We were going over the executive approach to teaching and the teacher wrote this question on the board. I don't really understand it either, that is why I am asking for help. I definitely do not think he was saying that technology limited teacher creativity. You are probably right about two questions. Divide it up and it makes allot more sense.
So: Do curriculum materials reflect a technological mindset. And: Do curriculum materials limit teachers creativity.
Perhaps the "technological" mindset is a way to say something like a "systematic" mindset - meaning that curriculum supposes that with a common plan and input, the output will be predictable.
Many people believe that teaching is part "art" and therefore not really something you can plan or predict.
I think curriculum represents an opinion about how people learn, and then the curriculum writer creates materials based on that opinion. So therefore if a curriculum is written with a belief that teachers are creative, and must use this creativity to teach, then it will have enough flexibility to not stifle teacher creativity.
Curriculum can be written with a belief that teachers are not delivery systems.
The question assumes that all curriculum is created equal, which is not true.
Wow, there are so many different ways to read that questions. Not, sure if any of the following will help, but here goes...
All of these assume curriculum means teaching materials and not state standards.
1) The adopted curriculum materials I've used tend to present a systematic approach to teaching/lessons.
2) The current curriculum we have have viewed for possible adoption always includes a "technology component" that may or may not be of any worth or use.
3) Teachers at some schools and in certain situations are not allowed to stray from the given curriculum. This is usually because they are in school that are under pressure to increase standardized test scores. There are also some administrators who only feel comfortable when teachers follow exactly what is in the book.
4) Other teachers limit their own creativity by only doing exactly what the curriculum says to do.
5) There is always a way to creatively present the adopted curriculum in creative ways if the teacher is willing to try/ask/collaborate. This is true even in a restricted environment.
There's a story in the news this week of a teacher whose version of creatively teaching includes wholesale ridicule of all people of faith.
On the flip side, we know there are teachers who believe that evolution is a crackpot theory. With 6.2 million teachers in the US, you can probably find some who believe, and who would teach, almost anything.
So, yes, curricula do and should limit teacher creativity.
Do curricula reflect a technological mindset? To the extent that the printing press is technology, yes. Do they reflect what I think of as technology, object-oriented programming, o-o knowledge bases, quad-core graphics cards, voice recognition, inductive reasoning, machine learning? Not too often.
Its not about limiting teacher creativity, but increasing the students'. Curriculum is a road map for getting to student success. It may appear that there is only one, best way to go, but if you just plan your trip a little more, you'll find backroads with all sorts of opportunities. Pretty good 7:30am analogy eh? (-;