One Size Fits All

Who Is the Curriculum Really Designed For?

I have always believed that curriculum writers approach education with a one-size-fits-all mindset, but being in the classroom every day proves just how inaccurate that assumption is. Watching students interact with the curriculum—sometimes struggling, sometimes disengaged, and other times completely lost—makes it clear that it doesn’t meet the needs of all learners. This raises an important question: Who is the curriculum really designed for?

Not every school is like the one I teach in. My school serves a majority of students with academic deficiencies, and the traditional curriculum often fails to bridge the gaps in their foundational knowledge. The prescribed lessons move forward at a set pace, assuming students have mastered prerequisite skills that, in reality, many of them have not. Where does that leave the students who need extra support?

The Limitations of Whole Group and Small Group Instruction

Whole group instruction, while efficient for introducing new concepts, often caters to the “average” student—who may not actually exist in my classroom. Some students grasp concepts quickly and are ready to move on, while others need more time to process and practice.

Small group instruction is meant to fill those gaps, providing more personalized support. However, even small groups have limitations. With a wide range of learning needs, behavioral challenges, and time constraints, differentiation can only go so far. The reality is that curriculum alone is not enough—especially when it doesn’t reflect the realities of the students it’s supposed to serve.

The Problem with Standardized Curricula

Most curriculum designs are built on a "universal learner" model, assuming students are coming in at grade level, have access to resources, and learn in similar ways. But what about:

• Students who have experienced trauma and struggle with focus?

• Students who read below grade level and can’t comprehend word-heavy math problems?

• Students with learning disabilities who require modifications that the standard curriculum doesn’t address?

• Students who thrive with hands-on learning but are stuck with worksheet-driven lessons?

These are the real students sitting in classrooms like mine every day, yet many curriculum designs don’t take them into account. If the curriculum doesn’t meet their needs, then who is it really made for? Educators and curriculum designers might benefit from exploring frameworks like Universal Design for Learning (UDL)—a flexible approach that encourages inclusive, accessible learning for all students.

A Call for More Flexible, Student-Centered Curriculum

If we truly want to close learning gaps and support all students, we need curriculum that:

• Prioritizes flexibility, allowing teachers to modify pacing and content based on student needs.

• Integrates technology effectively, offering adaptive learning tools that adjust to each student’s level.

• Reflects diverse learners, incorporating scaffolding, multimodal instruction, and culturally relevant content.

• Empowers teachers to make data-driven decisions instead of rigidly following scripted lessons.

Education should not be about forcing students to fit into a curriculum—it should be about creating a curriculum that fits students. Until we shift that mindset, we will continue to see classrooms filled with students who feel left behind.

I don’t have all the answers, but I know this: Real learning happens when curriculum meets students where they are—not where we assume they should be.