Traditional or Progressive: What is your view of the curriculum?

By Jinky Marie Chua, RPh, MPH

After our lecture on curriculum, I learned that a traditionalist view on the nature of knowledge
exists as innate truth, past facts, and moral virtues and that this knowledge is transmitted through a
teacher. In contrast, the progressive view is that knowledge is constructed through a child's innate natural
tendency to explore their environment. In this view, a teacher's role is to nurture this by providing a free
and stimulating environment so that children learn through their own experience. Given a traditional
society which values stability and structure tends to view knowledge as preexisting and able to be
transmitted from the teacher to the student. While a progressive society value change and improvement
tend to view knowledge as constructive and learned through actualization. From the lecture and
experiences as an educator, it should not be either/or, right versus wrong, good versus evil
characterizations of each of the views, anyone who chooses one side ends up neglecting the different
ways that children actually learn.

Traditional was created first, and progressive was formed based on how to make traditional better
to meet more needs of the students. It really goes to show how much education has evolved and how the
mind has developed over time. I can see why I am more into progressivist at first since I am teaching at
the tertiary level. It is the preferred method because it stimulates the minds of students and gets them
engaged in the work and allows them to think deeper. For instance, when I give them an activity that will
introduce them to the thermodynamics of phase changes, they have enough prior knowledge on phase
changes. Hence, they become engaged and can easily connect with the new concept. I do believe that
professors can be facilitators in learning and help guide the student to finding answers on their own, but
I also think that a traditional lecture that brings the full content circle can be meaningful with the tertiary
level students.

A different perspective is in chemical formula naming, the truth about how children learn lies in
between these views. Most students learn to read a chemical formula because of lots of opportunities to
engage in authentic formula reading and writing experiences. All children need these experiences, but
some children need a step by step approach before they can internalize the range of strategies and master
the skill. Another is when chemistry involves computation, the field changed, but the problem is the same:
a conceptual, applied, problem-solving approach versus a tightly sequential, skills-based, drill and
memorize the rules approach. This problem is escalated by general perspectives from the public that
faster and more in mathematics is better than deeper with increasingly more complex applications. But
the best math teachers recognize that there are essential pulls in each view and some kids need more or
less of one than the other, but all kids need teachers who see both ways.

It is inevitable that the products of these two views are different. For the transmission of
predetermined knowledge from teacher to student, certain conditions must be present, an environment
of receptivity, order, obedience, and industriousness would be preferred. It would mostly be enforced in
an authoritarian role and behavior reinforcement. The logical outcome of these is that children develop
the characteristics as mentioned above themselves which are ideal traits in some jobs. On the other hand,
progressivists argue that citizens require more than obedience and punctuality. To live in multicultural
societies, to negotiate with technology, and to be able to solve global problems such as climate change,
the world needs active inquirers, questioners, and creative thinkers that can collaborate with each other
and transform existing knowledge to find novel solutions to uncertain problems. In this 21st century
generation, I can say that we need to have both traditional and progressive characteristics of a person. As
much as progressivists' characteristics are in demand, traditionalists' virtues must also be taught for a
peaceful society.

Arguably, the aims of the two views could be interpreted as two essential sides of the same coin.
It should not be either/or but must be traditional AND progressive. It boils down to the level, discipline,
heterogeneity, and uniqueness of children. Everyone has a different way of learning and applying what
they have learned – some may learn better with a slight traditional touch along with progressive. Schools
must continually adapt the curriculum to fit the needs of children, rather than thinking children will fit
into one.