Curriculum is conversation (Applebee, 1996), they say.

It has been quite some time since my last visit here, and it appears that my reflective faculties have been temporarily suspended. Such occurrences are not uncommon and arise for a multitude of reasons; this is simply a facet of life. Today, I wish to discuss a significant issue that has been a topic of conversation among many of my colleagues in various pedagogical and educational networks, particularly within the MENA region. This concern is notably less prevalent in countries where the identities and well-being of both faculty and administrators are duly acknowledged and respected. In the forums I have observed, there is a palpable dissatisfaction among my colleagues regarding the management of 'hidden curriculum practices' within their respective departments. Administrators often refer to these as 'operational and local practices,' granting them an unwarranted legitimacy, particularly when one considers that curriculum practices, as articulated by Applebee (1996), emphasize that 'Curriculum is Discussion,' especially in the context of higher education.

It is insufficient to merely assign a 'course' to a faculty member without engaging in a meaningful dialogue with them or thoroughly reviewing their curriculum vitae and professional profile. At the college or university level, administrative personnel frequently apply curriculum practices that are remnants of K-12 education, which is inappropriate. This approach may serve the administration's interests by fostering a hierarchical dynamic that undermines faculty autonomy, often justifying their decisions under the guise of unit/faculty/departmental needs. They must invest more effort into the selection and allocation process by gaining a deeper understanding of the instructors' profiles and engaging in discussions with them instead of focusing on exclusively quantitative and meaningless variables. Assigning a course without considering essential quality assurance criteria is fundamentally anti-pedagogical.

This assertion is corroborated by numerous faculty communities, albeit not extensively, throughout the region. I can personally attest to this observation, having visited/worked in various universities where such practices appear to be widespread, with only a few exceptions I must say. Probably these have to do with the cultural beliefs and philosophies of each institution.