Curriculum: Approaches and Theories

Prof . Fatin Khairy Al-Rrif’i , Ph.D.

Asst. Inst. Ghazwan Adnan Mohammed , M.A.

Abstract

Curriculum practitioners and implementers may use one or more approaches or

theories in planning, implementing and evaluating the curriculum. Even textbook writers
or instructional material producers have different curricular approaches and theories . The
current research on curriculum approaches and educational theories. According to
curriculum approaches , the emphasis is on the importance of planning in curriculum
design , thus note that although many curriculum approaches exist most can be classified
as Technical or Non-Technical approaches. Then, identify the types of each curriculum
approach. While , in terms of theories of curriculum , it examines the major theories that
have been involved in curriculum development and followed by a brief description for the
curriculum's different theoretical features including its history, programmed structure,
subject matter content, and its proponents.

Introduction
1
 Curriculum is connected to learning . Learning is planned and guided, therefore
there is a great need to identify in advance what one is seeking in order to accomplish and
know how to go about it. Aside from that, the definitions of curriculum refer to
schooling , therefore, it is vital to distinguish that the recent approval of curriculum
approaches and theories as far as practise materialized in connection with schooling ideas,
including subject and lesson.
Thus, one of the challenges academic faces identifying or designing curricula is
how best to articulate one’s own positionalities regarding the different ways of curriculum
approaches and theories . This research highlights some approaches and theories that have
been emerged over years. Also, it emphasizes the necessity of formulating an indigenous
curriculum approaches and theories to serve as a guide for curriculum planners and text
book compliers of the country.
Approaches of Curriculum

Curriculum is the most important component of educational process. It is a

dynamic process which plays significant role in shaping the society. The term curriculum
has been defined in various ways. The review of available definitions , indicates the
changing emphasis in the structure of the curriculum . Thus various approaches of
curriculum have been used in the transaction of curriculum and designing curriculum.

An approach is a set of beliefs and values about curriculum and curriculum work,
other synonyms for approach : image, orientation, perspective, or a belief ; so , any
curriculum developer should have :

 An understanding of curriculum and its process

 A value system
 A critical consciousness of the basic assumptions about the world, society, and
morality. 

2
 Yet , Curriculum design focuses primarily on the acquisition of skills and
competencies that are sustained by the day to day work environment of the learners in an
educational programme or course. There are a number of approaches to curriculum
development . According to Ornstein and Hunkins (2004:207), the emphasis is on the
importance of planning in curriculum design , thus note that although many curriculum
approaches exist most can be classified as Technical or Non-Technical approaches.

a) The Technical-Scientific Approaches

Generally speaking, curriculum developers which may include specialists,
superintendents, principals and coordinators are likened to engineers and architects who
use instruments and empirical methods in preparing a blueprint with well-defined elements
orderly-sequenced procedures, and quality control measures to increase the probability of
success in its implementation.

The technical-scientific approach states that the aims of education can be made
known, stated precisely, and addressed in a linear fashion. This approach exemplifies the
belief in modernism, a view that praises rationality, objectivity, and certainty(ibid.:208)

Successively, Ornstein and Hunkins (1998:203) argue that this approach views
the world as a complex machine, but a machine that can be observed and manipulated. The
main ideas of the technical-scientific approach to curriculum development as postulated by
its advocates (Macnold, Bobbitt, Charters, Taba, Tyler and others) are the following:

1. Improving the professional competence of teachers when they participate in

curriculum development,
2. Shaping the goals, selecting the content and method of instruction as well as
evaluating results, is assured by teacher’s involvement,
3. Interacting among teachers, learners, and people during face-to-face sessions, they
will better understand each other.

3
 4. Planning curricula, structuring the learning environment, and coordinating the
elements of personnel, materials, and equipment to optimize students' learning and
to increase their output.
5. Promoting curriculum developers to:
a. use a rational approach to tasks accomplishing.
b. believe in the possibility of outlining systematically the procedures that will
facilitate the creation of curricula.
c. Employ a means-end paradigm that suggests the more rigorous the means, the
more likely the desired results.
d. indicate that a systematically designed program can be evaluated.

To Ornstein and Hunkins (1988:68 - 97). "A curriculum approach reflects a holistic
position, encompassing the foundations of curriculum, domains of curriculum, and the
theoretical and practical principles of curriculum, in this respect, some of curriculum
approaches are cited such as :(a) behavioral-rational approach, (b) systems approaches, (c)
managerial approach, (d) intellectual-academic approach, (e) humanistic-aesthetic
approach, and (i) re-conceptual approach."

