Educational futures: Conflicting visions for Acirema “The Possible”

Abstract

The year is 2070, yes, the 50^th anniversary of the Roaring Year 2020. The United States of Acirema (Williams, 1997) was dealing with political discord, a struggling economy, a pandemic, and social unrest. Schiro (2013) published a book titled Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns, which focused on four curriculum ideologies/visions: scholar academic, social efficiency, learner centered, and social reconstruction. Aciremas became very adamant on the futures of education and society, and the country quickly became known as the Divided States of Acirema with citizens being divided by their beliefs/visions for education and society. The four visions are best understood through the lens of four former high school friends who each live in different states. To begin with, George treasures the cultural values and knowledge from the past, wants to end the political discord, and unite the United States of Acirema. In contrast, Wally is learning new skills based on society needs, which enables him to be marketable in a struggling economy and the age of artificial intelligence. Next, Covid, who is the narrator, loves his state and is able to learn and live based on his personal interests and beliefs; therefore, this allowed him to conduct an ethnographic study (Fetterman, 1998; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995) during the pandemic with the goal of uniting Acirema. Last, Justice is committed to ending social unrest by focusing on equality in her state and improving society for all. As Schiro (2013) clearly states in his thesis, these ideologies have conflicting visions for educational futures and are struggling with the ideal of syncretism (Berner U, 2001; Ezenweke and Kanu, 2012). After taking the ideology survey (Schiro, 2013) and discovering your beliefs and values, Covid, the narrator, will ask you to join him by using the Public Values Model (Rogers, 2020) to create syncretism where we can all live together as the United States of Acirema.

The year is 2070, yes, the 50^th anniversary of the Roaring Year 2020 when the United States of Acirema (Williams, 1997) dealt with political discord, which included a controversial Presidential election and transfer of power; a struggling economy with a K-shaped recovery (Chen, 2020); a pandemic with a vaccination that many feared; and social unrest from all spectrums of the political continuum. There were many curricularists (Eisner and Vallance, 1974; Ellis, 2004; Kliebard, 2004; Null, 2011; Pinar et al., 2008; Rogers, 2016) in education who foreshadowed this divide coming to Acirema with the government embracing one curricularist’s thesis in particular. An author by the name of Michael Stephen Schiro (2013) published a thought-provoking and controversial book titled Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns, which laid out in detail four ideologies and conflicting visions for the future of Acirema. Based on two key words, conflicting visions, I often wonder if Schiro (2013) majored in futures thinking (Kupferman, 2020a;Kupferman, 2020b) as this language, and his book, predicted what life would be like in 2020. I shudder even saying those two words because you have no idea what the conflicting visions did to Acirema in 2020. Not only would Aciremans read the influential book, but our government required them to take the “Curriculum Ideologies Survey” (Schiro, 2013) included in the book. The survey identified the readers’ ideology and vision for society and educational futures. I included the survey at the end of the story in hopes our readers, including our international readers, would take the survey and discover which ideology most closely aligns with their beliefs and to passionately request their help with the ideal of syncretism. By reading and learning more about Acirema’s mishaps in 2020, I hope other countries will accomplish “The Possible” (Kupferman, 2020a) and stay united by allowing people with different beliefs to live together.

Before we go any further with the ideologies, I need to roll over in my capsule and take my nightly pill to replenish my body and prevent me from aging. Thank goodness researchers at the universities continued to work together virtually to increase the quality of life for Aciremans, despite the divide in beliefs. I happily reflect on the times when Acirema was one united country with 50 states that differed; however, the states followed a Constitution, which connected them with an ideal called democracy (Edling and Simmie, 2020; Watson, 2021). I was 19 in March of 2020 when I felt like the world was coming to an end before I could even figure out what I wanted to do with my life after high school; however, the ills of 2020 motivated me to attend college, major in educational futures, and minor in curriculum theory, so I could figure this mess out and explain it to future generations such as you. First of all, please understand there were no capsules and definitely no pills to prevent a human from aging and partaking on the final journey that they called death. Yes, people like to say that those were the good ole’ days; however, a short history lesson at this time will benefit us all.

