Contemporary Venues of Curriculum Inquiry

In this episode I unpack an excerpt from Schubert’s (2008) publication titled “Curriculum inquiry,” which describes different venues or types of curriculum that educators and education researchers should consider.

Welcome back to another episode of the
csk8 podcast my name is jared o'leary
each week of this podcast is either an
episode with a guest or multiple guests
or a solo episode where i unpack some
scholarship in relation to computer
science education this week's particular
episode is a continuation of a little
mini series that i'm doing on curriculum
especially in relation to integration so
episode 121 discussed a paper that i
wrote on the intersections of popular
musicianship and computer science
practices but on episode 123 i talked
about some different types of
integration styles and their
implications in computer science
education and then episode 125 that
released last week i discussed different
images of curriculum and then this week
i'm going to read another little excerpt
from another chapter by william h
schubert and the title for that excerpt
is contemporary venues of curriculum
inquiry and is found in the curriculum
inquiry chapter in this age handbook of
curriculum and instruction in 2008. all
right so here's an introduction to this
particular chapter quote in this chapter
curriculum inquiry is conceived as
thought study and interpretation used to
understand curriculum which is
characterized as experiential journeys
that shape perspectives dispositions
skills and knowledge by which we live
curriculum inquiry inevitably must
consider a multitude of questions that
have perplexed educators throughout
history for example what is worthwhile
why where when how and for whose benefit
end quote from page 399. now i'm going
to be focusing primarily on the excerpt
that i mentioned however if you want to
read the entire chapter include a link
to it in the show notes so you can check
it out which you can find at jared
o'leary.com or by simply clicking the
link in the app that you're listening to
this on you also notice in the
description that i mentioned that this
podcast is powered by bootup which is
the nonprofit organization that i work
for where i create 100 free elementary
coding curriculum which you can find at
boot up pd.org or by clicking the link
in the app that you're listening to this
on now if i were to summarize this
particular excerpt into a single
sentence i'd say that this excerpt
describes different venues or types of
curriculum that educators and education
researchers should consider now i think
this is important for classroom
educators in particular but it's really
important for researchers to think about
what are they actually researching when
it comes to curriculum because there are
many different types of curriculum or
lenses through which we can assess
teaching learning etc and by ss i mean
to like broadly understand not just like
evaluate now here's a quote from page
consider quote today's curriculum
scholarship seeks complicated
understandings and multiple meanings of
personal and public identity modes of
human association and environmental
relationships in many societal venues as
well as the nature and effectiveness
curriculum delivery in schools the
dominant interest of past curriculum
inquiry such inquiry often includes
complex integrations of salient factors
that shape human lives and outlooks
culture language socioeconomic class
race ethnicity gender sexuality body and
appearance religion or belief mass media
ecology globalization imperialism and
more these factors are increasingly
perceived as curricula in their own
right not just forces that inhibit or
facilitate curriculum for schools end
quote alright so why is that important
so as i mentioned in the previous
episodes that i mentioned at the start
of this podcast when you're conceiving
of computer science curriculum or an
integrated version of computer science
curriculum you really need to be able to
sit down with your colleagues
stakeholders etc to figure out what one
what do you conceive of as integration
because there are many different ways of
integrating see the episode titled the
subservient co-equal effective and
social integration styles and the
implications for cs education for
computer science to learn more about
that then see the episode last week
titled images of curriculum which
mentions that there are many images or
characterizations of what we might even
consider to be a curriculum like what is
the intent or rationale or purpose
behind it but this week we're going to
dive into even more perspectives related
to
curriculum because it's important for us
to consider that even when speaking with
a colleague when we use the word
curriculum it has many different
associations or meanings or baggage tied
to it that we need to consider and it
might be helpful
when trying to figure out your computer
science curriculum or program or how
you're going to integrate computer
science how all these terms actually are
perceived and intersect and interact
with each other when engaging in
dialogue with different people here's a
quote from page 401 that kind of
enhances what i was just saying so quote
to inquire deeply into curricular
phenomenon is a daunting task as
depicted in a curriculum matrix
developed by foshae poche portrays
three-dimensional interactions among 25
variables purpose intellectual emotional
social physical aesthetic transcendent
substance mathematics science history or
social studies language and literacy
writing and composition foreign
languages arts vocational and technical
co-curriculum school culture and
practice evaluation cost governance
circumstance when how why what who to
even approximate understanding of such
complex interactions requires
investigation of their origins within
both the context of schooling and a host
of non-school realms from which they
emanate policymakers from governmental
and corporate circles however have not
wanted to deal with such complexities
and preferred business-like solutions
encapsulated in a goals implementation
