Even as early as the 1870s curriculum and leadership were intertwined. Abbot lists three methods of child government: "1. Government by maneuvering and Artifice. 2. By Reason and Affection. 3. By Authority" (1871, p.11). However, this idea of the adult being in control to the exclusion of the child has changed dramatically in the subsequent 120 years. Wasserman quotes a young child as a guide to her purpose: "I'm not little, I'm four" (1990, p.3).
Ironically, Wasserman proposes many of the same things that Abbot proposed, such as learning by example and play (Wasserman, p. 95). Abbot described in detail an incident wherein a mother began to treat her childrens' dolls as real as the children treated them. Joining in their play, she taught the dolls what she would normally have said to her children. Since it was play, the children listened (pp. 114-120). Abbot notes that if the instructions were delivered directly to her daughters they would probably have been ignored. Certainly children are more likely to be paying attention to something that interests them, like play, than to something an adult chose to impose upon them.
Wasserman also gives a question that should be the concern of every curriculum writer: "Why is this worth knowing?" (p. 97). She then gives charts to exemplify her proposal to classify examples by their seriousness of effect on the students' lives. That an apple is nutritious may be more important than that an apple is a fruit. She adds that "Big ideas are embedded in these [district's] learning goals, and investigative play activities may easily reflect district articulated educational values. Big ideas also come from each teacher's perceptions of children's educational needs and from issues of current concern." She is suggesting that the control of curriculum setting which Abbot hinted at should now be the responsibility of the adults (the teachers), the adults' adults (their boss, the district office), an...