Institute for Christian Teaching
Education Department of Seventh-day Adventists
TEACHING VALUES DEVELOPING
A CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK FOR
ADVENTIST SCHOOLS
Anne-Marie Kennedy MA Ed
Education Department
British Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
Stanborough Park
Watford, Hertfordshire
Great Britain
333-98 Institute for Christian Teaching
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904 USA
Prepared for the
22nd International Faith and Learning Seminar
Seminar Schloss Bogenhofen Austraia
August 1998
I
TEACHING
VALUES TRHUOGH THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM
Over the last decade there has been an interesting development in educational philosophy. Policymakers in many Western governments have recognized the need to incorporate the area of moral and spiritual development into the pedagogy of schools.
In the United Kingdom, for example, the National Curriculum is designed to 'promote the spiritual, moral, cultural and physical dimensions of pupils at school'.[1] While in Australia, one government aims document stipulates that 'the moral, ethical and spiritual development of students is a fundamental goal of education' and that teachers are to 'inculcate in their students positive values and a capacity for moral and ethical practice.'[2] The new shift in educational thought and practice is increasingly towards a holistic approach to education where teachers are expected to plan lessons in a way that will '[help] young people [to] develop morally and spiritually.'[3]
This supposedly 'new' educational language is all too familiar to Christian educators and a careful reading of the discussion papers and working documents generated by this development reveals more common ground. The most surprising similarity is that the methodology used to develop the spiritual and moral dimension of education in the public schools is almost identical to that used in Christian schools. Both sectors have recognized the importance of teaching values in a curricular context and both use the hidden curriculum alongside the formal curriculum to facilitate this goal.
In this paper we will examine the role that the hidden curriculum plays in teaching values, critique the curriculum model in the light of Christian educational philosophy and then suggest a framework for developing Christian values in a school environment.
Harnessing the Positive effects of the Hidden Curriculum
Developing a partnership between the hidden and the formal curriculum was the first radical step in this shift in educational policy. It will be remembered that during the early eighties reams of research papers were written documenting the detrimental effect of the hidden curriculum on pupil learning and behavior and at the time using the hidden curriculum, as a positive influence in the classroom was unthinkable. But as the shift towards values education became more pronounced educators realized that these new aims and objectives had to be delivered within a curriculum framework and so the process of re-evaluating the role of the hidden curriculum began.
In the book 'Curriculum Leadership', Allan A Glatthorn[4] defined the hidden curriculums '…those aspects of schooling other than the intentional curriculum that seem to produce changes in student values perceptions, and behaviors.' He pointed out that despite the proven negative influence of the hidden curriculum on pupil learning, its potential contribution to values education made it desirable 'from the viewpoint of one desiring optimal human development'.[5] He also suggested a framework for counteracting the negative influences while at the same time harassing its potential as a vehicle for values education. According to Glatthorn this was best achieved when a distinction was made between the constants (those aspects of schooling more or less impervious to change) and the variables (those aspects of schooling most susceptible to reform – of the hidden curriculum).
|
Constants
Variables
All those decisions about the assignment of teachers and the grouping of the children for instruction that influence learning.
The social dimensions concerned with the patterned relationships of persons and groups in the school associated with positive student attitude and achievement.
The social
dimension concerned with belief systems, values, cognitive structures and
meaning. |
Fig. 1 Glatthorn – Constants and variables of the Hidden Curriculum
Glatthorn argued that while the constants were unlikely to change, the variables – such as the organizational stsructure, the social systems and the culture of the school – could be influenced by educational policy.[6] He concluded that the hidden curriculum was neither good nor bad but that its positive or negative effect on students depended largely upon the way it was used by administrators.
Power and Kohlberg, in an article called Moral Development: Transforming the Hidden Curriculum[7] stated the case for a redefinition and re-evaluation of the hidden curriculum most strongly when they wrote:
'No matter what principle we may preach, the hidden curriculum of the school operates as the real curriculum for values education. [It] can become a curriculum for moral eduation and one that is more powerful than any formal curriculum we can name.'
