User:Gorakh Chand

--Gorakh Chand 17:08, 23 July 2006 (UTC)Gorakh Chand

jeechand@yahoo.com Kathmandu University School of Education Curriculum Metaphor Gorakh Chand Foundation of Education is new subject for me .I conduct this course first time in my life. At the initial stage at KU I found this subject uninteresting and boring. Different isms (constructivism pragmatism, realism and many more) make me very bored. After two week I found something interested in foundation of education and it made me curious to learning. It tried to give the answer of very big questions for me, like what to learn and what to teach? How to learn and why to learn? What the aim of learning? Which is proper style of teaching? What is knowledge and how it is gained? Is knowledge transferred? Is knowledge created? Is school is only spot for learning? Can we gain some thing outside school? Similarly what is curriculum? How it is impended? and many more. Before starting this course I believed in fixed text book and I was supporter of author's text. Actually I read only the textbook prescribed by curriculum development centre and I believed in exam oriented teaching learning. My aim was how to score more and more not how to gain more and more.

This is my final journal in foundation of Education. I get some thing different in my writing, thinking and doing and I fill my paper writing habit has developed from this course in KU. As Bal Chandra sir always inspire us and guide us for reflective I centered writing and I am very impressed by his thesis which helps me for writing. I was impressed not only by the contents but also with his presentation style. In this journal I want to discuss on “What does the image of the mathematics curriculum like, in accordance with various curriculum metaphors?” For this I want to continue through the following which we prepared at university classroom with the help of Bal Chandra sir. This chart is showing the image of mathematics curriculum with various curriculum metaphors. In this chart, Step by step description may take much time so I want to pickup main points, which are as follows: Centrally prepared document local enactment: In our present pedagogy centrally prepared curriculum is implemented. In above figure, figure is showing the more priority to centrally prepared document and less space to local enactment. Actually in the present trend of Nepal few number of exports sit for curriculum development in some highly facilitate place, they do very high level discussion and they forget the context and reality. They only talk how to make our curriculum near to foreigners and they don’t fill the need of research local touch. They don’t care what type of curriculum is needed for particular communities and they implement it without any interaction to local communities and without any dialogue with local communities. This type of curriculum can't be related with the context of all parts of country and communities. In present trend of Nepal, curriculum has become the Business of the exports. For ethnical touch interaction among students, teachers, parents, local exports and central export is needed. Power Sharing vs. Power imposition: In implemented curriculum power imposition have more space rather than power sharing. Curriculum development Centre does not share the power to others (local communities, teachers, students) and CDC doesn’t believe to teachers. CDC believes that teachers have no any idea for curriculum and it is not their job. Powerful interaction among parents, teachers, students, exports, government and CDC must be needed and it shares the power to every responsible factors of society. Learning outcomes vs. Activities: In implemented curriculum there are more places to learning outcomes and less space to activities. Especially in mathematics curriculum there are no activities includes and theme of curriculum seems mathematics is abstract subject. there is no space for activities in mathematics. This type of curriculum really builds a kind of wrong concept to civil society and which is harmful to the subject like mathematics. Silence vs. voice The implement curriculum is silent in society and it has no any local interest. There are so many problems in the society and curriculum has no interest to the problems of different communities, race, societies, and groups. The curriculum should provide the outline of acquaintance and values that leads students to communities, race, societies, and groups .A curriculum which pickup the voice of society and voice of social development is indispensable. Author’s text and dynamic text: In implemented curriculum, curriculum is dominated by the authors’ views because the authors are exports to their fields. A few numbers of exports knowledge plays critical role in the development of curriculum. In dynamic text the text is not fixed, and it is dynamic. It is volatile according to the demand of time, situation and communities. It covers different sources of knowledge, not only to the exports’ view. Though I want to write many argues on all the above noted topics but it make my journal very long so I want to conclude my journal in few words and I will try to write remaining on some other journals. Mathematics is not itself a difficult subject but our curriculum makes it difficult and uninteresting. As there is no interaction between curriculum and local communities so our present teaching learning style is in critical condition. Exports make it as their business and they don’t think the need of local stroke in development of curriculum. If we try to link mathematics to the local context and provide dynamic texts to the students with full of their voices, it will really develop the positive attitude towards mathematics and mathematics education. Curriculum metaphors play an important role to shape our thinking and action which are used in order to describe its comprehensive image. Finally the ideal chart of curriculum is as follows Gorakh Chand