In the Technical - Scientific Approach, there are many different curriculum

approaches, vis:

1- The Objectives Model Approach

 The ‘Objectives approach’ is so named because the very first step in this
approach is the defining of objectives of the course/ program/lesson. (Tyler 1949) In this
approach the school is viewed as a ‘factory’. Tyler states three important sources that must
be looked at in order to contextualize and make curriculum development more
relevant. These are:
a - The learners and their backgrounds,

4
 b- Present and future society, and
c- Knowledge of the major disciplines, especially Philosophy, Psychology and
Sociology.
Tyler (1949: 45) adds that if these are considered that good citizens
can be determined. The more specific the specification of objectives, the easier it will
be to determine the sorts of activities that students can be engaged in. Tyler’s approach is
seen as the linear model as well as the ‘ends-means’ model.
2- The Classical/Rational Approach
The classical/rational approach to curriculum development follows an
"objectivist", product-oriented paradigm. The aims and objectives of the curriculum are set
by professionals and experts who believe that they have sufficient technical knowledge to
produce the desired product. It assumes that there is agreement by all interested groups
(teachers, students, communities, employers) on common educational goals and, therefore,
dialogue and consensus building among groups are not required (Van Crowder, 1997:23).

3- The Behavioral-Rational Approach

It is a means-end approach, viewing the curriculum as the means, whereas,

instruction as the end is a behavioral orientation, in the sense that Stern (1984:501)
observes, " a means-ends view of teaching is unavoidable in language pedagogy".
Curricula, in this approach, are became the actual blueprints which prescribe the roles of
key figures in the educative process.

4- The Managerial Approach

Obviously, the principal is the curriculum leader and at the same time instructional
leader who is supposed to be the general manager. The general manager sets the policies
5
and priorities, establishes the direction of change and innovation, planning, organizing
curriculum, and instruction. School administrators are less concerned about the content
than about organization and implementation. They are less concerned about subject matter,
methods and materials than improving the curriculum. Curriculum managers look at
curriculum changes and innovations as they administer the resources and restructure the
schools. (Ornstein and Hunkins, 1988:77 - 80).

5- The Systems Approach

The organizational chart of the school represents systems approach, which is

influenced by Systems Theory, where the parts of the total school district or school are
examined in terms of how they relate to each other. It shows the line-staff relationships of
personnel and how decisions are made. The following are of equal importance: a)
administration b) counseling c) curriculum d) instruction e) evaluation (Ornstein and
Hunkins,1988:80 - 85).

6- The Intellectual- Academic Approach

It identifies three fundamental factors - - the learner, the society, and the organized
subject matter. It advocates that these three factors should be viewed as a whole, and not in
isolation from one another. This approach has the following three sources of the
curriculum: - studies of the learner; - studies of contemporary life and its needs; and -
suggestions from subject experts. It also emphasizes the importance of cognitive theories
and principles in curriculum planning. Finally, this approach is influenced by the
philosophy of John Dewey. It emphasizes on the importance of theories and principles in
curriculum planning. (Ornstein and Hunkins ,1988:86).

b) The Non-Technical – Non-Scientific Approaches

In contrast, those in the non-technical, non-scientific camp stress the subjective,
personal, aesthetic, heuristic, and transactional. They emphasis on the learners (inputs)

6
rather the outputs of production, especially through activity-oriented approaches to
teaching and learning.

Thus, advocates of this approach note that not all ends of education can be known
nor, indeed, do they need to be known in all cases. This approach considers the curriculum
evolves rather than being planned precisely (Cornbleth, 1990:34). Here the world is
viewed not as a machine but as a living organism. Individuals cannot objectively view this
organism from outside. Rather individuals are intimately involved in the very phenomena
in which they are participating.

In that sense, individuals who consider themselves postmodern realize that one
cannot separate curriculum development from the people involved in the process or from
those who will experience the curriculum. One cannot decontextualize the process
(ibid:36). Yet, in the Non-Technical Scientific Approach, there are many different
curriculum approaches, namely:

1- The Cyclical Approach

Sometimes, it's called the recycling or spiraling; the purpose is to repeat language
items throughout the syllabus; each time a language item is encountered more detail about
it is added; this allows students to build on prior knowledge (Brown,2007:34).