The link between the formal and the hidden curriculum was made explicit by M Roques in his book The Morality of the School. Roques argued that values held by people and, more importantly, establishments have far-reaching effects on others. These religious, political, social and invidivual values, when translated into action can become a cause for concern. Therefore, he states that:
'…the choice of a curriculum, how a person thinks and what she will think about will almost certainly have moral consequences, because such experiences will affect thought processes which will probably be reflected in behavior.'[8]
As a result of this re-evaluation process three elements of the hidden curriculum were identified as being essential to the process of integrating moral and spiritual development within the formal curriculum, namely:
· That research had shown that the hidden curriculum did have a powerful impact on pupils' values, perceptions and behaviors;
· That the positive or negative effects of the hidden curriculum on learners depended largely upon the way it was used by teachers and administrators'
· And that the hidden curriculum could be used as a vehicle for transmitting positive as well as negative values.
In the next section we will explore the concept of the hidden curriculum (now defined as values education) in the context of Christian educational principles and see how a biblical perspective also moves values education into the forefront of the core curriculum.
II
THE
ROLE OF THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM
IN CHRISTIAN
EDUCATION
In his book, Life in New Testament Times, Morris Joseph makes the following observations about eh emphasis on the moral and the religious in the ancient Jewish education system. He says:
'Of secular education there is scarcely a trace. All the ordinances dealing with education deal with it in the larger aspects as a preparation for the moral and religious life, as a means for developing character.'[9]
The same observation could be made about the writings of Ellen G. White. She too saw the perfecting of moral character as an important aim of Christian education and these themes runs throughout her counsels on educational practice.
Schools and colleges, she tells us, are 'designed of God to accomplish the great work of saving souls.'[10] Higher education is not the pursuit of academic excellence but 'an experimental knowledge of the plan of salvation'[11] and the 'great purpose of education' is to 'so elevate and ennoble man's character that he may again reflect the image of the Creator.'[12]
The emphasis on moral development should not, however, result in diminished intellectual attainment. On the contrary, White argues that '…true education does not ignore the values of scientific knowledge or literary acquirements; but above information it values power; above power, goodness and above intellectual requirements, character.'[13] Elsewhere she states that '…while religious principle is held paramount, every advance step taken in the acquirement of knowledge or in the culture of the intellect is a step toward the assimilation of the human with the Divine.'[14]
It is clear then that any model of Christian education that has a strong emphasis on moral development will also be committed to a high standard of academic achievement. With this objective in mind, the best curriculum model would be one where '…in the highest sense the work of education and the work of redemption are one.'[15] In practical terms, this would mean a combination of the formal and hidden curricula.
It is only when the components of the hidden curriculum are used explicitly for values education that the limited scope of the formal curriculum becomes apparent. By emphasizing the importance of moral development the Christian educator acknowledges that the goal of Christian education is neither student-centered nor test-centered but God-centered. This philosophy of education is also seen in Christ's teaching ministry. He could have unlocked the mysteries of the universe to His listeners but instead chose to speak only of those things that were essential for character development and to emphasize those areas of knowledge that would enlarge man's capacity for knowing God and increase his power to do good.[16]
Ellen G White highlights this curriculum model time and time again in her writings. She constantly points Christian educators away from a narrow curriculum that only recognizes the academic to a 'broader scope, a higher aim' where 'the realization of the perfect man, the rise of the holy nation begins on this earth.[17] With this aim in mind, values education in the Christian school is no longer a hidden component of the curriculum but becomes central to the goals of true education.
III
THE
ROLE OF THE HIDDEN CURRICULUM
WHEN INTEGRATING
FAITH AND LEARNING
In the previous section we saw that once the hidden curriculum is made explicit, whether in a spiritual or humanist framework, it can become a powerful tool for transmitting values. The model on the next page (fig 2) shows how the integration of a formal education strand with the hidden curriculum (values education) impacts on character development.[18] Note the three-way dynamic as the formal and hidden curricula impact separately on the character through aspects such as course content, peer influence etc., (what Glatthorn would call the constants) while other values – the variables – are made explicit and placed into the integration process.