Brief historical view of ideologies

I acknowledge that ideology conflicts were both documented and affected Acirema beginning in the 1890s with what Kliebard (2004: xx) likened to “interest groups,” which had leaders and key ideas for the future of society, education, and curriculum. Kliebard separated the interests’ groups into five factions: (1) Mental Disciplinarians, who focused on how to strengthen the mind through academic subjects; (2) Humanists, who closely aligned with mental disciplinarians but added virtues such as reasoning, sensitivity, and high moral character to the academic subjects; (3) Developmentalists, who believed in the natural development of children based on their strengths; (4) Social Efficiency Educators, who utilize economic principles to create goals and measurements to maximize efficiency; and (5) Social Meliorists, who focused on a just society for all. The beliefs in Kliebard’s (2004) interest groups from the 1890s are reflected in Schiro’s (2013) ideologies and the four states in Acirema.

Although historically there were different interest groups and ideologies, Acirema stayed united during these times because the majority of Aciremans respected differing viewpoints, and the differences would reflect in who was nominated as President. The differences were no longer respected and became much more dominant in March of 2020. To understand the distress I am dealing with today, please envision our country, the one we live in today, with 50, not four, differing states connected as one republic. I remember vividly, like it was yesterday, when my dad stated, “Covid, you are fortunate to live in a state focused on the learner centered ideology, which allows you to follow your interests and make decisions about your future based on your strengths knowing that your decisions have consequences.” Although I agree with my dad, I miss the freedom of moving among the four different ideologies based on the situation or need at the time. In my opinion, some of my friends from high school, whose survey results were different from mine, are not as fortunate as me. At least with the learner-centered ideology, I am able to follow my interests, which has allowed me to research this topic and share my findings with you.

As the results of the ideology survey were analyzed, our country quickly became the Divided States of Acirema following what I consider ideologies along a traditional, political spectrum from liberal to conservative as shown in Figure 1 and explained in more detail in supplemental appendix B.

Figure 1.

Liberal (left) to conservative (right) views of the visions (Rogers, 2020).

Ramifications of the curriculum ideologies survey

I question why Schiro felt that a curriculum ideologies survey was necessary in 2013, and more importantly, why our republic decided in 2020 that all Aciremans would live in the state that aligns most closely with their ideology results. I read in a history book and discovered during my ethnographic study (Fetterman, 1998; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995) that the four-state solution was the only way Acirema could bring a peaceful ending to political discord, a struggling economy with a K-shaped recovery (Chen, 2020), a pandemic with a vaccination that many feared, and social unrest from all spectrums of the political continuum. The four states were divided by Schiro’s (2013) four different ideologies, and each state aligned with the ills that Acirema dealt with in 2020. The scholar academic ideology state addressed the political discord; whereas, the social efficiency state focused on the struggling economy and the need for all citizens to have the skills for success. The learner-centered state allowed its people to follow their beliefs and passions and make their own decision on the safety protocols and vaccine in reference to the pandemic. Last, the social reconstruction state was determined to settle the social unrest and treat all people equitable.

In my lived experience as a child and then my current research confirmed, Aciremans used to have the choice to live in whatever state they chose out of 50 different states. Could you imagine having the power to choose where you live and it not be based on your ideology? Aciremans lost this choice in 2020, which resulted in high school students taking the ideology assessment at graduation and moving to the state that most closely aligned with their beliefs. It did not matter if their parents lived in that state or not. Most high schoolers were hoping to have the same beliefs as their parents, but we all know children who are very different and now they have to live away from their parents. It really does not seem fair.

