Disclaimer: I do serve as a Psychology department chairperson. However, just to put my comments in perspective, I did start my academic life with a biology degree. In the following post I ask lots of questions. If the answers were obvious I would be watching the olympics rather than writing.
I seldom comment on general K12 curriculum issues. This topic originated in an unusual way. I was asked to speak at a Psychology club meeting as part of a panel considering career opportunities in Psychology. For whatever reason, I asked the group if anyone was preparing to teach Psychology in high school. No one responded. Lots of interest in graduate programs, but no one in the group interested in high school teaching. It was this lack of response that started me thinking. There are a few high school psychology courses. I wonder if the instructors major in something else. Probably. I would guess there are more history or sociology majors teaching psychology than the other way around.
What accounts for the distribution of secondary courses anyway. Why multiple math, science, and history courses? What level of mathematics is necessary for general functioning as an adult. I don’t mean as an engineer or actuary, but as your average citizen. Is that senior year course in calculus really the best 4th year selection for the bright kids? What would be the justification for world history over a psychology course? I mean this in terms of relative value given you could take one or the other. The reason I wonder is that there is such a contrast with the college setting. I do understand the popularity of psychology courses in the college environment. Even though not a general requirement as might be the case with English composition so many students take so many Psychology courses – premeds, nursing majors, pre-OT and PT, and on an on. Far more credit hours generated than the math and science topics that dominate high school attention. An even greater differential when considering the fore-mentioned History. My department is the largest credit hour generator in the college of Arts and Sciences.
I am not necessarily arguing this is the most desirable situation. One of difficult situations I find myself in is allocating resources across service courses, experiences for majors, and graduate education. Few other departments contend with the pressure for service course instruction and focus more on their majors and graduate programs. Of course, I mean this in a relative way. Professional programs even have the luxury of using my department as a proving ground for their students allowing them to focus their attention on those students who have met some standard of performance.
So, my question is what accounts for this difference. High school kids need advanced math, but college students need Psychology? How does this make any sense? What about history? What college programs require their students to take the college version of the history courses they are required to take in high school? Why now is something very different a much higher priority?
The logic of the focus on STEM escapes me. The same is true of history. Connecting the general focus on STEM with international economic competitiveness seems misguided. It is great if you happen to work in math or sciece, but what we likely need are advanced programs for some students with a special interest or aptitude. This is what is likely to drive economic development. Perhaps the general focus is needed to justify the expense. One should not confuse politics with sound planning or an honest assessment of needs.
So, really, are there explanations for these priorities? Perhaps, since we are in a time of examining the purpose and value of education, we should ask some hard questions about the sacred cows.
