Ideology, the Hidden Curriculum and a

“Complicated Conversation” with the Canadian Language Benchmarks

Douglas Fleming PhD 

Faculty of Education, University of Ottawa

dfleming@uottawa.ca

Introduction

This lecture engages the Canadian Language Benchmarks (CLB) within the context of national second language programming and citizenship.

Findings from two studies:comparing how citizenship is conceptualized by a

sample of LINC students with how it is embedded within the 2000 and 2012 versions of the CLB.

how eight experienced ESL/literacy teachers described how they developed over the course of their careers a keen awareness of the importance of bringing critical perspectives to their classroom treatment of citizenship.

Concepts

Jackson’s (1968): hidden curriculum;

Students learn sets of implicit rules governing the privileging of certain kinds of knowledge and classroom behavior;

the hidden curriculum also exerts control over teachers through curricular microprocesses and governmentality (Foucault, 1978).

teachers can view engaging with documents such as these as “complicated conversations” (Pinar, 2012).

Related Empirical Work in General Education

Lynch (1989) and Connell (1982): curricula used in particular schools were differently framed according to the gender and social class of students;

Anyon (1980): teachers used the same curriculum material in different ways according to the socio-economic conditions within which they worked.

Apple (1979): teachers are forced to divide curriculum knowledge into various levels of status, according to the socio-economic background of the students in question.

Study 1 (Fleming, 2010)

comparing how citizenship is conceptualized by a sample of LINC students with how it is embedded within the CLB.;

• the students conceptualized citizenship in terms of multiculturalism, civic rights, and a respect for legal responsibilities;

• Linked to shifts in identity (esp. for women), family roles, a commitment to their new nation-state and access to labour and civic rights;

•in contrast, the CLB constructed isolated, passive and depoliticised conceptions of second language learners.

•the original 2000 version of the CLB:• the word "vote" does not appear;• rights and responsibilities almost exclusively related to

being good consumers, but not as workers, family members or participants in community activities;

• labor rights nonexistent;

•improvements in the 2012 version of the CLB:• several additions of content that refer to labour rights;• two references to voting;

•however:• there is still a heavy emphasis on consumer rights;• voting and labour rights are mentioned in reference to

passive skills.

• Study 2 (Fleming, 2014)

eight experienced ESL/literacy teachers described how they

developed an awareness of the importance of critical perspectives to the classroom treatment of citizenship.

• the participants in this study endorsed justice-orientated versions of citizenship;

• they linked participatory notions of citizenship to critical conceptions of literacy;

• they noted that they strengthened these positions as their careers progressed.

•

Despite claims that it is nothing more than an assessment instrument, as the first study shows, the CLB is a hidden curriculum in the sense that it:

encapsulates a privileged body of content and methods;

promotes an obedient and passive engagement with the nation-state;

links (rarely attainable) normative English language fluency with full citizenship;

Why is this a “complicated conversation”?

the CLB is nominally an assessment instrument;to be valid as a language assessment, such an

instrument must avoid making performance dependent on unfamiliar;

Canadian citizenship is (for the most part) unfamiliar content for newcomers to the country;

However, the CLB (esp. in the 2012 version) is also used to inform curriculum development;

curricular content found within the document becomes

exemplars for classroom teachers and thus privileged.

As the second study shows, teachers can critically engage such documents by:exercising professional autonomy;designing curricula and pedagogical tasks tailor-made

for the learners they face;not giving in to the temptation to delay treating

citizenship until the higher levels of second language proficiency;

conceptualising their engagement as an “complicated conversation” in which they own an equal half of the dialogue.