In this model the values, which are to be transmitted, are usually linked explicitly to a curriculum subject or policy statement. In figure 3 on the same page we see the model in action. A Geography module for a year 4 class (8-9 years) called Places[19] lends itself to work about missions, respecting other cultures etc. and there is also a stated character outcome.
Critiquing the Model
I have seen many successful examples of this model at work in my work as an educational consultant in both denominational and state schools. I have observed pupils as young as seven begin to develop personal responses to the key moral questions: Who am I and How ought I to live? But despite this evidence of successful integration of values education with specific learning objectives I have reservations abut its overall effectiveness as a model for Christian education.
My first concern is with the construct of this model. We noted earlier that the model was designed primarily to help pupils to reflect on, and hopefully begin to find answers to, the question 'What sort of moral person ought I to be?' But how can this aim be achieved if the question 'What sort of moral person can they be?' is not first addressed by those designing and implementing the model?
When devising an academic curriculum, educators base their decisions about when to introduce new concepts on theories of cognitive development. In the same way one would expect decisions about the appropriateness and inclusion of certain moral issues in a values education program to be based on theories of moral development. In other words any program that claims to facilitate a developmental moral process must first answer the question: 'What sort of moral person can they be now?' The absence of such fundamental questions from an operational model is worrying.
If Christian educators are going to successfully integrate faith and learning, values such as 'equity' or 'earthmanship' should be translated into a form commensurate with a child's moral developmental stage so that the child becomes integrated with the value. In this way she begins to understand what it is to be 'equitable' (for example) on a cognitive level (subject context), moral level (values context) and, ultimately on a spiritual level (faith in action prompted by emotional and intellectual assent).
Possible problems with moral development theories
Although understanding moral developmental theories is crucial to developing an effective values based curriculum it is important that these theories are used critically and not perceived as 'the last word' on moral development. It should also be recognized that a theory of morality that does not acknowledge the innate sinfulness of human nature and excludes the dimension of redemptive moral restoration would contain elements that conflict with the biblical view of human nature. For example, at first glance Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of stages in moral development appears to be in harmony with the Bible 9cf. Ps 92:12) but he differs from the biblical model on two fundamental points. Firstly there is the implication that moral development is natural process and that human intellect and reason act as conduits for moral regeneration. This is in direct conflict with the Christian belief that humans have a natural propensity towards evil and that moral regeneration can only take place as the result of an external power – namely the transforming power of the Holy Spirit. It could also be argued that ascribing moral development stages to fixed age-specific markers is more of a reflection of certain cognitive and societal expectations than a universal truth about human morality.
These concerns aside, understanding how children develop morally and knowing the moral concepts that they can handle at certain ages is an essential part of teaching values in a curriculum context.
Establishing links between the moral and formal curricula
Another serious concern is the model's heavy reliance on the formal curriculum to determine what values should be taught thus putting accredited Christian schools in the position where they may have to omit key areas in the Christian value systems simply because they are not on the mandatory syllabus. Approaching these issues at different times in the timetable is not the answer as we have already established that the most effective way of transmitting values is in a natural context in the curriculum. Christian educators who find themselves in this situation should consider the teaching model illustrated by Christ where the formal syllabus is sometimes subordinated to moral teaching. They should consider modifying or adding aspects of curriculum content to ensure that the areas that are essential to a Christian framework of belief are addressed. (See Fig 4 for an example of such modification in the British National Curriculum by the British Union Education Department).
Whose values?
We have already noted that the model works equally well within a humanist and a Christian framework. Does this mean that values neutral components that can be slotted into the curriculum and then translated into the organization's worldview?[20] The model makes it possible for teachers to introduce their own values system by emphasizing some issues and underplaying others.
The ideal model for IFL?
It is clear that although the model is effective in transmitting values within the curriculum it does not go far enough in addressing the 'broader scope' of Christian education. It fails to integrate faith with learning because of two major misconceptions about Christian education and that values education is synonymous with the faith that we are expected to integrate with learning.
