Human rights education’s curriculum problem

Abstract

Employing a theoretical perspective from the critical sociology of education, this article identifies a curriculum problem in human rights education (HRE) in schools and suggests strategies to solve it. The main problem is HRE's lack of an episteme-a disciplinary structure created in specialist communities-and, related to this, the flight of scholars from the field of curriculum practice, redefining it away from subject matter. A more robust HRE in schools will require not only advocacy but a curriculum, one that teachers can adapt to local needs, constraints, and students. Knowledge matters. If knowledge work of this sort is missing from HRE then it is difficult to claim that HRE has a social justice mission. Abstract: Employing a theoretical perspective from the critical sociology of education, this article identifies a curriculum problem in human rights education (HRE) in schools and suggests strategies to solve it. The main problem is HRE's lack of an episteme-a disciplinary structure created in specialist communities-and, related to this, the flight of scholars from the field of curriculum practice, redefining it away from subject matter. A more robust HRE in schools will require not only advocacy but a curriculum, one that teachers can adapt to local needs, constraints, and students. Knowledge matters. If knowledge work of this sort is missing from HRE then it is difficult to claim that HRE has a social justice mission. Keywords

Educational aims of rights education in primary school – zooming in on teachers and pupils in two classes

“…The human rights were explicitly included in the value base that permeates and guides Swedish schools, and human rights as specified knowledge content were strengthened and more precisely described than earlier. Parker (2018) addresses the slow pace in which rights education is introduced in schools by arguing that the main problem is a lack of 'a disciplinary structure created in a field of specialists' (4). Parker maintains that if education about rights is to be undertaken in schools, the subject matter and the learning goals (in other words, the what and why) needs to be elaborated and established by researchers and teachers.…”

Hypocrites or heroes? Thinking about the role of the teacher in human rights education

“…For example, the 'ignorant' teacher may be supported by revealing the rich knowledge base that underpins HRE, moving it from the 'unknown unknown' into the 'known unknown' category. Just offering a course may not be effective if teachers have not yet realised they lack powerful knowledge (Parker, 2018). Some 'conservative' teachers may be assisted by learning about the small steps taken by others in similarly restrictive contexts; for example, the school inspector who told Osler (2016, p.95) 'it would be better that these subjects are taken up to the political level and enacted through law' might be persuaded that there are small positive steps that can be taken through carefully curating existing curriculum resources, rather than waiting for national reforms (Al-Nakib, 2017;Akar, 2017).…”

Knowledge‐rich teaching: A model of curriculum design coherence

“…This article describes and justifies a theoretical model (the ‘Curriculum Design Coherence’, CDC model) that has been developed within the larger ‘social realist’ research programme into the theory and practice of curriculum knowledge (Muller, ; Young, ; Maton & Moore, ; Barrett & Rata, ; Barrett et al ., ). Specifically, the article responds to Parker's () call for re‐engagement with ‘curriculum planning, implementation, and evaluation’ (p. 8) and to Oates’ (; following Schmidt & Prawat, ) identification of coherence as a vital principle for curriculum design. The CDC model integrates concepts, content and competencies in a coherent way in order to avoid several tendencies which have affected curriculum studies in recent decades.…”

“…These are: a ‘skills’ versus ‘concepts’ bifurcation (Corbel, ); an over‐emphasis on fragmented and excessive content without conceptual integration; and a similar over‐emphasis on pedagogy (the ‘how’) at the expense of ‘what’ is taught (Young, ). Parker () locates these tendencies in ‘the abandonment of curriculum development by curriculum scholars’ (p. 16), characterised by three main movements in educational theory since the 1970s. These are: the ideology critique of the hidden curriculum (Young, ); the post‐1990s learning discourse, with its focus on pedagogy and the learner (Biesta, ; McPhail, ); and the outcomes‐based approach of twenty‐first‐century instrumentalised education (Couch, ; Lourie, ).…”

“…These are: a 'skills' versus 'concepts' bifurcation (Corbel, 2014); an over-emphasis on fragmented and excessive content without conceptual integration; and a similar over-emphasis on pedagogy (the 'how') at the expense of 'what' is taught (Young, 2010). Parker (2018) locates these tendencies in logic by making it public for scrutiny and criticism. Moving from the Engineering project to the model's development then to the Knowledge-Rich School Project recognises the to-ing and fro-ing between theorising and empirical research which contributes to building justifiable knowledge claims.…”