High School Curriculum When examining the literature regarding the past, present and future of educational curriculum, several main points seem evident, namely that the curriculum is cyclical, that it exists a dilemma or paradox and that the curriculum must be looked at with a sensitive vision. According to Lashway (1999) educators once viewed educational reform as cyclical. Every decade or so you might expect a public outbreak followed by frantic efforts to fix a broken system. However, over the past twenty years there seems to have been perpetual reform. Looking back it seems that the curriculum has become diluted. The schools offered many electives; schools even watered down the curriculum hoping to “retain” students (which it later turned out only exacerbated the problem) (Mclaughlin 1990). The curriculum resembled a garden sprinkler that covered a large area but had very little force. In the 1980s, a report titled “A Nation At Risk” stated that American children were falling behind in subjects such as math and science. Thus came the advent of greater educational attention to literacy and numeracy, responsibility and academic standards. These high standards, according to Dumas (2000), represent the most significant trend in schools today. These new standards seem to focus more on both accountability and getting back to basics. As a mathematics teacher I can be happy with this focus. However, as a potential administrator, I realize that this is too short-sighted. Indeed, these standards have created a dilemma, an enigma, a paradox. Back to basics? BUT these basics need to be taught differently, emphasizing higher level thinking and appreciation of life/work. Furthermore, all children must receive an education, whether they are rich, poor, have learning difficulties, speak a foreign language, etc. Cut the frills but be creative Don't forget to educate the “whole” child. Perform well on standardized tests by remembering and accounting for fewer standardized children. Be literate and professional but, as pointed out in numerous articles, be careful and be a good moral person. Also include character education of students. This has led some educators to express reservations about these current trends, largely due to fears that reform will be driven by compliance with political mandates rather than the educational needs of children. John Goodlad (1999) observes: “The language of school reform avoids virtually any reference to the measurement of self, civility, civicness, democratic character and participation in the whole of human conservation..