A PPa&eI of WadIt is probably safe to assume that some type of organization, for thepurposes of instructional improvement, is in force in most school sys-tems. The type of organization is conditioned, among other things, bythe type and size of school system, the groups it seeks to serve, the pro-visions for instructional service and leadership, the problems whichteachers are trying to solve, and the facilities at hand for the solution ofproblems. Because organization for curriculum improvement takes onso many shapes and forms, because it is dependent upon so many differ-ent or so many combinations of sets of circumstances; the articles in thisissue cover all phases-from broad and generalized problems of phi-losophy to practical details on specific problems.

In the first part of the magazine a variety of problems is discussed.The introductory article deals with basic issues which must be consid-ered if any program of organization for instructional improvement isactually to result in improved learning experiences for boys and girls.A second author discusses some of the pitfalls attendant upon the or-ganization of workshops-particularly those dealing with interculturaleducation. Another tells of an in-service program in a large city, andfrom it points to important generalizations applicable to organizationof in-service programs in all situations-large or small. Those con-cerned with and responsible for state leadership in curriculum develop-ment will be interested in the account of how states are providing forneeds in secondary education as well as the many aspects of a programof in-service education carried on in one western state.

%wx" )3HDkA AA n:HILDA TABA

The author of this account, Hilda Taba, is director of the Center forIntergroup Education, The University of Chicago.

IMPROVEMENT of instruction is like ion; the current trend, or the currentspring plowing. It is something that expert, plowed up what there was andmust be done over and over again, with set a new pattern. This pattern was al-a sense of newness and with a sense of lowed to encrust until the time canlerepetition of a process that each new for another re-patterning, which even-season brings. tually met the same fate.

Time was when instructional pro- Too often this was true because pco-grams were changed earthquake fash- pie other than those who worked in

Educational LeadershiP418

classrooms set the patterns. A con-tinuous and gradual exploration andimprovement was, therefore, difficult.Partly this inflexibility was caused bythe fact that the concepts of programpatterning were not themselves so con-ceived as to call for a continuous changeand improvement. They were fixed as tocentral ideas, areas to be covered, some-times even as to details. But mainly itwas because we addressed ourselves ina larger measure to schemes of curricu-lum organization and to isolated "meth-ods" rather than to the ways of think-ing about and planning instructionalprograms.

Time for Moving Into Action

The time may be ripe for the devel-opment of methods of instructionalplanning which will allow the kind offluidity in instructional programs whichis needed in changing social realities andvarying local conditions while still as-suring their educational soundness. Wehave, for example, made scientific analy-ses of various types of content and theirplace in and contribution to generaleducation. We should, therefore, beready for a conscious sampling of con-tent as well as for varying of organiza-tional patterns without fear of exclud-ing the essentials. We also have had ex-perience with various organizationalpatterns such as chronology, themes, orcurrent problems in history; authors,periods, outstanding books, and themesin English and literature, to name buta few. We have tested some combina-tions such as core curriculum and cor-relation. We should have learned fromthese how to combine important ideasand practices in various ways for en-hancing needed relationships or for serv-

April 1949

ing objectives other than those of con-tent.

We are beginning to have a fairlyadequately formulated body of factsand principles regarding the develop-mental levels of young people and therelationship of these to learning. Theanalysis of the needs of society and ofthe community is beginning to be sub-stantial enough and sufficiently popu-larized to permit translation into edu-cational needs.

Perhaps the hot currents of contro-versy over such "philosophical" issuesas student interests vs. content as pri-mary bases for curriculum planning,or experience vs. books as primarymethods of learning have gone on longenough to discover that there are no"vs's"--only shadings of one into theother and the need for considering all ineducational planning. We are begin-ning to discover that students, their in-terests and needs; society, or the com-munity, and its needs and problems; andthe unique features of any content arelike the legs of a three legged stool-none more important than the other, allneeded to support the stool.

We should then be ready for a co-herent factoring of all these considera-tions in planning instructional programsand a conscious consideration of eachin decisions about what to teach andhow to go about it. If this be true, themajor issue in improvement of instruc-tion is the development of a frameworkof study and thinking which will per-

elit sound planning by everyone con-cerned without dependence on "the"pattern or "the" scheme of selectingand organizing content and learning ex-periences.

What, then, are the crucial elementsin this scheme of thinking? Only a

419

few basic ones can be described in thisbrief article.

