Monday, May 1, 2017

The Hidden Curriculum

The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men, Gang aft agley
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, For promis'd joy!

Within the educational world we have the concept of the hidden curriculum. On one hand, you have the lessons and subjects taught in class from which students are supposed to be learning. On the other hand, you have the mostly implicit lessons which students internalize as they go through their education.

The hidden curriculum is often thought of as a way in which the dominant class, culture, and race exert control over an institution which seeks to allow people to escape that control. When the progressive movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries fought hard for the idea of universal public education, they did so under the banners of republican motherhood, marginalizing Catholics and Lutherans, and ignoring (if not outright promoting) racial segregation. The hidden curriculum promoted in this era was that of white protestants. For all the progressive activism of John Dewey or Booker T Washington, the classroom remained a place which championed a specific kind of outcome.

Explicitly, our modern classrooms are mostly engaged in active learning strategies which center on the student's abilities and needs rather than the teacher's preferences. Ostensibly, students learn better when given all the elements necessary to construct knowledge on their own. Hallmarks of this strategy include a strong focus on collaboration and group work. Teachers are encouraged to use technology as much as possible and even "flip the classroom" to allow more time for collaborative learning at school.

Implicitly, the hidden curriculum promotes specific kinds of behaviors which, if we're being honest with ourselves, are white. Young children sometimes don't do well in group environments. They want to play and "act out" and do things kids do. Kids who lack self control are often referred for special education testing. They don't get recommended for talented and gifted programs. Kids who don't speak English as a primary language suffer similarly. It's an easy connection from strong behavioral preferences in collaborative learning classrooms to the school-to-prison pipeline. In my own experience, I've seen that behavioral problems result most frequently from students who can't access the curriculum (poor literacy skills, for example) or from students with circumstances outside the school building that affect their well being (gang membership, parental death, poverty, homelessness). These kids act out and disrupt the collaborative classroom which begins to put them away from their peers and into pathways which help them understand the hidden curriculum: You Don't Belong Here.

It's not just behavioral expectations, though. The hidden curriculum has larger influences on the economy at large. For example, only 3% of young adults surveyed by the National Association of Home Builders say they would consider a career in construction. I strongly dislike uniform age cohort stereotypes (thank goodness they didn't say millennials) but I tend to pay attention to data that shows large effects or reveals strong preferences. 43% of surveyed young adults said they wouldn't consider working in construction at any compensation level. $1,000,000 a year wouldn't convince some of these respondents to work construction? I'd do it. But I'm not young anymore. I think this is, in part, due to the hidden curriculum.

No Child Left Behind famously gutted vocational education across the United States. I recall my county eliminating the Vocational Prep track while I was still in high school. They put out a press release claiming that 100% of Fayette county students were College Prep! Amazing! Stupendous! And, basically, a lie. Even now, more than a decade later, about 30% of high school graduates don't go to college (58% for blacks). Only about 1 in 3 adults in the US has a college degree. High schools, however, focus almost exclusively on college. The hidden curriculum is telling students that college is the only acceptable outcome. That's why surveyed youth don't want to work construction. They probably don't want to be electricians, plumbers, or mechanics either despite the fact that these jobs pay well (better than the shitty retail and service sector jobs so many kids end up in).

There may be other perceptions at work too. Construction jobs are stereotyped as worked by immigrants and as being harsh conditions for low pay. There is little social prestige attached to construction work so kids who say they want to go into construction don't receive praise or admiration. It's often seasonal and seems like it is highly at risk during recessions. We did just come out of the deepest recession in the post-war era which prominently featured a collapse of the housing market and nearly 3 years in which new residential construction (typically what we think of as construction jobs, another bias, somebody builds skyscrapers) ground to a halt. It's not an open and shut case, to be sure, but we can't ignore the effects schooling has on what careers people pursue later in life. If you spend 12 years being told that college is the only acceptable option, then you're going to strongly prefer college.

The thing about the hidden curriculum is, it's typically not something which exists on purpose. The goal of progressive reforms in the early 20th century was never to disenfranchise people but that was sometimes the result. The goal of focusing on college was not to deprive the world of skilled tradesmen but that was the result. The goal of collaborative learning strategies wasn't to marginalize students with different cultural expectations (or environmental influences) of behavior but that is the result. As I get closer to beginning my new degree program, I'm interested to see what the hidden curriculum is. How does a highly progressive institution like Teacher's College fail itself? How does it reinforce dominant cultural, racial, and economic forces? We shall see.

No comments:

Post a Comment