IV
THE
PRIMARY AIM OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATION
'The great work of parents and teachers is character
building…acknowledge of the sciences sinks into significance beside this great
aim; but all true education may be made to help in the development of a
righteous character.' EG White
In his book Myths in Adventism George Knight examines the educational philosophy of Ellen White in a chapter entitled Myths abut Educational Purpose and comes to this conclusion:
'…Neither the development of character nor preparation for service is the primary (i.e., first in time and importance, most fundamental) aim of Christian education. Why is this so? Because many have done, or have at least attempted to do them outside of Christ. Many humanistic educators have also sought to make character development and/or preparation for service to humanity the purpose of education. Altruism and human goodness, however, are not Christianity.'[21]
Knight then goes on to argue that a close reading of the Spirit of Prophecy reveals that 'the lostness of man provides the purpose of Christian education'[22] and he quotes Ellen White as saying that the 'all-important thing' in education should be the 'conversion of the students'.[23] It is the leading of young people into 'a saving relationship with Jesus Christ that provides the focal point of Christian education and it is only when the curriculum is built upon the foundation of the new birth experience that Christian educators can proceed with its other aims and purposes. If it fails at this foundational and primary point,' says Knight, 'it fails entirely.'[24]
Knight identifies the secondary aims of Christian education as follows:
1. Character development
2. Developing the Christian mind
3. Preparation for service
Each of these secondary aims, he argues, can only be accomplished within the context of the new birth experience. In the case of character development, Knight states that, 'if we equate the primary objective of Christian education to bringing students into Christ…then it follows that character development, as a secondary aim, is synonymous with sanctification and Christian growth.'[25] He also reminds us that 'the concept of Christian character development never takes place outside of the conversion experience or apart from Christ…' True character development, therefore, is an act of God's grace brought about when an individual is in a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. Knight concludes that conversion, character development and job preparation and acquiring a mature Christian mind are not ends in themselves.'[26] Each is an essential element in an individual's preparation for service to his fellow man…'[27]
Understanding the model
According to Knight, the primary aim of Christian education is redemption. This is the distinctive mark that sets it apart from all other education systems. It is importance to understand that Knight is not equating this primary aim (redemption) with the first steps taken to help pupils to become born-again Christians. (If this were the case then IFL programs could only be taught to converted pupils). He is simply making the point that success in Christian education is measured by the quality of the faith developed not by the equality of moral behavior.
As Ellen White wrote:
'Education, culture, the exercise of the will, human effort, all have their proper sphere but here they are powerless. They may produce an outward correctness of behavior but they cannot change the heart…the idea that it is necessary to develop the good that exists on man by nature, is a fatal deception.'[28]
If Knight is right then there are problems with the model currently in use for IFL programs as it only addresses one of the aims of Christian education and a secondary one at that!
V
THE
NEED FOR DEFINITIONS
Traditionally Christian educators have sought to develop pupils' faith in an academic context. It is clear however that for this to happen, the phrase, 'integrating faith and learning' must be translated into operational definitions.
Learning
Traditionally 'learning' in a classroom context has been viewed in three parts, namely:
· The formal curriculum – the stated objectives of the syllabus or curriculum
· The informal curriculum – those activities that supplement learning
· And the hidden curriculum – those aspects of schooling other than the intentional curriculum that seem to produce changes in student values, perceptions, and behavior.
In the context of Christian education however we must go further and determine which aspects of learning will best facilitate faith and spiritual development. In order to do this we must first understand the nature of the 'faith' that we are expected to develop.
Faith
In everyday speech 'faith' is sometimes used interchangeably with 'trust' thus emphasizing its personal and relational dimension. The biblical definition given in Hebrews also seems to emphasis this aspect. 'Faith,' we are told is 'the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen'.[29] But these definitions do not help in the process of developing concrete operational terms.
James Michael Lee provides one solution to the problem of definitions in an article called 'Facilitating Growth in Faith through Religious Instruction'.[30] In it he suggests that faith can be viewed as a construct, something that is tangible and observable and as such can be nurtured and developed meaningfully within a classroom context. We see this idea mirrored in the books of James and Romans where faith is characterized by demonstrable activity.[31] In the 'Faith' chapter in Hebrews 11 the write commends those who have acted as a result of their faith. Jesus Himself wondered if he would find faith when He returned the second time.[32]
Lee identifies three aspects of faith that could be nurtured within a curriculum context, namely:
- The affective experience
- The cognitive experience
- The lifestyle experience
For the purposes of this paper I have defined these domains as follows:[33]
- The affective experience (Faith resulting in love for an unseen Person)
Key text: Deut. 6 'Love the Lord thy God with all thine heart…'
The affective experience is the faith aspect most likely to be at the heart of IFL strategies as it is a personal and revelatory experience. This is the most difficult to integrate with learning objectives in a formal curriculum.
