|
computer science, anthropology, and philosophy has shown up in the
education field in one incarnation as brain-based learning7. Building on
advances in our understanding of the functioning of the human brain over the
last several decades, this approach to education views learning from the
perspective of the brain, and the ways and contexts in which it functions most
effectively. There is a school of pedagogy which is called brain-based
learning.8In the case of foreign language study, one can see a similar cognitive
orientation in the work of Chamot and O'Malley9. This topic is discussed at
greater length in the next chapter.
This overview is offered as a means of bringing out some of the more
important ideas from public discussions on education. There is no intent to
promote one or another of these ideas, nor should this be read an apology for
eclecticism. Our intent here is to raise these issues for their relevance to the
setting in which curriculum design is taking place in the US in the 1990s. Some
of these ideas will be discussed in more detail below, in the section on
implementation; however, this document cannot provide real depth of coverage.
The reference list contains sources for further reading on these topics10.
Foreign language study in the US in the 90s.
Two conceptually large issues require discussion in this section: K-12
national standards, and the delineation of the possible missions of a foreign
language program. Each of these is of vital importance for any program
because they are relevant in the planning process at an early, definitional stage
of development. With respect to the goals of this document, these two issues
connect in different ways. The question of mission fits together with the
principles of the framework, and has tremendous significance for the overall
shape of a program. The issue of national standards provides a kind of parallel
anchor (to the common curriculum) in structuring high school Russian
programs. There is no conflict between, for example, the standards under
development by ACTFL and the common curriculum of this framework. Rather,
the two project should be seen as different filters through which plans for high
school programs should pass. The ACTFL standards focus on pre-collegiate
programs, and strive to define outcomes appropriate to specific points in
students' careers with respect to a much wider set of goals than are directly
included in this framework. The common curriculum of this framework focuses
on different domains of learning in order to allow for articulation with continued
studies of Russian in college.
National Standards for K-12 Foreign Language Study.The national
discussion of education reform, stimulated by widespread dissatisfaction with
the results of our nation's school systems,has been played out in our field, in
7Cite Caine & Caine, ACSD articles, and MIT Press volumes
8Need brain-based learning reference
9Cite Chamot and O'Malley
10Note existence of Association for Supervision and Curriculum Design, and National
Learning Structure Initiative.
|