The opportunity to major in educational futures, complemented by a minor in curriculum theory, and teaching at the collegiate level, allowed me to study all four ideologies and understand their unique differences. Before Roaring 2020 began, there were documented conflicts in curriculum theory, which influenced education, curriculum, politics, and public life (Fallace, 2017; Mnguni, 2018; Paraskeva, 2011; Tahirsylaj, 2017). This helped me with my scholarship; however, my goal was to experience each of the four states by spending time in each state. Most of my research was collected through qualitative methods by utilization of observations, interviews, and document analyses. If it had not been for my ethnographic study (Fetterman, 1998; Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995) on the four different states, the Institutional Review Board (IRB) would have never allowed me to immerse myself in the culture of each state and have an emic perspective (Patton, 2015) of each ideology. The four visions (ideologies or states) are best understood through the lens of my high school friends who were forced to live in a different state from me and gracious to participate in my ethnographic study on their state.

Scholar academic ideology

George was the type of guy who always joked with us by sharing odd facts from the past and by beating us in any form of knowledge competition in school. Lovingly, we used to call him a braggart; however, he made us laugh and enjoy learning. I was always impressed by his yearning to understand the past through history and literature, and he felt that all students should receive a liberal arts education structured around essential knowledge identified by scholars (Adler, 1982; Bruner, 1966; Ellis, 2004; Rogers, 2016). George believed that scholars should disseminate knowledge to teachers and teachers to students as if they are empty vessels waiting to be filled (Freire, 1998; Rogers, 2016; Schiro, 2013). Hinchey and Konkol (2018) expand on this vision by sharing, “There is a single body of core knowledge that all students need to know…there can be a one-size-fits-all curriculum” (pp. 56–57). In the former United States of Acirema, scholar academic ideology addressed the ideal of democracy with its strong belief in providing an equal educational opportunity to all children (Null, 2011; Rogers, 2016). This ideology is important to democracy because it provides all children with a strong foundation of knowledge, which enables them to pursue their dreams.

During the events of the Roaring 2020, this state focused most closely on the political discord, which aligns with their belief of focusing on the culture from the past and embedding the current culture through the study of history and literature. George and other like-minded peers were disappointed that the President considered the election stolen/rigged, refused the peaceful transfer of power, encouraged an insurrection of the Capitol, and even did not attend the inauguration of the new President. George admitted to me in his interview that he would like to see the nation embrace the new President and once again be the United States of Acirema. Even though he was able to live around people who agreed with his beliefs, George stated, “I miss our friends from high school and the willingness to accept differences among beliefs.” Although George believed the Presidential election was not handled professionally, and that some of his friends approved of the election and events after the election, he missed the diversity in thought and believed that Acirema was better with differing beliefs.

Social efficiency ideology

Wally’s ideology survey results reflected the guy we hung out with in high school. Wally was always reading, posting blogs, using social media for growth, and was on the forefront of artificial intelligence, which we did not realize in Roaring 2020 would change the skills students and adults needed for success in the new society. Now that it is 2070, I realize how Wally and his identified social efficiency ideology kept him focused on lifelong learning with the knowledge and skills for the digital economy of the future (Dede and Richards, 2020). Hinchey and Konkol (2018) explained this ideology well by stating, “Students are best served by being tracked into career paths…adapting curricula to specific locales and students makes a lot of sense” (p. 58).

Under the social efficiency ideology, curricular standards, based on society needs, are developed by scholars, implemented through the expertise of teachers and their instructional methods, and showed mastery by students, which meets the needs of society (Schiro, 2013; Tyler, 2013). Historically speaking, the rationale for this ideology comes from the work of Taylor (1911) with a focus on management and efficiency (Rogers, 2016). Bobbitt (1918), who many call the father of this ideology, applied Taylor’s ideas to education and wrote what is considered the first book on curriculum titled The Curriculum. In the former United States of Acirema, social efficiency ideology addressed democratic values with a stance that all children deserve to learn standards that will help them find success in society and be a productive citizen (Kliebard, 2004; Null, 2011; Rogers, 2016; Tyler, 2013).

