Two misunderstandings of China's traditional curriculum view

(1) only equates the curriculum with the knowledge content of the teaching materials that students will learn, but does not take the learning experience actually gained by students from specific teaching activities as the organic element of the curriculum, which is the first misunderstanding of the traditional curriculum view. In the classroom, it seems that teachers are teaching the same knowledge and students are learning the same knowledge, but under different teaching activities, students' actual learning experience is quite different. For example, heuristic teaching and injection teaching, ethical teaching and anti-ethical teaching, receptive learning and inquiry learning, separated and competitive learning, cooperative learning, etc., bring very different learning experiences to learners. Some learning experiences are negative and some are positive. Some learning experiences are valuable, while others are of little value; Some learning experiences are consistent and coordinated with book knowledge, while others are in conflict and contradiction. Positive and valuable learning experiences will help students to grow and develop further in the future, while negative and worthless learning experiences will hinder learners' further growth and development in the future. Therefore, not only the predetermined knowledge content that teachers want to teach and students want to learn should be regarded as the only element of the course content, but also the practical experience that students get from specific teaching activities should be regarded as an organic part of the course content.

(2) It is another misunderstanding of the traditional curriculum view to regard the curriculum as a ready-made knowledge system compiled in advance in the teaching process, instead of looking at the existing form of the curriculum from a dynamic and vivid perspective. If courses are regarded as verbs and activities, obviously some courses are not formed in advance, but gradually generated and constructed in the process. For the development and compilation of generative curriculum, it does not depend on the authority of experts and scholars, but on the interaction between learners and their surroundings, teachers and partners. In the traditional development of prefabricated courses, teachers only act as interpreters and transmitters of established courses, while students only act as receivers and absorbers of established courses. They are all bystanders and outsiders of curriculum development. For generative curriculum, teachers and students are the main bodies of curriculum development. They are not only the transmitter and absorber of the curriculum, but also the constructor and creator of the curriculum.