- The cognitive experience )Faith resulting in love for the unseen world and its principles)
Key Text: '2 Cor. 4:1 The things which are seen are temporal; but the things are not see are eternal'.
This faith aspect is the development of the Christian mind where the believer acknowledges the limitations of human understanding and views systems and values in the light of the reality of the unseen world.
- The life style experience (Faith resulting in love in action)
Key text: '1 Cor. 13:2 If I have faith that can move mountains but not love I am nothing…'
In Mt. 25 Jesus states that knowing him on a personal and revelatory level and believing in the reality of the spiritual realm is only proven when this faith is translated into the life experiences. This aspect of faith then is the conscious living out of Christian values and principles in everyday life.
In the final section we will look at how educators can integrate these faith aspects with learning objectives and then suggest a renewed values education curriculum model that seeks to develop Christian believers as well as exemplary moral citizen.
VI
INTEGRATING
FAITH WITH LEARNING
We have established that IFL can only take place in a meaningful way in Christian schools and colleges when 'faith' is defined in concrete terms. Once these definitions have been made it becomes easier to identify the learning contexts most suitable for nurturing particular faith aspects.
Affective Domain
This faith aspect is the most desirable for Christian development unfortunately it is also the most difficult to integrate with a uniform set of learning objectives. One possible solution is found in the research conducted by Sir Alister Hardy at Oxford University in the 1970's.[34] Hardy defined spiritual experiences as being 'conscious of, and perhaps influenced by, some power…which may either appear to go beyond their individual selves or partly, or even entirely, within their being'[35] and he discover that such experiences are often 'triggered' by other experiences such as natural beauty or despair.
Positive and negative triggers
Dividing these 'triggers' into subcategories can help us to determine the types of activities most appropriate for nurturing faith in the affective domain.
|
POSITIVE
EXTERNAL TRIGGERS |
NEGATIVE
EXTERNAL TRIGGERS |
|
Examples |
Examples |
|
Natural beauty – Geography field trips |
Death |
|
Sacred places – history field trips |
Illness |
|
Creative arts – choir, drama clubs, museum trips |
Depression |
|
POSITIVE
INTERNAL TRIGGERS |
Examples |
|
Faith attitudes – 'the certainty that all will turn out for good.'[36] Fostered through activities such as Week of Prayer etc., |
|
Other-centeredness ('a sense of wishing to contribute to the needs of others'[37] Fostered through community service activities etc. |
The informal curriculum with its scope for field trips, community service, counseling sessions etc. provides the most appropriate setting for nurturing the affective domain of faith.
Cognitive Domain
The cognitive domain of faith is closely linked to Knights secondary aim of developing the Christian mind where '…Christian persons…think Christianly in every social situation.'[38] Pupils are made aware of the limitations of human understanding and are encouraged to see that truth cannot be discovered through human reason, intellect, experience or sensory truth alone. This is done most effectively when curriculum subjects are used to teach pupils about the nature of God.
For example, when studying order and design of creation in science a growing understanding of the laws of nature can help pupils to better appreciate spiritual and moral laws. Similarly, a careful analysis of historical periods and prophecy can teach pupils that human history goes beyond time-space reality and meets its fulfillment in God's ultimate purpose in human affairs. While it is necessary to be true to be 'voice of the subject'[39] Christian teachers and scholars must go one step further and search for the voice of God in the subject. The formal curriculum, once it has been regenerated and modified, is the most appropriate vehicle for developing the cognitive faith domain.