As one can imagine after learning the background on the social efficiency vision, Wally and all the others who follow this ideology are currently very successful in their state. Yes, Roaring 2020 resulted in a struggling economy with a K-shaped recovery (Chen, 2020) with some parts of the economy seeing growth while others continued to decline; however, the adults and current graduates who reflect this vision moved together and found success rather quickly under the social efficiency vision. An Austrian economist named Joseph Schumpeter (1942), who I believed majored in futures studies, coined the term creative destruction to describe what occurs when new technologies and industries replace the current technologies and industries because of an event in society (Pfarrer and Smith, 2005). The pandemic in 2020 not only caused a recession, but it also dramatically changed education, travel, restaurants, and gatherings with social distancing and masks, which resulted in creative destruction of how Aciremans lived life. For example, Aciremans are not able to travel freely among the four states because our country is concerned about conflicts in curriculum theory (Apple, 2004; Eisner and Vallance, 1974; Hinchey and Konkol, 2018; Kelly, 2009; Kleibard, 2004; Paraskeva, 2011; Schiro, 2013) and differing viewpoints on democracy and education (Apple and Beane, 2007; Hickman, 2020; Noddings, 2013; Soder, 1996; Teitelbaum, 2020; Watson, 2021). Although these factions were created in 2020 to help Acirema, it has divided our country even more, and I hope to make a difference with my belief in syncretism (Berner, 2001; Ezenweke and Kanu, 2012).

Learner-centered ideology

Following along the traditional, political spectrum as shown in Figure 1, I believe it is time to share my own lived experiences through an autoethnography lens (Goodall, 2000; Patton, 2015). As you know, my name is Covid, and I was 19 during Roaring 2020, which makes me 69-years-old as I share this story of the four factions. It was a horrific year because Acirema and the world named the pandemic COVID-19. How do you think that made me feel? My name is Covid, and I was 19-years-old in 2020. How did this happen? Although we were concerned about the pandemic and adjusted some of our regular routines, my parents and I all aligned with the learner-centered vision, which allowed my family to learn and live based on our personal interests and beliefs (Eisner and Vallance, 1974; Noddings, 2005; Rousseau, 1979; Schiro, 2013). Noddings (2013) explained the learner-centered ideology by stating, “…the main purposes of education are to help students find out what they are good at, what they would like to do with their lives, and how to live responsible and fulfilling lives” (p. 66).

In contrast to the social efficiency ideology, the learner-centered ideology focuses on students and the process of living in the present and not spending their time in school preparing for future living (Boyles, 2020; Dewey, 1929). In 2020, many considered this type of education progressive and linked this focus on the learners to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the author of Emile, and advocate that learning should enhance children’s interests and needs (Gutek, 1997). Interestingly, Rousseau felt that children were born perfect and that society corrupted them (Rogers, 2016). The ideal of democracy reflects in this vision through the importance of individual’s interests and passions over culture knowledge, the needs of society, and fixing the ills of society (Noddings, 2012; Schiro, 2013). I feel blessed that my parents and I had the opportunity to follow our desires because that is why I was able to complete this ethnographic study (Patton, 2015) and learn about the different visions for the four states in the Divided States of the Acirema. In addition, it gave me a reason to spend time in another state with a friend from high school, further my research, and share this knowledge with you hoping that we can learn from the Roaring 2020 and finally fix this in Renewal 2070.

Social reconstruction ideology

My eyes filled with tears as I examined my observation notes and interview data from my dear friend Justice. She and I were very close in high school until 2020 when many police officers shot and killed minorities for reasons that were unexplainable. With my learner-centered beliefs on following your passions, I had no concerns with Justice participating in marches, helping to elect leaders who would embrace social justice (Johnson and Parry, 2015), and holding those accountable for their unjust actions. However, during the social unrest of 2020, I focused on my goal of attending college with a major in educational futures and a minor in curriculum theory. Justice felt that I should participate in her activities, but the mandatory ideologies survey separated us into different states.

Justice was happy to join the state that focused on the social reconstruction vision; she knew that real change had to occur to not repeat the problems of Roaring 2020. The social reconstruction ideology connects learning, careers, and life with the goal of making the broader society and local communities better for all (Apple, 2004; Freire, 1998; Schiro, 2013). Giroux (2011) expands on this vision and shares what education and life look like within this state, “…public intellectuals willing to connect pedagogy with the problems of public life, a commitment to civic courage, and the demands of social responsibility” (p. 6).

