Suzan Waizani

EDCO 602: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment

Fall 2014: September 24, 2014
Reflective Memo # 1
Armstrong, T. (2007) The Curriculum Superhighway. Journal of Educating the Whole Child, 64(8), 16-20.

In this article, Armstrong showed his reflective point of view concerning the curriculum
superhighway that tends to destroy the human development ecologies if applied to educational
systems from preschool to high school. He discussed the type of education or instructions that
should be given to students throughout their different stages of development. In most stages, he
focused on giving more time to students in the out world to experience life. The author
mentioned that during the early childhood, the curriculum superhighway deliver formal teaching
lessons rather than playing which is the main concern of kids through which they can learn and
develop their brain. During the middle childhood, the brains are matured enough to learn formal
rules of reading, writing, and math. The author described how kids can use their intelligence to
explore the world around them on their own. In contrast, schools today are spending more and
more class time preparing students for academic tests that are part of the superhighway scheme.
In the early adolescence, young teens have more social, emotional, and metacognitive growth.
Armstrong supports the introduction of social and emotional writings to students. On the other
side, the curriculum superhighways infrastructure requires more homework and harder tests
leaving little chance to engage students needs. In the last stage late adolescence- young people
are being prepared to live independently in the real world. The author suggested that those teens
need less classroom time and more time out in the real world, in apprenticeships, internships, job
shadowing, and career-based experiences. The curriculum superhighway in this stage keeps
pressure on the students to prepare them for entrance exams for colleges. At the end, Armstrong
encourage educators to stop the curriculum superhighway.
This article was assigned by Dr. Hill to show us the different curricula applied and to
reflect on it. I think schools should build a curriculum based on basic knowledge of math,
science and different subjects that are environmentally sensitive to the ecologies of different
developmental stages of life. I support the author that literacy needs to take place in the context
of play in the early childhood. I think math and science can be taught to children by playing with
building blocks, counting, and observing living organisms such as birds, ants, bees, cats, dogs,
etc. While at the elementary school level, formal reading and writing skills should be taught. In

Suzan Waizani
EDCO 602: Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment
Fall 2014: September 24, 2014
Reflective Memo # 1

the middle school, students become vehicles for exploring the biology of life. In high schools,
students should learn more practical literacy skills like writing a resume or skimming for
essential information on the internet. In this stage, they study math and science for preparatory
exams. Thomas Armstrong is right by explaining the proper education throughout the different
stages of human development. The choice for a child to play would show his strength in some
aspects and intelligence in others. I think that education in nature is much more effective than a
classroom. Some kids hate going to school and may not continue education because of the tough
system followed like the curriculum superhighway. Most scientists like Albert Einstien didnt
have high marks in their schools but they have discovered wonderful theories form their own
experiences and experiments.
This article arises the awareness to change some of our applications in education. I agree
that students should be given more time in nature; we can take them to the green field for
example to give a lesson there; and there should be organized educational trips for students to
encourage them to study more and explore the real life. I believe that giving some space and
freedom to children will lead them to be innovative and creative. As educators, sometimes we are
not free to give the lesson in our way; we may be tied with specific lesson plans, concept list,
strict pacing charts, and weekly assessment that can make the students exhausted. This can affect
us as educators by following part of the curriculum superhighway without even knowing, but it
will be our duty to relate the life-based examples to the concepts taught. At the end, I disagree
with the superhighway curriculum and support the author to dismantle it.