evaluation test model end quote i would
argue that researchers also tend to not
want to look at those interactions and
intersections between those different
variables often we simply look at an
intervention and look at the curriculum
itself not necessarily how it was taught
who was taught by who it was taught to
where this occurred when it occurred
what was occurring outside of school how
did different funds and support impact
what was taught instead what it's just
focused on is the curriculum itself and
a pre and post et cetera but as we'll
soon find out there's so much more that
we can learn in terms of
curriculum all right so i'm going to
skip a decent portion of this particular
chapter and just focus on the section
that starts in 407 contemporary venues
of curriculum inquiry if you're
interested in more of like a history or
like a broader understanding from like a
kaleidoscopic view of curriculum
discourse check out the pages that i'm
skipping again i'll link to it in the
show notes but let's talk specifically
about contemporary venues of curriculum
inquiry so the first one is titled
intended curriculum so schubert
describes the intended curriculum as
quote explicit goals to shape the
outlooks and capacities end quote that's
from page 407 so as somebody who's
developed curriculum full-time for a few
years now the content that i create is
the intended curriculum it's what i'm
conceiving in my head and going this is
what i really like students teachers
et cetera to be able to walk away with
whether it's the big understandings or
concepts and practices like then from
the k12 framework or standards or in my
case it'd be more of like a passion for
wanting to learn more about cs and apply
it in their lives that's what i intend
through the content that i create and
that's what researchers tend to focus on
is what was intended to be learned and
that kind of assessment is usually done
through like a tylerian lens or tyler
rationale may have heard it from ralph
tyler in the 40s is in the 1940s wrote
some ideas in terms of like what
curriculum or schooling could look like
and those ideas have kind of been one of
the dominant paradigms or perspectives
that has shaped educational discourse
and what just generally occurs within a
classroom context in particular now
interestingly tyler wrote about how it's
not just the sequence of learning but
there are many factors that go into
education and learning that we need to
consider but schubert points out that
this is often neglected there is an over
emphasis on the activities or the
content itself and not enough emphasis
on the learning experiences even though
tyler recommended hey we need to focus
on this and what's also neglected is a
discussion on the quote interaction of
the learner and external conditions in
the environment end quote from page 407
and 408. now these nuances and these
interactions are often lost to what
schubert describes as recipes
hence only the shell of tyler's message
known as the tyler rationale remained in
too many central offices of schools
state departments ministries of
education federal bureaucracies and
corporate headquarters left behind was
his emphasis on careful attention to
context and nuance in student lives end
quote from page 408 which from a
perspective of somebody who has
presented and published it is really
interesting what people take away from
what you say and it sounds like in this
case even though tyler emphasized
nuances within education people took
away the focus on content and schubert
argues that this focus on content is
often perpetuated by professional
organizations publications or school
administrators as well as government and
corporate education offices and so it's
done in a how-to
or recipe format in order to meet some
kind of a mandate of government or
corporate entities whether it's hey
we're donating money if you do a b or c
or hey if you want to be accredited you
need to do x y or z and because teachers
have so many things to learn and do
outside of just teaching so many
responsibilities and whatnot the
attendant curriculum that is presented
as recipes or how to's is trying to make
the lives of teachers easier but
depending on what kind of curricular
rationale or characterization it can
unknowingly shape the learning that goes
on in the classroom check out the
episode from last week to learn a little
bit more about that now interestingly
schubert mentions that there are
curriculum scholars and leaders who are
trying to get back to what was emitted
from the tyler rationale in terms of
considering many different factors and
resisting these external mandates
imposed by people who are not experts
within the field of education for
example corporate influence issuing out
mandates in order to receive funding for
devices or pd or whatever schubert notes
that quote even though such sources
intend to resist corporate-minded
efficiency and enriching considerations
resultant inquiry for planning is often
streamlined and separated from
grassroots environments of teachers
students parents and community end quote
from page 408 now again this really
reminds me of the rhizomatic learning
discussion that i mentioned last week
with catherine bornhorst katie henry and
john stapleton it's a fantastic panel
discussion that we have on rhizomatic
learning and kind of talks about these
individualized and grassroots
co-development of learning experiences
so if you want to learn more about that
highly recommend checking that out and
learning more about rhizomatic learning
all right so if the intended curriculum
is like the thing that a curriculum
developer or organization or company or
whatever intends for people to learn or
to do or engage with a layer down from
that is called the top curriculum so the
top curriculum is what teachers actually
teach from the intended curriculum
sometimes teachers will deviate just by
monitoring adjusting sometimes teachers
will look at a curriculum go hmm that's
interesting but i'd prefer to talk about
a instead of b or the kids that i work
with might not be interested in that
