The Hidden Curriculum of Moral and Citizenship Education: How We Celebrate the Individual

• In Event: 60.033 - Challenges to Teaching Moral Education for Adolescents

Abstract

Moral development is not only influenced by the intentional behavior of teachers and counselors but also by the hidden curriculum. The sociologist Brint (2003) is even arguing that not the explicit curriculum activities in moral and citizenship education are the most influential, but the practices in the regular subjects and in the school culture. In our research we find different orientations in moral and citizenship education: an adaptive, an individualistic, and a critical-democratic orientation (Veugelers, 2007). We also find differences in intentions and practices. The practice is more adaptive then the intentions (Leenders, Veugelers & De Kat, 2008; 2012). Our research, both quantitative and qualitative, and the international comparative ICCS study (2009) show that Dutch students have a strong individual orientation.

In this paper we will analyze the hidden curriculum to find practices that support a more adaptive and in particular a more individualistic orientation among students. We will present four examples: 1. The learning theory used, 2. Assessment and selection, 3. The individual as historical and moral exemplar, 4. Psychological guidance in education. The data for the analysis of the hidden curriculum have been collected in interviews with teachers and students and by observations of classroom practices (Veugelers, 2012, Veugelers & Schuitema, 2013; Leeman, 2014).

Results
1. In most Dutch classrooms there is a traditional teacher directed way of teaching with a transfer of knowledge, and a control of goals, learning activities and learning processes by the teacher. A strong adapted orientation in citizenship is stimulated. When there are alternative learning orientations, there is a focus on child-centered education or on self-regulation, not so much on a socio-constructivist way of learning.
2. In Dutch education, students are being assessed often. The students’ feeling of competition and individual success is stimulated by assessments. Success depends on your personal effort.
3. When students are studying history and in particular when they are studying theories, they read the great books and we refer to their authors, not in the first place to movements that are described. We overemphasize the importance of the individual.
4. A fourth way individualization is entering education is by the strong psychological guidance in many schools. Mentoring, counseling, career education, they all help individual students to become better learners and better persons. These psychological support systems again focus more on the individual then on the social.

Conclusion
Following the argumentation of Brint that the ‘hidden curriculum’ is more influential than the overt moral education, it is not surprising that students develop such a strong individualistic orientations. From a critical-democratic perspective, moral and citizenship education should counterbalance this strong autonomy development. In special projects, but also in the ‘hidden curriculum’: by developing a more ‘just community’ in schools, a less selective assessment system, a democracy oriented school culture, more social oriented counseling and more social-constructivist teaching.

Authors

• Wiel M. Veugelers, University of Humanistic Studies Utrecht

• Yvonne A.M. Leeman, Windesheim University & University of Humanistic Studies