Dear Editor:
In response to Ronald Schulz’s op-ed entitled Curriculum Changes: ‘New’ Isn’t Always Better (June 19 Other Voices), I’m wondering if Mr. Schulz has looked at the new curriculum or if he thinks the main point is writing exams?
As a science educator he should know that up until this year the Science 10 exam has been 80 multiple-choice questions testing only fact-based knowledge, not higher cognitive understanding.
Teachers of Science 10 have had to cover a large amount of information over a broad range of topics to prepare their students for this exam. The new curriculum allows teachers to spend more time focusing on central ideas affecting deeper understanding.
Mr. Schulz asks, “If it ain’t broke, why fix it?”
In this era of rapidly evolving technology and understanding we need to ensure that young people in British Columbia are being exposed to thoughtful, challenging and current ideas. I applaud the government’s new curriculum and believe it allows teachers time to focus on material that students will remember for years to come.
Lorrie Welch
North Vancouver
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
