John Quicke, of the University of Sheffield (England), discusses the implications of modernity on the self and the resultant impact that this should have on curriculum reform in “Self, Modernity, and a Direction For Curriculum Reform” (1996). To begin with, the self is examined in light of modernity. And the very first sentence of the article highlights the main thought here most sufficiently when Quicke states, “Basic to the project of modernity is the idea of freedom from traditional authorities giving rise to widening opportunities for self development and self fulfillment” (364). With this of course comes specifically a greater opportunity for individual autonomy. From here, then, a goal of an educational institution ought to be increasing autonomy.
Before moving on to how this enhancement of autonomy could be achieved I want to look more specifically at the modern self and its distinctive feature(s) from, say, the pre-modern self. While I’ve already mentioned that the modern self is noted as having wider opportunities for self-definition, what seems to be specifically going on within this widening is one’s ability to “keep a particular narrative going” (366). Creating a stable, fulfilling narrative is key in more fully actualizing one’s own self-identity.
Now in terms of educational curriculum Quicke saw Personal and Social Education (PSE), with more emphasis on Personal, as key in developing the self. Now admittedly what particular classes/educational subjects would fall under Personal curriculum remains vague within this article. Quicke, however, highlights the values of both Personal and Social Education. For Social Curriculum an emphasis is placed on “environmental, multicultural, economic, or citizenship practices” and Personal an emphasis on “social, psychological, and philosophical practices which provide insights into our definition and understanding of the autonomous self.” (372). Some particular teaching/learning methods are mentioned that would be present in Personal Curriculum such as group work, personification in history texts, and the teaching of novels. Through these particular practices it seems that a student is given significant opportunity to more fully examine and define his or herself through reflections of the self via others.
In conclusion, I have to begin to ask where to take this. We see an emphasis on creating opportunities for the self to become more fully defined. And of course this lends itself the autonomic goals of a liberal education. But if we take for example Drake University’s own mission statement, creating “meaningful personal lives” is just one-third of the university’s objective. How do we also make room in a curriculum for “professional accomplishments, and responsible global citizenship?” Or is it the case that by expanding a more “personal curriculum” we’re also providing for all of the values of the mission statement and not just the aspect that focuses on personal lives?
Posts