A popular cyclic approach to such a process, prescribed by Nicholls and Nicholls

(1981: 21) involves revisiting the steps: selecting objectives; selecting and organizing
content; selecting and organizing methods; and evaluation (including assessment and
feedback). The Nicholls’ cyclic approach emphasizes that the approach to content, not just
the content itself, should be a key aspect of the curriculum development process. Most
importantly, this approach draws attention to the need for curriculum evaluation.
2- The Procedural Approach

7
 Sometimes, it's called Dynamic Approach which takes into consideration the
background and experience of students & teachers. The curriculum elements are seen as
flexible, interactive and modifiable (Sharma et al., 2004:37-67).

3- The Interactive Approach

Interactive approach follows a "subjectivist", process-oriented paradigm. It puts

emphasis on participation and interaction among the various interested groups or
educational stakeholders. The goal is to stimulate different actors to participate in a
dynamic, interactive process that allows their perceptions of the "ideal curriculum" to be
made explicit and then made compatible and/or modified as necessary to produce the
curriculum. (Van Crowder, 1997:54),

4- The Participatory Approach

Soundly, the participatory approach can be guided by outside curriculum
development "experts" or staff internal to the educational institution. It emphasizes a
participatory mode of action based on an inventory of stakeholder groups and the nature of
their interests, and in an interactive manner elicits their input to the curriculum (e.g.,
through interviews, consultations, post-hoc evaluations). It recognizes the need for
concrete participation by curriculum stakeholders and makes provisions for their ongoing
involvement in curriculum innovation. It also recognizes the key role of teaching staff and
the need to develop their skills to carry out curriculum development and to
evaluate/monitor the outcomes (Gregory,2000: 185).
5- The Humanistic-Aesthetic Approach
Argumentatively, those who favor the rational approach miss the artistic and
personal aspects of curriculum and instruction. It is rooted in progressive philosophy
which promotes the liberation of learners from authoritarian teachers (Ornstein and
Hunkins, 1988:89 - 93).
6- The Reconceptualize Approach
8
 Commonly, the Reconceptualize Approach criticizes the technocratic – scientific
models as not sensitive to the inner feelings and experience of individuals, which reflects
on existentialist orientation. The aim of education is not to control instruction in order to
preserve existing order (ibid, 1988: 94-96).
7- Language Experience Approach
The Language Experience Approach (LEA) encourages reading and writing
using the personal, real-life experiences of learners (Peyton, 1995; Taylor, 1992). There
are several basic steps in the LEA approach, which can be done on an individual or group
basis. The first step is to choose an experience. This experience can be an individual
learner’s experience or a group experience, such as personal story or a class field trip. In
both cases the experience is told orally by the learner or learners and transcribed by the
teacher or students. (Taylor, 1992).
According to Peyton (1995), LEA is especially good for ESL students with high
oral skills but low literacy skills because it capitalizes on their strengths and allows
reading and writing to develop naturally from speech. LEA stories use vocabulary that
students already know in oral form and help them learn the words in written form.
They also provide a unique source of written texts for learners, based on their own
experiences (Peyton, 1995; Taylor, 1992).
c) Technical – Scientific and Non-Technical –Non-Scientific Approach
Yet, another way of viewing curriculum approaches in terms of both technical
and non- technical approaches, appears in different scholars, such like; an India scholar,
Bhalla (2007:4-10) states that there are three approaches to curriculum development, as a
starting point for greater awareness about curriculum choices. The first approach,
"traditional," is borrowed from the K-12 school setting. The second, "learner-driven,"
incorporates theories specific to adult literacy education. The third approach, "critical,"
sees education as a distinctly political act, and curriculum development as functioning in
personally or politically empowering ways, as explain below:

9
 1- The Traditional Approach

The Traditional approach has been conceptualized by Tyler (1941) through

publishing his seminal book, "Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. “Today, this
approach is recognized by both educators and the public due to its widespread use in the
K-12 public school settings throughout the United States. The traditional approach,
however, is not just limited to school settings, and within that approach there have arisen
three distinct emphases highly dependent upon the educational environment,
circumstances and expected outcomes, by starting with;

a- Content Emphasis: Basically, it provides a list of knowledge to a student that he

must learn. Yet, Knowles (1984:10) mentions that this approach has a "subject-
centered" orientation: students gain mastery of subject matter predetermined by a set
of "experts." Curriculum is organized around content units and the sequence of what
is taught follows the logic of the subject matter.
b- Product Emphasis: Grandly, it focuses on what the intended learners are able to
accomplish upon completion of studies. Based on systematic planning, this
emphasis will assume all learners have common goals and the required resources
available to aid in learning.
c- Process Emphasis: Seemingly, it acts as an intervention strategy because, it
emphasizes on ever-changing communication mediums between people and their
environments rather than focusing on specific learning objectives.