Life Experience Domain
'What good is it if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?…Faith by itself, if it is not accomplished by action, is dead…I will show you my faith by what I do.'[40]
The life experience domain could be renamed 'The Faith in Action Zone'. In this domain 'teaching faith' goes beyond 'book knowledge' and 'chalk and talk' approaches and provides pupils with situations and learning experiences that will help them to discover their faith and make faith choices about their lives. These faith experiences may come in a number of different situations such as exposure to academic theories that conflict with faith, initiating community based projects or personal faith issues. The multifaceted aspect of this domain means that it can be nurtured through the formal, informal and hidden curricula.
Conclusion
We have seen the moral and spiritual development of pupils is fast becoming the concern of non-religious groups. Governments want schools and colleges to teach pupils moral and concepts and the model critiqued in this paper goes along way in facilitating this aim.
The model helps pupils to respond to questions such as 'How ought I to live?' and 'What ought I to do?' and encourages them to explore associated concepts such as justice, truth, morality and righteousness. If, as we have established, the primary aim of Christian education is to help pupils to develop a faith relationship with Jesus Christ, the model must be expanded to cover all aspects of spiritual development not just moral development.
A successful values education program will only produce disciples when moral concepts are rooted in a biblical framework of reality about human nature and are taught in the context of the new birth experience. This is because all moral questions must be preceded by spiritual concepts as moral considerations can only come about in creatures with a spiritual identity. So teachers must provide a variety of situations and learning experiences that will help pupils to discover, reinforce and exemplify their faith. Part of this comes about when pupils are encouraged to make faith connections in a natural and meaningful context.
The final model (fig 6) suggests that the process of integrating faith with learning can only work when the formal curriculum is regenerated and modified and the voice of God in the subject can be heard clearly. It also suggests that the curriculum emphasis will change dependent on the faith domain that is to be nurtured.
With these additions the model will go some way in helping our pupils to become thinking, responsible and principled adults who reflect the image of God in all areas of their lives and live out the true purpose of their life on this earth.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Beanes J. A. & Lipka. Self concept, Self-esteem and the Curriculum. Allyn and Bacon 1984.
Best R (Ed). Education, Spirituality and the Whole Child. Cassell 1997.
Bottery. The Morality of The School.
Craig I (Ed). Primary School Management in Action. Longman. 1989.
Epstein I. Judaism. Penguin 1964.
Gaebelein. The Patterns of God's Truth: The Integration of Faith and Learning. Moody Press. 1968.
Glatthorn A. Curriculum Leadership. Glenview, Ill: Scot, Foresman
Gribble D. Considering Children. Dorling Kindersley, 1987.
Holmes A. The Idea of A Christian College (Revised edition). WmB Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids Michigan, 1987.
Holmes B & Mclean M. The Curriculum: A Comparative Perspective. Unmin Hyman, 1989.
Horton T. (Ed). Challenge and Change in the Curriculum. Hodder and Stoughton.
Hunter R. The Organic Curriculum. The Falmer Press, 1989.
Joseph M. Life in New Testament Times.
Kent G. The Modern Primary School Teacher. Hogan, 1989.
Knight G. Myths in Adventism. Andrews University Press, 1985.
Knight G. Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective (2nd edition). Review and Herald Publishing Assoc. 1989.
Kohlber & Power. Moral Development: Transforming the Hidden Curriculum. Curriculum Review Sept/oct 1986.
Lee J. M. (Ed). Handbook of Faith. Religious Education Press, 1990.
Manzl H. Feeding on Fast Food and Fast Values. Education Digest, 1990.
Middleton J. & Walsh B. The Transforming Vision: Shaping a Christian Worldview. Intervarsity Press, 1984.
Oliva P. Developing the Curriculum Scott. Foreman & Co. 1989.
Parker P. J. To Know as We are Known: Education as A Spiritual Journey. Harper San Francisco, 1993.
Roques, M. The Curriculum Unmasked. Monarch, 1980.
Sharpes D. K. Curriculum Tradition and Practice. Routledge, 1980.
Stevens R. Education and the Death of Love. Epworth, 1988.
Stevenson L. Seven Theories of Human Nature (2nd edition). Oxford University Press
White, E G. Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students. Pacific Press
White, E G. Education, Pacific Press.
White, E G. Fundamentals of Christian Education. Pacific Press.
White, E G. Testimony Vol. 4 Pacific Press.