Objectives that Really Function

Teachers need help in formulatingrealistic objectives and in conceivingthem in relationship to each other.This sounds trite. Have wve not cov-ered pages with statements of objec-tives, carefully classified as to their im-mediacv and remoteness, carefully cov-ering attitudes, skills, and knowledge?Yes, we have. But the uneasy truth isthat these statements rarely serve theirpurposes, namely, aiding in selection ofcontent and learning experiences, di-recting the emphasis for interpretationof ideas touched upon, and helping tofocus details around basic concepts.Neither will an analyst of these state-ments appearing with courses of studyor instructional plans find in them eithera reflection of social realities or of thepsychological realities of growingyoung people, their needs, and theirways of learning. Further, the attemptsat being analytic in these statements, asone must be, have produced a curiousoverlooking of the organic nature oflearning. Attitudes, knowledges, andskills swim around in separate classifica-tory pools with little or no recognizablerelationship to each other or to the con-tent outlines which follow.

To give objectives a functioningreality, it seems necessary for a teachernot only to accept the principle of needsbut also to get some tangible evidenceabout what the needs of his studentsand his community are. Teachers needonly ask such questions as: What aremy students like? What experienceshave they had? What kinds of growthdo they most need? What is the com-

420

munity or the society like? What arethe urgent problems and needs? Howcan my particular area of teaching con-tribute to these?

These questions cannot be answeredin totality, gunshot fashion. They canbe answered only with reference to aparticular program or a particular deci-sion about the program. Which prob-lems of local history are most useful ina ninth grade? Which books will helpto sensitize a given group of fourthgraders in human relations? To be sure,these tangible studies do not answer allquestions. They will, however, helpteachers to get meaning from the gen-eralized concepts found in literatureand to set these concepts into relation-ship with their own work.

Both tangible studies and the explora-tion of literature are needed. Neitherthe society nor its children are there ina nutshell for the teacher to look at.All he can do is get a taste of what suchanalysis may yield. The general discus-sions and concepts about society orabout children (found in literature)make little sense to classroom teacherswho simply set about to teach humanrelations through literature in the sixthgrade or community civics in the ninth.Only as they themselves find out aboutsome tangible things in the communityand about the students-the patternsof acceptance and rejection in com-munity life in connection with humanrelations or the operating concepts ofstudents on what makes for leadershipin connection with civics--can they be-gin to use what is written about com-munity needs and the development ofyoung people.

With an insight gained from somedirect studies, combined with the use

Educational Leadership

of general interpretations, the teachercan turn to the "content" of literatureor of civics; select the most appropriatefacts and ideas; and organize them intolearning experiences designed to meetthe "needs" and to achieve the objec-tives he has in mind.

Content in Terms of Ideas

Another bothersome problem isthat of organizing the content. Themajor stumbling block seems to lie inthe definition of content as a body offacts or an array of "areas" to be cov-ered rather than a body of ideas to belearned through or illustrated by de-tailed facts. This former approach tocontent makes it difficult to relate con-tent either to objectives or to needs,for the contribution of content lies notin its details nor special areas but in theunderlying ideas and generalizations orthe effect of details on molding of feel-in g or insight.

If, for example. a teacher is concernedwith teaching about American peoplefor purposes of enlarging sensitivity todiversity wvithin America and enhanc-ing insight into problems of living to-gether, he must decide, to be sure,which group of people he will cover.Naturally he will have to sample, forcovering all would be an impossibility.His decisions should depend on hisknowledge of the people in the com-munity and which understandings are,therefore, most helpful or needed, whathis students are concerned with, wherethey need enlargement of insight.

But the main organizing ideas wvillcome from answering the question ofwhat needs to be taught about thesepeople. These answers lie in such gen-eral ideas as the kinds of values they

April 1949

brought with them, what they had todiscard in the new environment, whathappened to them, in the process of ad-justment, and wvhat was added to Amer-ica through them. From that point onthe details may be settled: food cus-toms in one case, skills in growing fruittrees in another, ideas about govern-ment in a third. In such an organizingscheme there is freedom for accommo-dation of detail to the local situation, tostudent interests, even to teacher ca-pacity and availability of materials,wvithout running the danger of sacri-ficing the sound main points and with-out getting lost in the tangential andirrelevant.

This approach to organization of con-tent is in contrast to the usual method.Teachers and curriculum makers bothare sure to outline the details, point outthe topics and sub-topics of areas with-out mentioning the guiding ideas. Theseare left to the momentary impulse ofthe teacher or to the accidents of class-room development. This being the case,assurance of coverage is needed to avoidimportant gaps or treatment of irrel-cvant matters.

Needs Below the Surface

A third important problem is thatof translating what we know or learneither about the community or aboutthe children into educational pro-grams. Our common mistake has beento make too direct a translation fromsurface facts about needs into curricu-lum, a sin rather frequently committedby the general education programs andcore programs. An expression of inter-est in bicycles produces a unit on bi-cxcles. Discovery of problems of so-cial adjustment due to lack of social

421

skill tends to be followed by a unit onmanners. A deficiency in the conceptof democracy is translated into moraliz-ing about democratic ideals, duties, andresponsibilities. A neat package of il-lustrative biography of great peopleamong minority groups is supposed tosolve the problem of sensitizing to mi-nority relationships or their contribu-tion to American life.