In a brief, the ‘content’ and ‘product’ orientations are more closed, uniform,
predictable and ‘safe’. The ‘process’ orientation results in a more open, varied,
unpredictable and ‘risky’ curriculum which may have an impact upon individuals as
well as on organizations and institutions (Oliva,1982:88).

10
 2- The Learner-Driven Approach
Frequently, Knowles (1984, 12), is considered the father of adult education, says
that adults come to education "with a life-centered, task-centered, or problem-centered
orientation to learning. For the most part, adults do not learn for the sake of learning".
Learner-driven approach draws upon constructivism, Learners construct their own
understanding from what they are exposed to in the classroom and what they have
experienced in the rest of their lives" (Cromley, 2000, 10).
Historical, social, and cultural influences play major roles in shaping the way
individuals think and learn, it draws upon the work of contextual theorists, who believe
that effective learning is situated within the social context of real surroundings and
situations (Bransford et al.; 2000: 12).

3- The Critical Approach

Freire's theories, and the curricula that spring from them, promote critical
thinking, dialogue, and decision-making activities that support democratic ideals and move
toward socially critical consciousness. In developing critical curriculum, teachers must
first learn about important issues in their students' lives through conversations, journaling,
discussions, and lots of listening. This research enables teachers to identify issues that
relate to the experiences and concerns students identify. Reading and writing skills
develop in tandem with critical thinking skills, and ultimately, literacy learning becomes a
means of transforming students' lives and communities (Freire’s, 1985: 10). To
summarize, Hemphill (1999: 2) provides such details of these approaches in app. 1.
Also, Bernstein (1996 :66 – 90) identify two distinct types of approaches to
curriculum, which he calls the ‘competence’ and the ‘performance’.
1- Competence Curriculum Approach
Competence curriculum is interested in learner’s competences which are
believed to be innate. Thus, knowledge is not imposed from the outside, but the
competences that learners already have are sought on the inside. So, it encourages teaching

11
that draws from a learner’s own experiences and ‘everyday knowledge’ and, in turn,
assists learners in using their new learning in their lives and work. The focus on the learner
and everyday experience tends to affirm learners and build their confidence, whatever
their background. It also provides the teachers and learners with important ‘ways into’ the
formal ‘school knowledge’ that is to be taught, and later with the basis for applying that
formal knowledge.
2- Performance Curriculum Approach
Performance curriculum is characterized by developing high levels of
understanding, often in particular subjects. As a consequence, the curriculum tends to:
1. be very specific about what content must be learnt, and in what order;
2. focus on depersonalized, formal ‘school knowledge’ rather than on everyday
knowledge and experience;
3. be more vertically organized than a competence curriculum. In other words, it
builds knowledge and understanding in a specific sequence. (Each bit of knowledge
becomes more complex than the previous bit of knowledge). The table 1 below
summarizes what has been intimated above.
Table 1
Competence & Performance Curriculum
Competence Performance
Issue (Also called an acquisition competence (Also called a transmission performance
approach, or an ‘integrated’ curriculum) approach, or a ‘collection’ curriculum)
∙has control over the selection, sequence, and ∙has little control over the selection, sequence,
pace of learning and pace of learning.
Learner
∙assumption that all learners can learn but will do ∙assumption that not all learners can learn at
so in different ways and at different speeds. all levels; as learning proceeds vertically,
some learners are excluded.

. indirect role as facilitator of Learning. ∙direct teaching role; transmits knowledge

according to defined pedagogical rules.
Teacher ∙control is personally negotiated
∙control is hierarchical, the teacher decides.

∙learner-centered. ∙teacher- and subject-centered

∙integrated ‘learning areas. ∙strong links to ∙clearly demarcated subject areas

learner experience and everyday knowledge.