Within this vision, Justice and others who live in the state often discuss the idea of hegemony, where the dominant ideology oppresses those who do not believe the same way (Freire, 1998; Giroux, 2011; Paraskeva, 2011). Justice felt that she and her family’s culture and values were not accepted in the former United States of Acirema. In our interviews, Justice agreed that the hegemonic ideology changed in her state where all individuals align with the social reconstruction ideology, but she raised serious concerns with the hegemonic values in the other three states and did not want to repeat the social unrest of 2020. Justice admitted that she was hesitant to join the states unless all Aciremans were willing to accept different cultures, and our country becomes a mosaic instead of a melting pot (Palmer, 1976).

Advocates of the social reconstruction vision consider equitable treatment and democratic values as the major purpose of the ideology, which align with the ideals of democracy (Rogers, 2016). Apple (2004) shares his thoughts on democracy and social reconstruction by stating, “…those issues surrounding a vision and a practice of democracy and social justice that is thicker…and responds…more to the needs, histories, and cultures of oppressed people, of people of color, and of poor people…” (p. 177). This is what my friend Justice was fighting for and is now experiencing in her state, but I believe we can have justice in all states and once again be the United States of Acirema. Observing in Justice’s state provided me with raw data that supports equitable treatment of all and a more just society. I am not sure if Justice will ever want to unite our states again and be what George and I envision as the United States of Acirema.

Syncretism: “The Possible”

After reviewing the four states and their ideologies, it is important that I share what my goal is for Acirema. I truly believe in the idea of syncretism (Berner, 2001; Ezenweke and Kanu, 2012) where our nation can combine the different beliefs/visions and blend the practices of the various ideologies within one united country in what I consider utopia (Tyack and Cuban, 1995) for Renewal year 2070. This belief is “The Possible” (Kupferman, 2020a), and it can happen if Aciremans will respect the four ideologies, synthesize the ideologies in our educational system (Rogers, 2016), create a society that values cultural knowledge/intellect (Schiro, 2013), embrace the economic/digital needs of our society (Dede and Richards, 2020), value the desires and passions of the individual (Dewey, 2012), and embrace and treat all people equitable while improving the community (Apple and Beane, 2007). With the publication of my ethnographic study, which describes each state and provides a solution to the problem with Acirema, I hope you will join me by embracing “The Possible” (Kupferman, 2020a) and moving toward a syncretism (Berner, 2001; Ezenweke and Kanu, 2012) where we embrace all four ideologies, embrace Renewal year 2070, and live as one United States of Acirema.

Ideologies survey

After reading about the four different visions for Acirema and learning their beliefs through the eyes of George (scholar academic), Wally (social efficiency), Covid (learner centered), and Justice (social reconstruction), I believe it is important for you to take the survey and discover if your beliefs still align with your results after high school or if you have changed through life’s experiences. We must understand ourselves and where we align before striving to unite our country. For international readers, it will be interesting to see which state you would have been assigned if you had lived in Acirema. To take the survey, rank the statements in each section from 1 to 4, with 1 being the statement you most closely align with in your beliefs and visions for Acirema. The answers to the survey are found in supplemental appendix A.

Ideologies Survey (Schiro, 2013)

Section 1: Aims

_____ Schools should provide children with the ability to perceive problems in society, envision a better society, and act to change society so that there is social justice and a better life for all people.

_____Schools should fulfill the needs of society by efficiently training youth to function as mature constructive members of society.

_____Schools should be communities where the accumulated knowledge of the culture is transmitted to the youth.

_____Schools should be enjoyable, stimulating, child-centered environments organized around the developmental needs and interests of children as those needs and interests present themselves from day to day.

Section 2: Teaching

_____Teachers should be supervisors of student learning, utilizing instructional strategies that will optimize student learning.

_____Teachers should be companions to students, using the environment within which the student lives to help the student learn.

_____Teachers should be aids to children, helping them learn by presenting them with experiences from which they can make meaning.

