The Curriculum Shadow

Abstract

This article presumes that the curriculum field needs to be semantically rich so that practitioners and researchers may enhance their educational perceptions. Languag enables us to communicate and it helps us to “see” what otherwise may go unnoticed. Hence, this article propounds a new term, the “curriculum shadow,” to refer more precisely to aspects sometimes viewed as what is commonly called the “downsides” of curricula. The new term reveals how every discrete curriculum has a shadow that can be found by reflecting on what the curriculum privileges and what it disdains. What the curriculum apparently disdains could actually augment the curriculum, and may, in fact, be vital in creating a balanced curricular unit.This article begins with an overview of some critical Jungian concepts, and then distinguishes the curriculum shadow from the hidden and the null curricula. The idea of the curriculum shadow is then applied to the teaching of science, liberal arts, and reading. My analysis suggests that in thinking about science curricula, educators ought to consider including such processes as feeling, fantasizing, intuition, and dreaming to help students understand how science is really done. In discussing the liberal arts curricula, I use Noddings’s ideas to emphasize that caring ought not be neglected, and I also suggest what one can do when one discovers a curriculum shadow. Finally, I point out that even approaches to teaching reading can have shadows. For instance, in our rush to help children learn to read, some approaches may be “petrifying” children’s thinking.Mr. Hutchins teaches seventh-grade social studies. Civically involved and a former state representative, he lectures his students about the importance of citizenship in a democratic state. He demands that they read the U.S. Constitution and the Federalist Papers. He says both will be covered in his lectures over the next four weeks and warns his students that they will be tested on the documents at the end. Ironically, Mr. Hutchins does not encourage discussion on issues pertaining to democracy in class—an omission Mrs. Fine tells him is inconsistent with his beliefs. Numerous times she has urged him to allow students to engage in dialogue. She says practice in discussion is vital as a skill for prospective citizens, but Mr. Hutchins considers class discussion inefficient and he abhors inefficiency. Hutchins’s curriculum would be better, Mrs. Fine tells him, if he allowed some inefficiency so that his students could experience the inefficient aspects of democracy.