12
 Pedagogy ∙little link between formal school knowledge
and everyday knowledge.

∙general competence criteria. ∙specific performance criteria; there are clear

rights and wrongs.
∙focus on presences; on what learner knows and
Assessment
can do. ∙focus on absences – on what the learner has
left out.
∙no failure; only different lengths of time in
which to succeed. ∙failure if the learner does not complete things
fully or correctly
∙teacher shares the task of evaluation with the
learner. ∙teacher performs the task of assessment.

Along the lines of curriculum approaches, also three Indian scholars,

Narayana, Kirshna, and Rao, (2011:49-66), state four main approaches to curriculum
construction:

1- Herbartian Approach
2- Morrison Approach
3- Evaluation Approach
4- Integrated Approach
To clarify more, the following paragraphs provide with details for the above-
mentioned approaches.

1. Herbartian Approach
The idea of educational teaching is central to Herbart’s theory of education
which is founded on experience and on philosophical reflection. Like practical and
theoretical educationalists before him, Herbart also makes a distinction between
education (Latin: education) and teaching (Latin: instruction). ‘Education’ means
shaping the development of character with a view to the improvement of man.
‘Teaching’ represents the world, conveys fresh knowledge, develops existing aptitudes
and imparts useful skills. Herbart’s reforming pedagogics revolutionized the
relationship between education and teaching. A new paradigm of pedagogical thinking

13
and pedagogical action is thus created (Hilgenheger,2000: 649-664).

2- Morrison Approach
Morrison's studies posit that genuine learning consists of the student adapting or
responding to a situation through rejecting the notion that learning referring only to the
acquisition of subject matter, Morrison instead concentrates on actual change in the
behavior of the learner, what he calls an adaptation. Thus, the unit is the procedure used
for the teaching of an adaptation based on a stimulus-response psychology. This
concept stems, in part, from Morrison's categorization of learning into a cycle of three
phases: stimulus, assimilation, and reaction (Beck,1962:56-59).

3- Evaluation Approach
Today teaching is organized by using the evaluation approach. Under this
approach a yearly and a unit plan is prepared. The education process is considered as
tri-polar process. There are three fundamental elements: (1) Education objectives. (2)
learning experiences and (3) Change behavior of evaluation approach. Teaching and
testing activities are performed side by side, yet, all the activities of teachers and
students are evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively, thus, the evaluation of the
students include cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains (Narayana et.al.,
2011 :57-58). In a such context, the teacher has to organize and create learning
situations for providing experiences to the students according to their available
resources. Teacher should behave as philosopher, instructor, and friendlier (Rani,
2007 :167).

4- Integration Approach
Integration approach employs group-controlled instruction which must be
actively oriented method of instruction. To be briefed, Narayana etal. (2011:63-66)
mention the main characteristic and limitations of this approach as showing below:

1- The knowledge of subjects is given in the integrated form.

14
 2- The students learn the various subjects simultaneously.
3- The students' interests are taken in consideration.
4- It is activity oriented and experience – centered.
5- The selection of the subjects is useful in real life.
6- It employs group- controlled instruction, therefore, duties and responsibilities are
assigned to the students.
7- It helps in developing a spirit of team work and feeling of cooperation.
While the major limitations of this approach can be listed as the following:

1- It is very costly from time, money, and energy point of view.

2- The sequence of the subject-content is not be followed.
3- It can be used at lower level but can be used for higher level.
4- The higher objectives of education cannot be achieved.
5- It does not consider the individual differences of the student.
Smith (1996, 2000), author of “Curriculum Theory and Practice” in the
Encyclopedia of Informal Education, developed his own categories for understanding
curriculum development. Smith’s approaches are listed as follows:

 Transmission of Information: Curriculum as a body of knowledge to be

transmitted via a syllabus.
 End Product: Curriculum as an attempt to achieve certain ends-products.
 Process: Curriculum as a process.
 Praxis: Curriculum as praxis (action that is committed).
There is a general consensus that no one-curriculum development approach is
better than another rather one approach may better suit a specific situation. The flexible
approach simply refers to another approach that is derived from other curriculum models.
For example, teachers can modify the specified curriculum elements all the time as the
objectives are taken as a guideline. The same can be said for many texts such as Target or

15
Link (Language texts) which teachers select activities from rather than getting students to
do all exercises from the 1st to the last page. It is seen as a resource book instead with the
teacher having the discretion of how much or how little to use depending on the caliber of
the class in question (Johnston , 1999:85-95).

