Response to the Eisner Article

One general thing that has made me stopped is Eisner's ideas about the implicit curriculum. I often think about what we do beyond the content and how this affects/prepares our students. I would say that before reading this article, I would almost categorize this implicit curriculum as SEL, but I think there may a distinction between the two. I think Eisner's implicit curriculum is more based on what the structure of school teaches students, and less about intersection of implicit and explicit curriculum which I believe is how SEL is taught in the secondary classroom. In this section, the idea of school cultures having great importance on their student really struck me. Although I was somewhat aware of the great school cultures I have been privileged to be a part of, I have never consider putting a label to it. It is something that is still on my mind. 

Another thing that I keep thinking about, although it is less relevant to the point of the various aspects of the curriculum, is the outdated neuroscience he references. I suppose this just distracted me a little bit, because I found that it just took a little bit away from his argument as the findings he cited I believe to be quite insignificant. 

The final thing that perked my interest was the idea of the null curriculum. I have made similar arguments to my partner when we discuss what should and should not be taught in school. He often argues that he appreciates the learning that he did in school, as he think it made him more "cultured" and knowledgable about the world in general. When I suggest that students could simultaneously learn culture and more practical information, he argues that would prevent students from pursuing these more "traditional" subjects later on. It seems to make sense to me that if students were able to opt out of taking the tradition curriculum for more practical curriculum, they may never have the opportunity to explore these subjects later on. So I'm not sure if I agree with Eisner or not. I feel like I'm in a little bit of a limbo there. 

The main thing that I think would be important to consider in future curriculum based on this article is definitely the implicit curriculum. However, as I type that last sentence, I had the idea that I'm not sure how controllable an implicit curriculum is and to what extent it should be controlled. I kind of imagine this gentrification of schools when I think of the comparison to Ivy league schools. Nonetheless, I can imagine an implicit curriculum being quite important to consider.