- A course of study
- A program of courses taken to complete a degree
- A prescribed course of studies
- A set of materials
The Latin origin of the word curriculum is to run a course. It is as simple as it gets, but is it really that simple? Considering the amount of money schools spend on "curriculum", I'm guessing it isn't so simple. Within education circles, teachers and administrators also have very different ideas and definitions of curriculum. It seems hard for any one school to embrace one clear definition. If curriculum is "to run a course", then are the texts, technology and materials also part of the curriculum or are they to be considered curriculum support? What should we call all of the documents we develop to support the curriculum? Is it correct when we say, "I am writing curriculum"? Are we really doing that or writing documents to support the curriculum?
I was recently asked to manage the curriculum for grades 6-12 in my District, and I find it difficult to get to an agreed upon working definition. I don't see this as awful, just a good opportunity to begin the conversation. When asked to define curriculum, one friend of mine in another District replied, "textbooks". I realize that this may be the response from a number of educators when polled, but I also think that curriculum is something more, much more. If there was a consistent agreed upon definition, I believe then it would be easier to decide what to purchase with "curriculum" money.
I have to dive into the creation of my own definition of curriculum, but I wrestle with the processes of writing curriculum, developing curriculum and experiencing curriculum. At this point, I would define curriculum as the designed or planned course of study that students (and teachers) will follow as they progress through an educational program. The base design or plan must be improved by quality ancillary materials such as video, podcasts, individual and group activities/projects, and assessments. These must easily plug into and support the base course of study. They should also enable a meaningful teaching and learning experience. During the development process, there has to be some requirement for interdisciplinary connections.
Thinking more deeply, I see the course of study as the cells in the body. They provide the most basic information related to the overall design and structure of the body. The cells each carry a responsibility for the makeup of the body systems including, the bones, skin, organs and hair. These systems ultimately come together to enable the sensory perceptions that allow our body to gather more pertinent information in a constant learning capacity. In my mind, this is where curriculum design tends to fail our students. We have yet to consistently figure out how to bring together all of the ancillaries to create or enable the extra-sensory connections that will open the door to a wider range of knowledge acquisition and critical thinking opportunities. While it may be possible for us to develop our curriculum at a "cellular" level, we have to be willing to take a risk and really look at change that requires an overhaul of the curriculum delivery system to meet those extra-sensory requirements that will make teaching the curriculum much more powerful. After careful consideration, I believe the curriculum is the DNA of teaching and learning.
