One thread got me thinking - what exactly is the definition of "curriculum" and how should I use it in conversation. Typically I use it to mean any subject I am teaching individually - such as Math curriculum. I also use it when speaking in general terms meaning everything I teach - as in general curriculum. There was a little confusion in one thread by the term curriculum. So I've been thinking about it ever since. What is curriculum vs. materials, reference, etc? And at what point do these items become curriculum (or included in the term)? How/what do all of you define curriculum (as)? Here are some dictionary definitions to get the ball rolling: cur·ric·u·lum (k-rky-lm) n. pl. cur·ric·u·la (-l) or cur·ric·u·lums 1. All the courses of study offered by an educational institution. 2. A group of related courses, often in a special field of study: the engineering curriculum. curriculum [kəˈrɪkjʊləm] n pl -la [-lə], -lums 1. (Social Science / Education) a course of study in one subject at a school or college 2. (Social Science / Education) a list of all the courses of study offered by a school or college 3. any programme or plan of activities [from Latin: course, from currere to run] curricular adj Noun 1. curriculum - an integrated course of academic studies; "he was admitted to a new program at the university" curriculum n curriculum [kəˈrikjuləm] a course, especially of study at school or university They are changing the curriculum. I do notice that only one source uses it as an individual course of study.
Depends on the context. I usually see curriculum as an organized topic for a specific level and subject. For example, I might say miquon is my math curriculum, but the c-rods are supplemental materials used with the curriculum. MoH is my history curriculum, but maps, timelines, etc. would be supplemental. I guess an easier way to look at it is with food. Meat & veggies are food. Lollipops are eaten, but they're not food. They're just something extra. Meat alone isn't healthy, though. A good curriculum would have a mix of meat, veggies, fruits, etc. That's how I look at mom-organized unit studies. They're not a store-bought curriculum kit, but when put together in an organized way for a specific purpose, they ARE collectively called a curriculum. I think what a lot of people call "curriculum" is more like what I'd call a "scope & sequence". If it's a list of things to learn, but not actually the material itself, it's not really curriculum in my mind.
In my mind, "curriculum" is what you plan to teach, either in one subject, or in all subjects. "Curriculum materials" would be the textbooks, workbooks, videos, etc., that contain and help you teach what you plan to teach. "Supplemental materials" would be games, wall charts, flash cards, etc., that add a bit of extra facts or extra help to what you plan to teach. For instance, I plan to teach American History, from 1865 to the present. The specific facts I plan to teach about that would be my curriculum. The textbooks, workbooks, videos, a progression of maps, etc., would be my curriculum materials. The games, flash cards, projects, etc., would be supplemental.
Ah, Lindina.... good answer. Mine is a little different. When I say "curriculum" it is what I am teaching through whatever materials. For example - my American History Curriculum for, let's take your 1865 to present, might be a core of BJU with unit studies on each major war, civil rights and women's rights along with the automobile and flying. All of that together, planned out and specified in my daily lesson plans, would be my curriculum for the year. I think I got into the habit of thinking of everything I was teaching in an orderly and planned out fashion as "curriculum" in the early days, when we always seemed to have to "prove" ourselves. When homeschooling hadn't been even heard of by many and certainly not considered. I always felt like my "curriculum" was in competition. I can't get past that mindset, somehow. It is what I always dealt with. One other thing that really formed my ideas was one year when we tried the "satellite school" option. We went with BJU. I wanted to combine World History and Geography into one unit study to teach. I had to submit my "curriculum" in written form to BJU for acceptance in order to be able to teach it and receive credit. Well, I did and they did. In fact, they said they wished they had had a teacher like me in school! But that, I think, is why I always consider everything I teach as "curriculum". It's more about what I teach than what a book says. Am I making sense?
Absolutely. It's more about what you teach. A teacher's "curriculum" (which things are in the plan to teach) might be found in Ch 6, 7 from this book, then Ch 1, 2 and 4 from that book, this movie/video, that historical novel or two, and the worksheets on the topic from that internet site, then finish up with unit 4 from this other book. You choose your materials carefully, combine them however you want, and they help you present to the student what you want to teach. Most of us get into a bad habit of saying we're "buying curriculum" when actually we have in mind what we want to teach (whether we write it all out or not), and are buying books and materials to help us teach that. Sometimes we use every page in the order the publisher puts it out, and sometimes we don't.
Right, Lindina. I agree. Probably why we get in the habit of calling textbooks curriculum is because that is what the manufacturers and distributors call it.
