![]() |
| http://www.flickr.com/photos/52254014@N00/6976328515 |
I would argue there are many societal forces that influence school curricula today. First, I would posit that the federal government influences school curricula more so now than ever before. From No Child Left Behind to Common Core, the federal government influences curricula significantly. It feels as though this move to centralize control of curriculum tends to go against the we as educators should support a child’s unique gifts (Burrello, 2000). Although there is something to be said for the common core standards allowing for a more quantifiable set of results and therefore may be more psychometrically valid (ibid). With yet another twist, Burrello talks about the notion that content and the process of learning being linked (ibid). The Burrello readings left me with many more questions than answers.
![]() |
| http://www.flickr.com/photos/28164579@N08/6054632360 |
One way a school leader can be proactive is by helping students determine and follow their interests. A robust school should have a myriad of after-school offerings for topics that may interest students such as photography, robotics, sports, and more. School is the only place where many students will get to access these types of programs, and in the wake of common core schools will be possibly forced to offer fewer classes during the day. After-school extracurricular activities may end up being the only way students can determine and pursue their interests.