In such instances direct surface stepshave been substituted for interpretationand translation at several spots. Suchdiscoveries as desire for bicycles, lack ofsocial skill, difficulty in applying demo-cratic ideals, or prejudice towardsNegroes are but surface manifestationsand need to be seen in their larger set-ting. Educational needs cannot be ful-filled directly the way one may satisfyhunger for milk or bread. A wish forbicycles may spring out of confine-ment, fad, a need for freedom fromhome, or lack of transportation. It mayrepresent a false sense of values or of in-dependence. Whatever the basis, sur-face needs must be interpreted untilone arrives at a point where an educa-tional and educative answer is possible.Learning how to buy and run a bicyclemay not qualify as that in all cases.

Another abrupt translation occurs inconnecting the idea of a need or an ob-jective directly with a specific content.Thus, teachers who want to use fic-tion to help in awareness about thevarious kinds of work people do usefiction on carpenters, milkmen, andother workers selected for study. Atthis point the essential function of lit-erature is lost and it is being used as asource of specific information. To makean adequate translation and connection,the specific problem, such as that of the

422

milkman, needs to be generalized intoa general human problem-let us saythe problem of loneliness while work-ing alone, the contrast in our attitudestoward physical and mental work, orthe many ways in which the lives ofpeople are influenced by their work.One does not then need to limit theselection of literature to stories aboutmilkmen. Any literature throwing lighton these general problems will do andthe insights gained can be applied tomilkmen, carpenters, food workers, orany workers.

A Chance for All to LearnThroughout these proposals runs

the issue of preparing teachers forthis type of planning. Teachers, likeanyone else, learn by doing. They alsoare affected by the environment. Ourfirst requirement then in improving in-struction is to provide an experimentalsetting which stimulates teachers forthinking and planning.

This setting can be created by initia-ting tangible projects around which towork and learn. Teacher initiative can-not be aroused by someone workingout plans and schemes and then askingteachers to adopt and to apply them.Participation in the very creation ofplans themselves is needed. Experi-mental projects, limited in scope butgeneralized as to techniques of plan-ning and ways of applying and usingboth tangible facts about students, com-munity, content, and philosophicalprinciples of good education, might domore for spreading competence in in-structional planning than all the tech-nical courses taught in isolation fromanyone's classroom put together. This,of course, assumes supervisors who are

Educational Leadership

interested in curriculum planning andare not devoted to a particular schemeor a particular set of methodologicaldevices.

Cooperative planning also becomesimportant-within departments, be-tween departments, and school-wide.This cooperative planning is importantat almost all steps: in getting data, withteachers who have worked at differenttypes of information pooling facts andformulating interpretations together; inattempting to set the over-all directionor objectives suggested by the facts;and certainly in weighing the uniquecontributions of each area toward theseobjectives to assure well-rounded em-phasis and to avoid overlapping. Ifproperly planned, this type of coopera-tion need not be a nuisance or an ex-cessive drain on time and energy. Itdoes not take unusually brilliant teach-

ers. Recent experiences of the authorhave shown her that the average teacherdoes respond to this kind of counselingand can undertake instructional plan-ning of a commendable soundness.

Harmony Between Essentials and Needs

Perhaps by combining this general-ized technique of curriculum planningand a conscious identification and ap-plication of educational principles andpsychological knowledge at each step,we can also solve the perennial di-chotomy of the "essentials," which as-sumes universality and local adaptation,clearly necessary if we take the needstheory and individual variations serious-

Iv. We may find the essentials in gen-eral ideas and generalized skills and befree to serve the local needs of groupsand individuals by a judicious variationin content and in Xways of learning.

gJ~eawe~eA &xf.,&u 3d nad ,& itwiSAMUEL EVERETT

Assistant professor of education at City College, New York, SamuelEverett is also general consultant in the Philadelphia Open-Minded-ness Study.

"The contributions that might comefrom classroom teachers are . . . analmost unworked mine."'

A group of teachers were meeting atthe Philadelphia Board of Educationbuilding to discuss ways and means ofpromoting open-mindedness. They hadresponded to a request for volunteersmade by the principals of eight elemen-

DI)ewev. John. The Sources of a Science of Edu-catron, New York: Horace Liveright, 1929.

April 1949

tarv and secondary schools where theytaught. But no one really knew justwhat is awas all about.

The meeting began with a briefstatement by the Associate Superin-tendent in charge of Curriculum. Hetalked about "the open and the closedmind," quoting from a challenging ar-ticle by Samuel Fels, a distinguishedcitizen of the city. "Can open-minded-ness be taught in the schools?" "To

423

Copyright © 1949 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. All rights reserved.