Curriculum planning can be no more based on single theory than can other
complex decisions such as choosing a spouse, buying a car, or selecting a president. In
order to repair these deficiencies of theory as a basis for curriculum planning, Schwab
offers the "Eclectic" as an approach to curriculum planning. Theory brings certain features
of a phenomenon into focus, helping the curriculum planner to understand better that
aspect of the situation. For example, Piagetian theory helps the planner understand the
student's cognitive development. Curriculum planners trained in the "eclectic arts" not
only can use theory to view phenomena, they also know which aspects of the phenomenon
each theory obscures or blurs (Schwab ,1970:45-50). See App. 2
Theories of Curriculum

The education theorists have founded theories about education by relying on the
overall worldview that governs society. They also got assistance from psychology and
sociology theories. These education theories in turn inspired the curriculum planning
theory-makers. Numerous attempts have been made to classify curriculum theories in
terms of maturity and complexity as well as attempts at categorization. The following
philosophic theories examine curriculum from a broad view that includes all of the
learner’s experiences to the more restricted view that sees it as academic subject matter.
Gutek (1988 :120-122) discusses many sources of educational theory such as;

1- Idealist Curriculum Theory

This theory is prevalent during the days of Plato. Idealists viewed
curriculum as a body of intellectual subject matter and learned disciplines that
are ideational and conceptual. Mathematics, history and literature for instance

16
 are ranked very high. The overriding goal of Idealist education was to encourage
students to be seekers of truth.
2- Realist Curriculum Theory
Aristotle finds Realism. Realist curriculum maintains that the most effective
and efficient way to find out about reality is to study it through systematically
organized subject matter disciplines. Realist curriculum involves instruction in the
areas of reading, writing, and computation. Gaining knowledge through research
methods are stressed.
3- Naturalist Curriculum Theory
The Naturalists view of curriculum differed from the earlier theorists.
Learning should actively involve children in dealing with the environment, using
their senses, and solving problems. Naturalists maintained that genuine education is
based on the readiness and needs of the human being.
4- Pragmatic (Experiential) Curriculum Theory
This curriculum theory approaches learning through experiencing. The
child’s interests, needs and experiences are taken into consideration.
5- Existentialist Curriculum Theory
The curriculum includes the skills and subjects that explain physical and
social reality. “The crucial learning phase is not in the structure of knowledge, nor
in curricular organization but rather in the student’s construction of its meaning”
6- Conservatism Curriculum Theory
The curriculum should transmit the general culture to all and provide
appropriate education to the various strata in society. This curriculum included the
basic skills found in most school programs – reading, writing, and math.

One of the most widely cited classifications of curriculum theories is proposed by

Eisner and Vallance (1974: 56). As they survey the field, they find five different
conceptions of or orientations to the curriculum, which are:
17
  A “cognitive-process” approach is concerned primarily with the development of
intellectual operations and is less concerned with specific content.
 The “curriculum-as-technology” orientation conceptualizes the function of
curriculum as finding the most efficient means of accomplishing predetermined
ends.
 “Self-actualization” sees curriculum as a consummative experience designed to
produce personal growth.
 “Social reconstruction-relevance” emphasizes societal needs over individual
needs. Theorists with this orientation tend to believe that the primary role of the
school is to relate to the larger society, with either an adaptive or a reformist stance.
 “Academic rationalism” emphasizes the importance of the standard disciplines in
helping the young participate in the Western cultural tradition.
A tripartite classification proposed by Pinar (1978: 205-214) seems equally
unsatisfactory: In his formulation, all curriculum theorists can be classified as
traditionalists, conceptual empiricists, or reconceptualizes.
Traditionalists, in his formulation, are those such as Ralph Tyler who are
concerned with the most efficient means of transmitting a fixed body of knowledge in
order to impart the cultural heritage and keep the existing society functioning.
Traditionalists like Tyler view curriculum as notions of class, teacher, course,
units, lessons, and so forth. For example, Hirsch (1995 :76), reveals that proponents of
formal education are generally very interested in the concept of schooling that emphasizes
basic knowledge and a definitive structure of instruction that involves the classics.
Common themes of formal education proponents might include the development of a
syllabus, transmittal of data and knowledge via lecture, formulation of goals and
objectives, assessment, and a focus on an end product.
While, theorists who espouse an informal education reveal an entirely different
perspective on how curriculum should be designed and implemented. Informal proponents