particular topic so how could i reframe
these concepts and practices in a topic
that they would be interested in so when
educational researchers are
investigating a curriculum like with a
pre and a post to see well how well does
this teach computer science concepts and
practices standards or computational
thinking or computational literacies
what's often omitted from those
publications in those discussions is
okay well how did the intended
curriculum what was designed and
developed how did that differ from what
was actually taught what was changed or
was there a script and teachers were
reading verbatim likely not so we need
to consider differences in how people
teach things from how it was intended to
be taught now what is taught is
different from the experience curriculum
so here's a quote from page 408 and 409.
partially through dewey's emphasis on
experience authors of synoptic text on
curriculum development have hailed
curriculum as an experiential process
caspell and campbell define curriculum
as all the experiences children have
under the guidance of teachers and b
smith stanley and shores call curriculum
a sequence of potential experiences for
the purpose of disciplining children and
youth in group ways of thinking and
acting the curriculum is always in every
society a reflection of what people
think feel believe and do the enacted
curriculum includes the intended and
taught moreover its complexity involves
a combined impact of all contributors
teachers students parents policy makers
subject matter and milieus within
schools the experience curriculum
expands attention to thoughts meanings
and feelings of students as they
encounter it end quote okay so now in
our third layer we have the intended
curriculum which is like what's designed
developed we have the talk curriculum
which is like the variations and
deviations that a teacher chooses to
make or unintentionally or willingly
from the intended curriculum but then
what is experienced by a student might
be different in terms of how did their
learning experience differ from their
peers and from what was taught or
intended but then there's another layer
deeper that is the embodied curriculum
so the embodied curriculum might be
conceived of as like well what do
students walk away with what do they
take away and hold on to and oftentimes
that's not necessarily the concepts and
practices that were supposed to be
emphasized or the standards that were
written up on the board of here's your
intended learning outcome what a student
actually walks away from is the embodied
curriculum which is a result from what
they experienced which is a result from
what it was taught which is a result
from what was intended to be taught
however there's another type of venue to
consider when it comes to curriculum and
that is hidden curriculum so here's a
quote from page 404 quote the idea that
the structures of schooling teach much
that is not included in the official
curriculum is referred to by the term
hidden curriculum in quote so a little
bit further down on page 404 schubert
mentions that educators should quote
look at hidden consequences of life in
classrooms and shaping outlooks and
attitudes he showed that living in a
crowd of age mates learning to defer
gratification and learning one's place
in a variety of pecking orders
constitute indelible consequences of
schooling perhaps more powerful than
intended subject matter end quote and a
little bit further down the author
mentions a particular study that
explored the quote hidden curricular
messages about divergent meanings of
success conveyed to students of
different school different social
classes she found that lower class
students are taught to follow rules
middle class students learn to give
right answers while professional class
students are allowed to be creative as
long as they do not challenge executive
elites and the latter learned that
schools bestow upon them valuable
credentials of the ivy league variety
that combine with their powerful
connections and financial wherewithal to
seal and deliver the continued dominance
of their families end quote so i want to
expand upon this idea of a hidden
curriculum and specifically like the
difference in class and what is taught
so as an example one time i had a
conversation with somebody who's
describing a curriculum in a lower
socioeconomic location and the
curriculum was very verbatim in terms of
add worksheets where there were right
and wrong answers you had to follow a
sequence of steps and everybody would
end up with the same result in that this
was for scratch which is intended to be
expressive and creative and open but
what they were describing was a very
closed structure everybody had to follow
the rules basically the hidden
curriculum of this aligns with what
schubert was just describing they were
using unknowingly i'm assuming a deficit
framing that
urban kids in particular could not
engage in creative expression first they
need to learn how to follow the rules
then maybe after they've kind of proven
themselves then maybe they can actually
express themselves that hidden
curriculum or deficit framing of a
hidden curriculum in particular is
highly problematic and is something that
we need to consider what are the things
that are not overtly taught through the
intended curriculum but are nevertheless
embodied through the hidden curriculum
and these forms of curriculum differ
from what schubert describes as the
tested curriculum so here's a couple of
questions that schubert asks from page
benefits from the testing how does
testing sort society into a variety of
levels of opportunity end quote that
last question in particular is really
something to sit with how does testing
sort society into a variety of levels of
opportunity when we think of high-stakes
testing it's high stakes because we know
that if you don't pass this test that
has an impact on what doors are open or
closed for you down the road it's almost
like we're playing an educational
roguelike where if you make one mistake
it can have a cascading series of
barriers or challenges that you would
