1

How far has the curriculum studies come?

How far has the curriculum studies come?

University of the People

EDUC 5220

Curriculum Design and Instructional Decision Making

Dr. Rochelle Massingill

September 11, 2020

 2

Introduction

The reconceptualisation of the curriculum studies has been altered extremely in various levels,

from theoretical tools and ideologies to philosophy for over 50 years. Slattery, (1995) said, “I

believe that curriculum and instruction are the very heart and soul of schooling”(p.67). I am in

full agreement with this and surprised about how reconceptualization of the curriculum has taken

place in the early 1970s.

How far has the curriculum studies come?

According to Slattery (1995), “ all the traditional structural disciplines of the curriculum field

have been reconceptualized.” (p.96). The focus which was made on schools shifted to giving

respect to students and their social well being, when the four curriculum ideologies came into

being. The curriculum ideologies being referred to here are: The Scholarly Academic Ideology,

The Social Efficiency Ideology, The learner Centered Ideology and the Social Reconstruction

Ideology. This has been a very significant achievement in curriculum studies. The social

efficiency ideology is dominating now in my milieu as learners are expected to learn in groups

and gain social skills which will enable them to have a better life in the future. Through

collaboration amongst learners, cooperating, working in groups, discussing and doing

community service learning, the learners are gaining the social skills and the expertise that they

can use to be productive in their jobs in the future. All these will enable them to fit in the social

community. Even though there seems to be unending competition amongst the curriculum

ideologies; it brings about a change and popular growth in education.

Pinar, (1978), binds the curriculum studies to an abundance of perspectives and the new

research that is taking place. He states, “unlike the early 1970s, the field is not moribound. It is

intellectually very lively, complex, and variegated. The field is threatened less by its internal

complexity than by external political conditions.” (Pinar, 2007). These threats Pinar is

discussing are due to the politics that face curriculum which is brought about by the governing
 3

powers in order to bring their own fashion to the development of the curriculum. Focusing on

the interior of its complexity, (Pinar, 2007) realizes that in the victory of postmodernism, the

curriculum field was broken down to multiple specializations. “Among the categories that were

fragmented from post scholarly productions are curriculum history, curriculum politics, cultural

studies, race theory, women and gender studies, including queer theory, post colonial studies,

Jewish curriculum studies, disability studies, narrative (including autobiographical,

autoethnographic, and biographic) inquiry. Complexity theory, environmental studies,

psychoanalytic studies, technology (especially computers), arts based research and

internationalization.”

Elaborating on the theoretical sustenance of the curriculum studies, Pinar, (1978) recognizes

curriculum as a compound discussion, finding out new and diverse discussions which have their

backgrounds on the reconceptualization and post-reconceptualization periods which are

interlinked. According to (Seguel, 1996; Schubert et al, 2002) the curriculum studies today have

been developed from the background of the past relationship where the theories and practice

should be integrated mainly on social, cultural and political affairs.

The link of several philosophical orientations as indicated by the post modernists’ voices, shows

a very good quality of diversion in the reconceptualization of the curriculum studies field. There

is a strong belief that the big diversity of power and the liberation of education, as slattery,

(1995) comments, “ In the spirit of Huebner, Dewey, Freire, Day, Nhat, Hanh, Orr, and

Bonhoeffer, I believe that curriculum development in the postmodern era must foreground

critical and prophetic public discourse for individual transformation and social renewal.

Teachers and their students must work collaboratively as partners in the cause of justice and

ecological sustainability.” (p.58)

The discovery of many types of curriculum broadens and sinks deep the focus we use to identify

the significance of education quality. In this view, the “hidden curriculum”, which is not written
 4

or taught directly but is assumed to be known, is very important. Thus educators should be

warned that what affects learners’ development is rarely the explicit subjects but also the factors

that are implicit, within which the school culture and society is very crucial. Today,

social-emotional learning is an essential skill for all, more research done on the hidden

curriculum is very necessary.

One of the huge concerns on the curriculum studies has been the historical and theoretical nature

of curriculum. Pinar, Reynolds, Slattery and Taubman, (1995) argue that “ the theoretical wing

of the curriculum field must not be ignored as several synoptic textbooks continue to do.” As

Raba Page, (2009) states that the main question of curriculum studies has been how to identify it:

“Curriculum studies seems to have always had something of an identity problem. This problem

has been infected by external development including broad societal shifts and, more recently,

increasing intervention in curriculum by formal government and by a growing number of

informal groups.”

Summary

In my view, it is very true that the reconceptualization of the curriculum has been altered

extremely in several levels from the conceptual tools and philosophical ideologies for over 50

years. It promotes big growth in both education and society. Even though there is a lot of

competition amongst the curriculum ideologies as well as orientations of the philosophy which is

quite intense and they do not show any signal of slowing down, it is my belief that the education

system is improving tremendously in the service it offers to the human.

 5

References

Pinar, W. (1978). ​The Reconceptualisation of Curriculum Studies. Journal of Curriculum

Studies,

10​:3,205–21. Retrieved from:

​http://daneshnamehicsa.ir/userfiles/file/Resources/8-2%29%20Ideologies/ARTICLE_

​William%20Pinar.pdf

Pinar, W. F. (2007). ​Intellectual Advancement through Disciplinarily​;

​Verticality and Horizontality in Curriculum Studies.​ Rotterdam: Sense Publishers

Schubert, W. H. et al. (Eds.). (2002), ​Curriculum Books. The First Hundred Years (2nd ed.)

New York: Peter Lang.

Seguel, M. L. (1966). ​The Curriculum Field: Its Formative Years​.

New York: Teachers College Press.

Slattery, P. (1995). ​Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era.​

New York & London: Garland Publishing, Inc. Retrieved from

​https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=mBb9CAm3BP0C