Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Justin Highfill
Professor Rieman
English 1101X
2 February 2010
The "hidden curriculum" is the supposed process by which schools "prepare" their
students to enter certain class-specific jobs and lifestyles. The hypothesis, laid down in Jean
Anyon's essay "Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work," is that the class of the
school, determined by the social class of the students and their parents, decides the social class
the students are prepared for. That is, a lower or working-class school gears its students to enter
into the working class, while an upper class school sets its students on the path to an upper-class
The differences are not so much in the material as they are in their methods of presentation, with
the overall goal not to develop class-specific skills, but to inflict a class-specific mind set.
This is done primarily through the attitudes and observed outlooks of the teachers.
Where a lower class teacher might demand a strict and mundane regimen, using menial tasks and
understanding the concept, which is arguably "teaching" vs. "learning." The focus change is
based on the student, with the "teaching" method requiring little actual thought on the part of the
student, while the "learning" approach hinges on and develops the student’s ability and
job line one is supposed to enter. The lower-class education accustoms the student to menial
labor, strict organizational hierarchy, and an unquestioning acceptance for rules, a mindset fitting
with working-class jobs. The higher-class education, on the other hand, having expanded the
students problem solving, critical, and analytical thinking skills, is a well-suited preparation for
It is here that the question arises. Should the schools decide what social class a child
should ultimately enter? But before that question should even be raised, we need to look at the
extent and deliberateness of this "hidden curriculum" theory. Anyon's essay portrays the hidden
curriculum as a product of teaching styles, and thus, primarily dependant on the teacher. Are all
teachers calculatingly guiding their students through subtle manipulation? Or are the varying
Anyon's focus stems toward the end result. In her quest to expose what she believes to be
a grievous wrong, she fails to thoroughly examine the different possible causes of the varying
classroom activity. "What is of primary concern is not the immediate cause of classroom
activity." (Anyon 246) While this outlook spotlights the result over the origin, it does not fail to
exhibit Anyon's personal opinion, and the reader ends up with a slanted view, angled toward the
beliefs of the author. The causes for her observations, the reason behind the "hidden curriculum"
cannot be ignored. Whether a result is insidious in nature, or the natural product of a set
situation, who is to blame, if it can, or even should be changed, these are all dependent upon the
why. By overlooking the origins of this situation, the Anyon's reader is forced to act upon her
assumptions, her belief that the hidden curriculum is both manufactured and wrong.
Many would argue that the hidden curriculum, (at least in the sense that Anyon portrays
it) does not exist, and that differing methods in teaching are in direct response to the behavior of
the children. A misbehaved, unmotivated, or uncaring group of students would not respond to
the teaching attempts of the upper class teachers. They would abuse their freedom, and
ultimately, the teacher would be forced to amend her teaching habits, accepting that only strict
regimens could coerce orderly conduct from her students. After a time teaching in such an
environment, the teacher would abandon her former style completely, relying on regimen for all
students, the same teacher would be freer to allow the children to explore on their own, knowing
that they have the willingness and capability to both learn and thrive, and thus she would be able
to abstain from trite, regimental methods. This argument asserts that schools do not teach social
class, so as to instill it, but teach to the class of their students, tailoring their lessons and teaching
John Taylor Gatto, an ex-teacher turned activist for school reform, and author of books
such as Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling (1992), carries
the opposite opinion. "The current system of government factory schooling is based on belief
that ordinary children cannot accomplish much, will not work hard unless coerced, tricked, or
bribed, and will inevitably work, for the balance of their post school lives, - if they work at all -
elite." (Gatto) These circumstances would perfectly explain the current system. According to
this view, the lower class, or by this definition, ordinary students, would not be viewed as
capable. They would not be expected to "accomplish much" or even to be able to work
diligently without manipulation. In this case, they would be taught down to, set strict, infantile
rules to keep them in place, and even treated with an obscene lack of respect, all aspects
portrayed in Anyon's essay. At the same time, this view looks upon the upper-class children as
"above ordinary." Those children would be held to a different standard of schooling, one tailored
toward their growth and advancement, allowing them to thrive. Under this argument, in direct
opposition to the previous assertion, the personality or quality of the students has no affect on
their schooling. They are gauged solely on the social standing of their parents, and are treated
accordingly.
Both of these arguments serve to qualify the current system of schooling. Both achieve
the same results, but under completely different methods. With one, the reasons are arguably
good, even beneficial, and the outcome is natural. With the other, the reasons would most likely
In conclusion, while the reasons for the current system of schooling are inconclusive, and
it is even unclear if the outcome is just or unjust, both students end up able to perform in school.
They both are afforded the academic resources to further their education through college, and
with a college education, to change their place in society, be it established by school or not.
Anyon, Jean. "Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work." Writing Conventions. Eds.
Gatto, John Taylor. "Mudsill Theory, the Lancaster Amish and Jamie Escalante."