then have to overcome if you didn't make
that mistake for example just not doing
well on sats or something how will that
impact whether or not you get into a
college and maybe the reason why you
didn't do well in the sats has
absolutely nothing to do with your
preparedness maybe you just had a death
in the family but college admissions
don't know that they just see the score
and schubert points out that it tends to
be policy makers who have this over
emphasis on test scores as they tend to
have like a business mindset in terms of
well this is the profit margin of
curricular success this curriculum is
great because students scored this way
on this thing but again that's just
looking at the intended curriculum not
necessarily what is taught or what is
embodied and experienced so policymakers
in some states are now going well we
should have performance pay so that way
we can also evaluate what is taught what
is experienced what is embodied you
could do that but that gets into another
category that schubert mentions called
the null curriculum here's a quote from
page 410 quote this term refers to that
which is minimized or excluded due to
priority and budget capacities for art
philosophy psychology health commitment
imagination empathy dedication
resourcefulness spirituality kindness
integrity and lifelong learning are
often touted as valuable yet widely used
achievement tests measure none of them
so they are given short shrift or no
emphasis at all especially in social
context where students receive low
scores due to poverty racism and
impression thus one could argue that the
testing industry is built upon a network
of assumptions about inquiry that
creates methodologies of control or
colonization thereby creating docile
acceptance of the sorting machine end
quote going back to that little story
that i mentioned of the person talking
about well these urban students are
unable to engage in creative uses of
scratch they need to just follow the
steps another thing that i hear is
what true bridge is described as an old
curriculum is all of these other things
that are often highly valued and whatnot
those things are often left out in those
contexts because there's such an
emphasis on following rules and coming
up with the same solutions rather than
actually engaging in a more holistic
approach to learning that goes beyond
just simply standards concepts and
practices or content knowledge and
instead focuses on other areas of life
like that list that schubert mentioned
so the capacities for art philosophy
psychology health commitment imagination
empathy dedication resourcefulness
spirituality kindness integrity and
lifelong learning so few of those are
actually a part of intended curricula
which means they're likely not part of
what is taught or what is experienced
and then therefore what is embodied and
most of those certainly are not a part
of the tested curriculum so oftentimes
what is omitted from that curriculum can
be even more important than what is
actually included in the intended
curriculum but that being said having
been a classroom educator and now
curriculum developer and whatnot i'm
fully aware that you don't have enough
time in the day for everything you have
to make design decisions essentially
especially if you're trying to sell a
curriculum to a large group of kids
which again goes back to well you don't
have to do that learn more in that
rhizomatic learning podcast that i
mentioned with katie catherine and john
and there's a link to that in the show
notes all right so one more area that
schubert mentions is the outside
curriculum so this is the curriculum
that occurs outside of schools whether
it be through their community families
homes peer groups workplaces
or even just like hobbies and
a vocations and whatnot think of like
papert or stebbins in their discussions
on constructionism and serious leisure
these are all areas of curriculum that
can profoundly shape our understandings
of life or concepts or domains or
whatever and within these venues outside
of school they all have their own
different intended taught embodied
hidden and tested and null dimensions
that relate to these different curricula
so if we're an educational researcher
yes we should maybe look into the
intended versus the taught versus what's
experienced or embodied as well as the
hidden tested and null curricula but
it's also useful to look at well what is
learned or experienced outside of
schools how might that have an impact on
what's going on inside of schools and
one way you can actually explore this
and connect with this in the class is
through curare which the author
describes in the episode that i released
last week with more detail so check out
that one if you're interested in it here
rare has profoundly shaped my own
understanding of what i designed for
boot up and then how i collaboratively
designed individualized learning
experiences with kids that i worked with
in the classroom all right now i want to
actually read a couple of paragraphs
from the close of this particular
chapter so the section is titled
questions for continued curriculum
inquiry and there's so many good
questions in here which is why i want to
read all of them for you this is from
page 412 quote the expansion of
curriculum away from school into
multiple spheres of life has made many
scholars uneasy some have assumed that
this diminishes the democratic project
that we have historically seen as the
purpose of schools what however if
schools have become so fully
institutionalized to serve affluence
that the democratic project has been
transformed into preparation for
autocracy or oligarchy of a new
corporate world in such a case should
not the context that shape us become
curricular content worthy of study what
if school is a mere decoy for education
of the dewey and democratic tradition
what if engagement in educational
experience that searches for meaning and
direction opposes the intended
curriculum of developing loyal followers
are we in an area in which the choice is
as chomsky warns hegemony or survival if
schools are largely reflections of