_____Teachers should be knowledgeable people, transmitting that which is known to those who do not know it.

Section 3: Learning

_____Learning best proceeds when the student is presented with the appropriate stimulus materials and positive reinforcement.

_____Learning best proceeds when the teacher clearly and accurately presents to the student that knowledge which the student is to acquire.

_____Learning best takes place when children are motivated to actively engage in experiences that allow them to create their own knowledge and understanding of the world in which they live.

_____Learning best occurs when a student confronts a real social crisis and participates in the construction of a solution to that crisis.

Section 4: Knowledge

_____The knowledge of most worth is the structured knowledge and ways of thinking that have come to be valued by the culture over time.

_____The knowledge of most worth is the personal meaning of oneself and of one’s world that comes from one’s direct experience in the world and one’s personal response to such experience.

_____The knowledge of most worth is the specific skills and capabilities for action that allow an individual to live a constructive life.

_____The knowledge of most worth is a set of social ideals, a commitment to those ideals, and an understanding of how to implement those ideals.

Section 5: The child

_____Childhood is essentially a time of learning in preparation for adulthood, when one will be a constructive, contributing member of society.

_____Childhood is essentially a period of intellectual development highlighted by growing reasoning ability and capacity for memory that results in ever greater absorption of cultural knowledge.

_____Childhood is essentially a time when children unfold according to their own innate natures, felt needs, organic impulses, and internal timetables. The focus is on children as they are during childhood rather than as they might be as adults.

_____Childhood is essentially a time for practice in and preparation for acting upon society to improve both oneself and that nature of society.

Section 6: Evaluation

_____Evaluation should objectively indicate to others whether or not students can or cannot perform specific skills. Its purpose is to certify students’ competence to perform specific tasks.

_____Evaluation should continuously diagnose children’s needs and growth so that further growth can be promoted by appropriate adjustment of their learning environment. It is primarily for the children’s benefit, not for comparing children with each other or measuring them against predetermined standards.

_____Evaluation should be a subjective comparison of students’ performance with their capabilities. Its purpose is to indicate to both the students and others the extent to which they are living up to their capabilities.

_____Evaluation should objectively determine the amount of knowledge students have acquired. It allows students to be ranked from those with the greatest intellectual gain to those with the least.

Final thoughts

After completing the survey and reflecting on your results, do you believe in the ideal of syncretism (Berner, 2001; Ezenweke and Kanu, 2012) and “The Possibility” of all visions living as one in the United States of Acirema? Which ideology do you most closely align with and least align with, and how does your belief affect “The Possible” (Kupferman, 2020a) for Acirema? Let us examine your results and see what role you may play in uniting our nation under the ideal of syncretism and become a republic once again in Acirema.

To assist us with this audacious goal of syncretism (Berner, 2001; Ezenweke and Kanu, 2012), a Public Values Model (Rogers, 2020) was created and can be found in supplemental appendix B to help us visualize the four different visions and how they connect with other values in our society. To begin with and to achieve this goal, we need to unite and connect with the ideals of our Republic, public schools, curriculum, and politics. Although we have different beliefs, we can respect one another for the common good and to reunite our United States of Acirema. Understanding the different values that closely align with the four different visions will help us conquer this goal. For example, those who are in the social efficiency (Schiro, 2013) state, like Wally, typically believe in prosperity (Boyle and Burns, 2011), have more faith in the market (Boyle and Burns, 2011) solving our problems, vote Republican in most elections, and embrace the economy to help with society’s ills. The Public Values Model, if embraced and accepted, will be the framework to help unite our country around Renewal 2070 and make “The Possible” (Kupferman, 2020a) become “The Reality.”

Supplemental Material

sj-pdf-1-pfe-10.1177_14782103211055353 – Supplemental Material for Educational futures: Conflicting visions for Acirema “The Possible”

Supplemental Material, sj-pdf-1-pfe-10.1177_14782103211055353 for Educational futures: Conflicting visions for Acirema “The Possible” by Richard H Rogers in Policy Futures in Education