The Hidden Curriculum (guest-blogger Bill Farren, post 2)

By Bill Farren on teaching

[Clay here: In a wonderful bit of musical blogs, I’m guest-blogging on Wes Fryer’s Speed of Creativity this weekend, while Bill Farren is continuing his guest-blogging stint about his Education for Well-Being.  Read Bill’s first guest-post here, and his Education for Well-Being website as well.  And if you want to involve your classrooms in some exciting projects, see the comments to the first guest-post.  Now, here’s Bill:]

Much of what is learned in schools isn’t the result of a lesson plan. It’s often the result of a lack of planning, lack of ideas, and lack of reflection. Take the building students call school. How was it built? What materials were used? Where did those materials come from? How is it run? Who decided how it should be built? What’s taught inside of it? The answers to these questions form another curriculum that often goes unnoticed. David Orr refers to the architecture of school buildings as a kind of “crystallized pedagogy” with its own “hidden curriculum that teaches as effectively as any course taught in them.”

School, London (source: seir at Flickr)

Let’s take a look at some of the questions above by posing even more.

Did the building’s designers take into consideration its location? Did they work with the advantages and challenges of the site in mind? Or did they use a one-size-fits-all approach? Does the design take advantage of available sunlight to provide lighting, heat and electricity? Are buildings situated and designed in a way that they take advantage of prevailing winds? Is rainfall used for advantage? Is local expertise–the kind that has taught desert dwellers and tropical inhabitants to design effectively over thousands of years–incorporated into the design? Is material local; or has it been shipped from afar at great expense to budget and planet? Depending on the answers to these questions, the unwritten lesson might be one of sustainability, harmony, efficiency, nuance, practicality, mindfulness, consideration for others, long-term thinking, intergenerational justice, and the importance of wellness. Or it might be about short-term thinking, man “conquering” nature, mass production, cheap energy, dismissing “primitive” local culture and proven simplicity in favor of high-tech, “sophisticated” “solutions”. It might be about faulty economics, taught by constructing energy-intensive buildings that are initially believed less expensive to build but prove much more expensive to own and operate over their lifetime. (As this video demonstrates, designing efficiently in terms of systems, has shown to increase first costs by only 1- 5% in many cases, and in others, actually lowers first costs as compared to standard construction processes. Operating costs in terms of energy purchases and maintenance are dramatically reduced for the life of the building. Design and construction makes up only 2% of the total costs of a commercial building over 30 years. The other 98% is from operations, maintenance, finance and employees.)

Who decided how (if) it should be built? As I mention in “Did You Ever Wonder?”, we teach about democracy but we could do better at allowing those in our schools to practice it. Were students or staff asked about what kind of building they needed or wanted? Were parents or neighbors involved? The answers to these questions teach a lot about power, influence, passivity, and expertise.

Does the building make an attempt to connect students with their outside world? Does it bring the outside in? Or are its occupants disconnected physically and mentally by artificial light, artificial climate, artificial sights and sounds, in a classroom dealing with artificial problems? Again, what’s learned depends on the answers to the questions.

What does the formal, intentional curriculum teach? Are students taught how to protect and nurture their environment? Does the school offer a formal curriculum that addresses the challenges we all currently face vis-à-vis living on a planet with a finite biosphere? Are classes such as sustainable architecture, sustainable economics, media literacy, ecology, biomimicry, oceanography or energetics taught? If so, are they mandatory or elective? When these classes are not offered or relegated as electives, what does that tell students about how we value their future? What message do students learn about the value adults place on the environment? What message does it give about our belief in our ability to change?

How is this formal, intentional curriculum taught? Do we teach students to think integratively? Are subjects combined with each other? Do we teach systems thinking, contextualizing what happens in the classroom? Or do we, as David Orr reminds us, promote “failure [which] occurs when minds are taught to think in boxes and not taught to transcend those boxes or to question overly much how they fit with other boxes.” (2004, p. 95)

Do we involve students in real-world problems, using their findings and ideas in real ways? Or do we teach that they should leave the “real thinking” to adults; that they should defer their contributions until they enter the “real world”? Aren’t they in the real world now?

Is furniture purposefully uncomfortable in an attempt to keep those using it awake? Are ideas and questions explored deeply, or are they merely skimmed so as to fulfill mandates? Does the school’s design inspire the mind or merely meet the building code requirements—rules, regulations, and bureaucracy being more important than the spirit or intellect. ?

How is the school run? Are resources like energy, water, and paper used efficiently? Is human capital used efficiently, or is there a lot of busy-work and down time? What is discarded? What is recycled? What is prevented from having to be recycled or discarded? Are doors left open on cold days? Are air conditioned rooms left open? Are lights, fans and air conditioners left on in empty classes? How do the adults in the school respond when they see resources being wasted? Is there an attempt to educate staff and students about ways to lessen waste? If not, what does that teach about the cost of energy, the cost of waste, or the importance of efficiency?

How is security portrayed? Is the glass shatterproof? Are the doors robust enough to withstand a heavy assault? Is the school’s entrance monitored by security cameras and equipped with metal detectors? What does the physical plant teach about security? Does safety come from a fortress-like defense that tries to keep the bad out, or might it come from what’s consciously taught and practiced within? Do we ask students to reflect on how a sustainable and equitable economy, cooperation and efficiency can provide us with security? Do we promote a culture of fear, tragedy and victimization or do we promote one of concern, inquiry and activism?

What is sold or advertised on campus? Are sugary juices, soft-drinks, candy, and other junk food available for purchase? Is it advertised? Are lunches provided by fast-food corporations? (And why is it always fast food? Why not slow food in unhurried, relaxed, healthy environments?) What do the contradictions about what is taught in health class and what appears on the cafeteria menu say about money? About the power of corporations? About power? What does the need for speed when receiving our daily nourishment say about the correct pace of life? How, and more importantly why, do we encourage a frenetic, harried, stressful existence?

The hidden curriculum is a powerful teacher. If we reflect on what is learned and not merely on what is taught, it will have fewer places to hide. What are the hidden curricula you’d like to expose?

Be well,

Bill Farren

“To be surprised, to wonder, is to begin to understand.” Jose Ortega y Gassetde

1. Guest-Blogger Bill Farren: Education for Well-Being
2. The Age of Paradox (Guest Blogger Bill Farren, no. 4)
3. Random Acts of Deceleration (Bill Farren Guest-Post 3)
4. Course Evaluations and the Hidden Curriculum

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.