1 Curriculum Theory M. Ed. University of the People EDUC 5220- Curriculum Theory Written Assignment 2 Dr. Samuel Amposah June 30, 2021 Curriculum Theory 2 It is an error to assume that one human being is a repertoire of knowledge and information. Thus, forty (40) years after publishing Pinar's article: "Reconceptualization of Curriculum Studies" in 1978, there has been a lot of new exciting developments in the field of curriculum. I will attempt to answer this question by considering the extent to which curriculum ideologies have changed from the time of Pinar's prediction and whether the different curricular movements have massively evolved over time. An attempt will also be made to evaluate the extent to which curricular issues remain as essential as an aspect of educational research. Firstly, how much has curriculum ideologies changed from the time of Pinar's prediction? Ideology is believed to be a collection of ideas, a comprehensive vision, a way of looking at things, or a worldview that embodies the way a person or a group of people believes the world should be organized and function”(Schiro, 2013, p. 8). Curriculum ideology refers to the underlying motives and reasons which dictate why a curriculum will be constructed in a particular way, and the essential elements upon which such a curriculum should be based. Schiro outlined four different ideologies that guide the curriculum design which are the scholar academic, social efficiency, learner-centered, and social reconstruction ideologies. As the oldest ideology, the scholar academic or traditional ideology of curriculum may today not be very relevant in a rapid-changing world. Schiro argues that scholar academic ideology sees the principal aim of education as an extension of specific disciplines by way of getting young people to become seekers of knowledge as some sort of apprenticeship. The ideology as well sought to emphasize the learning of the accumulated body of knowledge in the society (Schiro, 2013). I think that to a very large extent, this ideology still functions today in many local schools that have not been able to move past the rudimentary teaching and learning by rote memorization, and assessing learners' feedback using standardized tests. Therefore, in my view, this scholarly Curriculum Theory 3 academic ideology is still in use in many parts of the world today, and curricula in developing parts of the world such as West Africa still follow this model. The social efficiency ideology envisages developing a curriculum that will help students acquire the skills that will enable them to meet society's needs when they grow up and begin to handle responsibilities (Schiro, 2013). This expectation has remained the same and unchanged across many curricula. This tradition of training children to become useful to the needs of society started with the work of Franklin Bobbit in the 19th century. It was later carried on by scholars like Ralph Tyler (Kelly, 2004) in the 20th and the 21st century. It is a fact that this ideology has remained relevant for a long time until now. The learner-centered ideology started with the research findings of Francis Parker in the 19th century, which was followed up with the progressive education movement in the 20th century. The recent progress in open education and appropriate practices in the 21st century are reflections of this learner-centered curriculum ideology (Schiro, 2013). The learner-centered ideology emphasizes the learner as the center of the learning process. There are presently groundbreaking works conducted on learner curriculum alone by curricula researchers, another indication that the curriculum world has not stagnated much since the 1970s (Kelly, 2004; Su, 2012). Most schools practice a blend of the learner-centered and the knowledge-centered curricular. It is clear from this exposition that from the time of Pinar's prediction, the field of curriculum studies has not stagnated but has grown and evolved into a more elaborate discipline. It is clear from this exposition that from the time of Pinar’s prediction the field of curriculum studies has not stagnated but has grown and evolved into a more elaborate discipline. Curriculum Theory 4 To what extent has curricular movements evolved since the 1970s? The curricular movements have evolved quite significantly from the time Pinar made his prediction. According to Pacheco (2012), the curriculum literature from 1900 to 1980, has seen three movements emerged on the scene, which are the intellectual traditionalist, the social behaviorist, and the experientialist movements. The intellectual movement adheres to the ideals of Western intellectual history, stemming back to ancient Greece and greatly influencing U.S. educators. The social behaviorist movement on the other hand emerged out of a positivist notion of science. Many of today’s advocates of social behaviorist point of view call for attention to link behavioral aspects of teaching to standardized test scores. Schools in middle-class sub-urban environments, some university communities that value research are part of this movement. It is said that the Experientialist curriculum has its origins in the work of John Dewey. Here, the interest and concern that emerged from learners’ experience is the main concern. All these movements are still active with the tone of publications supporting their orientation. How has curricula definition changed? From I970 to now, there have are a plethora of definitions of curriculum. In fact, Su (2012) outlined over five different concepts by which curriculum could be defined. Some websites even list about forty-six different definitions of curriculum. This shows the ever-expanding nature of this field of study as predicted by Pinar. To sum up, the structure and the drive-in curriculum ideologies have evolved throughout the years and that process is still ongoing. Humanity is adding to our reservoir of knowledge every now and then and we are better placed to understand how we can best put in place systems that involve the delivery of quality education and thereby improving the quality of life of people. I am of the view that curriculum development has not been stagnant as a lot has been added and a lot more will be added in the future. 5 Curriculum Theory References Kelly, A. V. (2004). The curriculum theory and practice (5th ed.). London: SAGE Publications Limited. Pacheco, J. A. (2012). Curriculum Studies: What is The Field Today? Journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Curriculum Studies, 8, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15505170.2009.10411717 Schiro, M. (2013). Introduction to curriculum ideologies. In Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns (2nd ed., pp. 1–13). California: SAGE Publications, Inc. Schiro, M. S. (2013). Curriculum theory: conflicting visions and enduring concerns. In Choice Reviews Online (Vol. 45). https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.45-5118 Su, S.-W. (2012). The Various Concepts of Curriculum and the Factors Involved in Curricula-making. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(1), 154–158. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.1.153-158 Curriculum Theory 6