18
such as conceptual empiricists and reconceptualizes view education more as an existential
experience.
Conceptual empiricists, such as Gagne, are those who derive their research
methodologies from the physical sciences in attempting to produce generalizations that
will enable educators to control and predict what happens in schools.
Whereas, the reconceptualizes emphasize subjectivity, existential experience,
and the art of interpretation in order to reveal the class conflict and the unequal power
relationships existing in the larger society.
The basic difficulty with this tripartite formulation is that it mixes in a confusing
fashion the theorists’ research methodologies and their political stances as bases for
categorizing theorists. Whereas, McNeil (1985:69) sets up what seems to be an
unilluminating dichotomy: soft curriculars and hard curriculars. Soft curriculars, in his
view, are those such as William Pinar and other reconceptualizes who draw from the
“soft” fields of religion, philosophy, and literary criticism; hard curriculars, such as
Decker Walker and Mauritz Johnson, follow a rational approach and rely on empirical
data.
The basic error of all three formulations (McNeil; Pinar; Eisner & Vallance) is
that they do not sort out curricular theories in terms of their primary orientation or
emphasis. Here, Huenecke’s (1982: 290-294) analysis of the domains of curricular inquiry
seems the most productive. She postulates three different types of curricular theorizing:
structural, generic, and substantive.
 Structural theories, which she claims have dominated the first 50 years of the
field, focus on identifying elements in curriculum and their interrelationships, as
well as the structure of decision making.
 Generic theories center their interests on the outcomes of curriculum, concentrating
on the assumptions, beliefs, and perceived truths underlying curriculum decisions. It
sometimes referred to as critical theories, they tend to be highly critical of past and
present conceptions of curriculum. They seek to liberate the individual from the
19
 constraints of society, using political and sociological frameworks to examine issues
of power, control, and influences.
 The substantive theories speculate about what subject matter or content is most
desirable, what knowledge is of the most worth.
To Huenecke’s typology seems very useful, it seems to err in omitting one
major domain—those theories such as Schwab’s that are concerned primarily with the
processes of curricular decision making (Schwab, 1970:1-23). While Huenecke would
probably argue that Schwab’s work is primarily structural in its emphasis, the distinction
between structure and process seems to be one worth maintaining.
It therefore seems most useful to divide curriculum theories into the following
four categories, based upon their domains of inquiry according to Glatthron (1980,78):
 Structure-oriented theories are concerned primarily with analyzing the
components of the curriculum and their interrelationships. Structure-oriented
theories tend to be descriptive and explanatory in intent.
 Value-oriented theories are concerned primarily with analyzing the values and
assumptions of curriculum makers and their products. Value-oriented theories tend
to be critical in nature.
 Content-oriented theories are concerned primarily with determining the content of
the curriculum. Content-oriented theories tend to be prescriptive in nature.
 Process-oriented theories are concerned primarily with describing how curricula
are developed or recommending how they should be developed. Some process-
oriented theories are descriptive in nature; others are more prescriptive.
All of those scholars such as Holmes and McLean are well aware of their
investigations toward the education transformation and introduced four types of
curriculum theory which include: Essentialism, Encyclopedism, Polytechnicalism, and
Pragmatism (Holmes and McLean, 1989:87).

20
  Essentialism. In this model the aim of education is to sustain a just society the main
feature of which is stability.
 Encyclopedism. This model is based on the premise that the content of education
should include all human knowledge.
 Polytechnicalism. The fundamental premise on which this is based is that the
content of education should be deliberately interpreted in terms of the productive
life of society.
 Pragmatism. The knowledge most worthwhile in this model is that knowledge that
enables young people to tackle problems and prepares them to solve the problems
they are likely to meet as adults in a democratic society.

However, other theorist has considered other bases and standards for categorizing
curriculum theories. Miller & Seller (1990: 205-209). In their book "Curriculum
Curriculum, Perspectives and Practice", they categorize curriculum theories in to
“Subject/Discipline, behaviorism, Cognitive process, Humanistic, Social Developmental,
and Transpersonal.

Other theories have also been offered about curriculums by several other
theorists. A Summary of the most important theories have been offered in app.3. Although
some authors have suggested more than five theories, most of the theories can be included
in the following five major categories: academic, technical, intellectual processes, social,
and personal. From what is said above, it can be concluded that today discussion about
curriculum theory in the education literature of the societies has gained considerable flow
and has opened new research horizons to the curriculum field experts.