messages that assert domination by an
opulent minority are they not
preventatives to the free pursuit of
lifelong learning what if the structures
of schooling are a hidden curriculum
that rejects personal and democratic
construction of meaning and direction
what if dominant goals curriculum
materials and tests are packages
delivered unwittingly by minions who
perpetuate the power of a globalized
opulent minority is it not the
responsibility of those concerned with
curriculum to find the best places to
keep alive basic curriculum questions
what is shape dust how do we become what
we are what is worth being and doing how
do we want to become and how can we
shape the journey to go there how can we
live together without continuing to
destroy this planetary environment for
those involved in curriculum inquiry i
ask how can we overcome the powerful
impediments to pursue such questions how
can curriculum inquiry enable public
discourse including that of children and
youths to be centered on such questions
unquote some fantastic questions to
think through now normally i like to end
with like sharing some of my own
lingering thoughts and questions and
whatnot i've kind of been embedding that
throughout what i'm going to do instead
is just kind of give a quick example of
each of these different venues of
curriculum inquiry okay so zooming out
again and i'll use boot ups curriculum
like as an example so the lessons that i
have written out like scratch and
scratch junior are the intended
curriculum i went into it going i want
kids to be able to express themselves i
want their interest to drive their
learning i want them to find a way to
connect concepts practices
understandings of computer science
education with things they are already
passionate about so that way they can
hopefully develop a passion for computer
science that's what i intend however i
have seen some people teach the lessons
that i've created that are like designed
to be springboards as a model not a
mandate but what i've instead seen the
talk curriculum where some teachers will
go in and be like okay we're all going
to create the exact same thing
everybody's going to recreate jared's
project exactly the way that jared
created it that talk curriculum is very
indifferent than what i intended and
what students experience in that might
differ for each of them some of them
might be working in a group some of them
might be working individually those have
a big impact on how they experience
those particular projects that i
designed which has an impact on what
they embody in terms of what do they
walk away with what do they learn all of
these are also shaped by hidden
curricula that i have unknowingly or
intentionally designed into it for
example in a scratch junior project that
has mixed race parents with jobs that
are not typically associated with those
genders that is a hidden curriculum that
i intentionally design into the
curriculum and then also hidden
curricula of the social milieu so the
social context such as classroom
environment how kids and adults
collaborate and communicate with each
other and then depending on what is
tested or assessed you want to go with
that like maybe there's just a project
rubric hey when you turn on this project
make sure it has a variable make sure it
has two conditionals and like four
different event structures or something
that tested curriculum has a profound
impact on what students will experience
and embody because they tend to focus on
that rather than the things that are not
tested or assessed but then everything
within that that is left out of those
experiences that's the null curriculum
and then beyond all of that that went on
in the classroom context the outside
curriculum maybe somebody instead of
using boot ups curriculum maybe they
went with code.org on their own at home
or maybe they just went on youtube and
watched griff patch or something create
something cool in scratch they're like i
want to do that too all of these
different types of curriculum or venues
for curriculum have a profound impact on
teaching and learning which leads me to
a question that i have if you were to
analyze your experiences as both a
teacher or a student of computer science
education how have the various
curriculum venues impacted your
understanding of computer science
education and then building off of what
i mentioned last week how do these
venues intersect or interact with the
images or characterizations of
curriculum that i previously discussed
if you actually sit down and take the
time to really think about these
different images characterizations
venues of curriculum in relation to the
different types of integration this can
lead to
a very rich reflection and discussion
with colleagues about what do we
actually want from our computer science
curriculum and how do our integration
goals align with our vision or
rationales for computer science and
maybe it doesn't maybe one of the things
that you'll find is you know what
integration while it might save time it
actually is a disservice to the concepts
practices understandings we want
students to walk away with instead we
want to have a standalone class that
specifically dives deep into computer
science concepts practices standards
whatever and then we can embed those
understandings into other subject areas
or maybe you'll find no we just want to
focus on integrating into math and math
only and that's really up to you my hope
is that these podcasts spark discussion
or thought or reflection or inquiry and
if it did i hope you consider sharing
with somebody else or leaving a review
on whatever app that you're listening to
this on it just helps more people find
it thank you for joining me in this
nerdy discussion around curriculum if
you're not a fan of curricula and
curricular discourse and scholarship my
apologies for the last several episodes
that have kind of talked about it but
hopefully it was of interest to you
certainly is for me but i know i'm a
curriculum nerd stay tuned next week for
another episode and until then i hope
you're all staying safe and are having a
wonderful week

