There is a move in some countries, including England, towards less curriculum control by government. This stands in contrast to a national curriculum which may be universally applied in all schools within a state/country. National curricula tend to use either content (subject mastery) or process (skills) based models (Kelly, 2009). More localised curricula have the potential to be more issue and problem centred with a wider concern about learning outcomes of the whole child/student (Sobel, 2004). However marketisation and globalisation typified by the PISA 'effect' on national policies have discouraged teachers' creativity and curriculum innovation (Au, 2007, Alexander, 2012) This paper is concerned attempts to create an educational 'ecosystem' in which there are increased affordances for teachers in developing a more localised, issue-centred curriculum.
For more than 25 years the author plus colleagues have worked promoting innovative pedagogies but we have come to realise that innovation has to encompass curriculum change and associated assessment strategies. As a result we have, through both funded and unfunded activities, promoted more localised curriculum development, highlighting inquiry and project based learning drawing upon community resources (Leat, 2017). Along the way we have encountered a significant range of people with compatible, if not identical, ideas. In our work we have been conscious of ecological models of education and particulary that developed by Hodgson & Spours (2013), drawing on Bronfenbrenner (1979) which identifies 5 system levels that pertain to coherent educational provision.
- The micro - the space in which learner identity is developed through relationships with family, friends and teachers;
- The meso - essentially the school and its staff;
- Exo 1 – this level is not directly experienced by the young person but it has direct impact on their experience and includes community traditions and institution arrangements such as transition and accreditation;
- Exo 2 – 'The exo 2 system level comprises the regional economic landscape and labour market, employers, training providers and their organisations, regional agencies and networks, including local authorities, further and higher education institutions, specialist vocational provision and wider travel-to-learn/earn patterns' (Hodgson & Spours, 2013, p. 217);
- The macro – reflects both national and international political level.
Having concentrated previously on the micro and meso level we have consciously begun to address Exo 1 and 2. Currently the macro is beyond our reach.
One small incident has been a turning point in this evolution. We held a small reception for a pedagogic coach, visiting from the US in 2013/14 and we were very struck by the animation evident as our guests met and chatted with like-minded people and that some were swapping emails and mobile phone numbers. This resonated with our theorised knowledge of the importance of social capital (Field) and networking (Castells, 1996).
Thus in addition to our normal function of conducting funded research projects we have made networking a deliberate element of our work. This does have an added bonus in that our research grading in the UK uses 'impact' as one element of the evaluation. This paper reflects a meta-project which ties together our other funded projects and represents, more than any single project, our moral purpose as researchers.
Research Questions:
1. How do curriculum activists benefit from localised networking?
2. What is the potential wider impact on curriculum in local schools of the networking?