum for Wales guidance) in another post soon. But for now, please feel free to share your thoughts, challenges and questions. The more we push each other, the better we can make this.

Diolch

James Wise

@MrWiseCHS