Decanonizing the Field
Edited By João M. Paraskeva and Shirley R. Steinberg
Afterword: Curriculum? Tentative, at Best. Canon? Ain’t No Such Thing
afterword Curriculum? Tentative, at Best. Canon? Ain’t No Such Thing Shirley R. Steinberg Most of us remember our own educational canon being culturally and academ- ically expected. Up until the latter part of the twentieth century, this canon was not flexible for most public schools. Repeated from decade to decade, the canon was the curriculum, consisting of tattered and yellowed hand-me-downs, most without revision. The curriculum was considered classical … the best there can be, not questioned. Teachers, professors, politicians, and parents assumed the validity of the canon and continued to support the texts and les- sons. Occasionally, scholars would proclaim a slight change in the educational canon, assuring that certain curricular content be modified or retained. In the case of historical events, the canon was modified according to dominant cultural myth, and it took a long time. In the United States, the “conflict” in Viet Nam (Vietnam) was inserted into the curriculum years after it ended; Civil Rights were added as an afterthought; and the history of Labor … well, you still can’t find it in most school texts. Not only has curriculum been fixed and declared as correct; any changes to it have been politically motivated. After João and I finished this book, I intended my afterword to be a recap of the discussions we included, hoping to create provocation and rebellion. I kept coming back to the notions of curriculum as canon and canon as curric- ulum. The succinct, political, and thoughtful chapters reminded me that in 720...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.