When I myself first read (or tried to) Scotland's 'Curriculum for Excellence' I was shocked and dismayed by its complexity and thought it was utterly ridiculous as a document to support teachers and to underpin teaching. No wonder Greg comments in his conclusions that this kind of curriculum leads teachers to imploring 'Just tell me what to teach'. As if their working life isn't hard enough without trying to wade through such a humungous, complex document.
I find it quite gratifying then, when years later, people other than me are pointing out the same problems with the Curriculum for Excellence that I first identified some time ago.
In fact, what I find amazing nowadays is the growing community of people who have observed various aspects of official documents over the years and who are now writing about the plethora of their ideologies and flawed guidance which have hindered teachers so badly (in various countries) leading to many actually leaving the teaching profession - and, worse still, leading to so many failed children. It is impossible to hold those in authority to account for this state of affairs - but the least those in charge can do is to get fully on board with research findings and simplifying guidance rather than making a meal of it by the kind of complications noted by the OECD below!
https://gregashman.wordpress.com/2017/0 ... xcellence/Learning lessons from the failure of Scotland’s “Curriculum for Excellence”
You only have to look at the OECD's description above (in blue) of the complexity of the Curriculum for Excellence to realise what a ludicrous, indigestible approach this is likely to be in reality for busy teachers.Unfortunately, the path of CfE has not been smooth. Its detractors are pulling their hair out while even its fans admit that it needs a bit of work. John Swinney, Scotland’s education minister, has brought in reforms that include the introduction of more assessment.
These reforms are the result of a review conducted by the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and commissioned by the Scottish government. The OECD noted:
“Curriculum for Excellence represents an ambitious departure seeking to develop a coherent 3-18 curriculum around capacities and learning, rather than school subjects, with a different approach to assessment from that in place before. It is complex as it is organised around four capacities (covering 12 attributes and 24 capabilities across the four); five levels, from early to senior; seven principles, six entitlements, ten aims, and four contexts for learning; eight curriculum areas and three interdisciplinary areas; and several hundreds of Experiences and Outcomes.”
I think there are two linked aspects of this statement that are critical: the departure from a system based upon school subjects and the complexity of the system that replaced it.
If anyone is interested in further information about the battle for the approach to reading instruction in Scotland, you can read about some developments here - a thread in which I refer to my responses to the Curriculum for Excellence with regard to early reading instruction - now with over 18,000 views:
https://phonicsinternational.com/forum/ ... .php?t=707