Article

Schubert, W. H. (2008). Curriculum inquiry. In F. M. Connelly, M. F. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction (pp. 399-419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Intro

“In this chapter, curriculum inquiry is conceived as thought, study, and interpretation used to understand curriculum, which is characterized as experiential journeys that shape perspectives, dispositions, skills, and knowledge by which we live. Curriculum inquiry inevitably must consider a multitude of questions that have perplexed educators throughout history; for example, what is worthwhile, why, where, when, how and for whose benefit?”

My One Sentence Summary

This excerpt describes different venues or types of curriculum that educators and education researchers should consider.

Some Of My Lingering Questions/Thoughts

If you were to analyze your experiences as both a teacher or student of computer science education, how have the various curriculum venues impacted your understanding of computer science education?
How do these venues intersect or interact with the images of curriculum discussed last week?

Resources/Links Relevant to This Episode

Other podcast episodes that were mentioned or are relevant to this episode
- Educational Aims, Objectives, and Other Aspirations
  - In this episode I unpack Eisner’s (2002) publication titled “Educational aims, objectives, and other aspirations,” which problematizes behavioral education objectives and discuss two alternative approaches.
- Images of Curriculum
  - In this episode I unpack an excerpt from Schubert’s (1986) book titled “Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility,” which describes different examples, intents, and criticisms of “images” or “characterizations” of curriculum.
- How to Get Started with Computer Science Education
  - In this episode I provide a framework for how districts and educators can get started with computer science education for free.
- Intersections of Popular Musicianship and Computer Science Practices
  - In this episode I unpack my (2020) publication titled “Intersections of popular musicianship and computer science practices,” which discusses potential implications of hardware and software practices that blur the boundaries between music making and computer science.
- Rhizomatic Learning with Catherine Bornhorst, Jon Stapleton, and Katie Henry
  - In this panel discussion with Catherine Bornhorst, Jon Stapleton, and Katie Henry, we discuss what rhizomatic learning is and looks like in formalized educational spaces, affordances and constraints of rhizomatic learning, how to support individual students within a group setting, standards and rhizomatic learning, why few people know and use rhizomatic learning approaches, how to advocate for and learn more about rhizomatic learning, and much more.
- The Centrality of Curriculum and the Function of Standards: The Curriculum is a Mind-altering Device
  - In this episode I unpack Eisner’s (2002) publication titled “The centrality of curriculum and the function of standards: The curriculum is a mind-altering device,” which problematizes curricula and standards by discussing how both can deprofessionalize the field of education.
- The Subservient, Co-equal, Affective, and Social Integration Styles and Their Implications for [Computer Science]
  - In this episode I unpack Bresler’s (1995) publication titled “The subservient, co-equal, affective, and social integration styles and their implications for the arts,” which “examines the different manifestations of arts integration in the operational, day-to-day curriculum in ordinary schools, focusing on the how, the what, and the toward what” (p. 33).
- More episodes related to curriculum
- More episodes related to inquiry
- More episodes related to integration
- All other episodes
Check out griffpatch’s YouTube channel
Find other CS educators and resources by using the #CSK8 hashtag on Twitter