Class 11: March 24, 2008

Second to last class! This has been a great course. Denis' leadership and the contributions from everyone has made for a very rich experience. Thanks to you all!

Deconstruction

An interesting exercise with the poem. To me, the definition of the word deconstruction was straight forward. If construction meant to assemble, then deconstruction simply meant to disassemble. However, as we learned, the key in the deconstructive disassemblage is to have the words speak as they are. This is curious. How do words speak without a meaning assigned through everyday use? Is not language socially constructed? What can words mean when strung together? We have talked about authorship and that it is the author who can really clarify the intention of his/her text, be it poetry or prose. But, as we again discussed tonight, texts can take on multiple meanings independent of any intention. As words stand alone or in combination without an authority to explain their intention, they present different meanings for their readers, meanings derived from the frames of reference of the readers. The simplicity of this at its root is beautiful... a little like math! Deconstruction: yet another critical modality (see http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/derrida/deconstruction.html).

Sidebar Thoughts

Language as a communication technology - it seems so. Language as medium - it seems so. Langauge as message - yes, but which one? One medium, many messages. Social control through language? Why not? Which language: English, French? How about music? Maybe art? Is Curriculum a language? Sure.

This is fun. Yet, after an analysis of what curriculum could be, especially in light of text deconstruction, it seems clear that curriculum is for sure but one thing: a word. And if a word, then how about just a brick!

Goodyear

The reasons why the word curriculum was chosen to describe plans of designated study is irrelevant, but at an atomic level, it is interesting to consider linguistics and how certain combinations of symbols were assigned particular meanings. The Curriculum Design course could be analyzed the same way. The concepts presented came in a particular order, as did the readings/presentations.

As we moved through the course, it became clear that there were significant relationships amongst the readings. There was a grand plan being discovered at the same time as it was being followed. Though in the course a formula for how to design a curriculum was not explicitly stated, the readings shed light on the fundamental elements to be considered when desigining one: philosophy, context, content, organization.

Goodyear's framework includes fundamental elements that interact when a curriculum is being created. For me, the most significant is the pedagogic philosophy, yet environment can dictate a philosophic stance taken. The cyclic orientation of the framework is strong because curriculum needs to be open-ended, always ready to change with the wind. This is postmodern and allows becoming, as Baudrillard would say. A 21st century design should be guided by such a framework.