In order to understand curriculum theories, it is helpful to group the varying

conceptions into broad categories and discuss the different categories are suggested by the
above authors within these categories.

21
 Academic: It tends to focus on a body of knowledge which is grouped into
disciplines, subject matter, or broad fields. It is a familiar pattern of organization
that is evident in the way in which knowledge is organized for course work in most
schools. The academic category carries with it the message that knowledge is
organized into logical categories and that values can be attached to those categories.
 Technical: It is based upon an analysis of performance or processes. A job and task
analysis or the identification and sequencing of behavioral outcomes becomes the
means for creating curriculum. Efficiency is desired, requiring the curriculum to
provide the most efficient means of delivering the identified performance
objectives. These categories are highly structured, and whether they are derived
from task analyses or systems (inputs, processes, outputs) analysis, they are
behavior-focused curriculum plans.
 Intellectual Processes: It deals with the development of cognitive processes. such
as critical thinking and problem solving or human processes and traits such as
creativity and self-confidence the focus of curriculum, rather than a structured
discipline or a sequenced task. The goal of this category is to increase learning
efficiency and the transfer of problem-solving abilities to all areas of the curriculum
and life.
 Social: It focuses on the application of knowledge in realistic or real-world
situations. In brief, there are two distinct and opposite sides to this category. For
example, one variation could focus on social reconstruction with the assumption
that the future of society can be changed as a result of the educational activities of
the current generation. While another variation could also focus on social adaptation
with the assumption that students are the raw material of society, and they need to
be shaped to conform to existing social values.
 Personal. It is a learner-centered with a focus on the individual needs and interests
of the student. Students help or totally create curriculum by expressing interests and

22
 investigating those interests. Teachers serve as diagnosticians and facilitators for
this effort. It is the teacher's role to help students to identify interests and guide them
to appropriate resources and connections to another knowledge.

Conclusion

The above – mentioned papers, gives an overview of the literature on

curriculum approaches and theories. Concisely, the best approach or theory to
curriculum design is to combine the best of both according to student’s need, teacher’s
experience and organizational structure and resources. For example, it is useful to design
the overall shape of the course, the main aims and learning objectives, broad content areas
and time allocation centrally but then devolve out the detailed planning and design to those
teachers who will be delivering the course so that they have ownership of their
programmed or course.

References
Bhalla, N. (2007). Curriculum Development. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing

House.

Beck, H. E. (1962). "The Contributions of Henry Clinton Morrison: An Educational

Administrator at Work." Ph.D. Diss., The University of Chicago.

Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. London:

Taylor and Francis Press.

Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R., (eds.) (2000). How People Learn:
Bridging Research and Practice. The National Academy Press.
(www.nap.edu/openbook/0309065364/html).

Brown , Peter McKenzie. (2007). Reflections on Communicative Language

Teaching; The Language Institute. Thailand : Chiang Mai University.

23
Cornbleth, C. (1990). Curriculum in Context. Basingstoke: Falmer Press.

Cromley, J. (2000). "Learning with Computers: The theory behind the practice."

Focus on Basics, 4C, 6-11.

Eisner, E. W., & Vallance, E. (Eds.). (1974). Conflicting Conceptions of
Curriculum. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan .

Freire, P. (1985). The Politics of Education: Culture, Power, and Liberation. Critical
Studies in Education Series (eds. Freire, P. and Giroux H.). New York:
Bergin and Garvey.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1980). A guide for Designing an English Curriculum for the

Eighties . Urbana . IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Gregory, A. (2000). Problematising participation: a critical review of approaches

to participation in evaluation theory. Evaluation 6(2): 179-200.

Gutek. G. L . (1988). Philosophical and Ideological Perspectives on Education.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ. : Prentice Hall.

Hemphill, D. (1999). "Incorporating postmodernist perspectives into adult

education." In V. Sheared & P. Sissel (eds.), Making Space: Reframing
Theory and Practice in Adult Education, A Grassroots Approach. New
York: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Hilgenheger, Norbert (2000). Johann Friedrich Herbart(1776-1841) Paris, UNESCO:

(International Bureau of Education), vol. XXIII, no. 3/4, 2000, 649-664.

Hirsch, E. D., Jr., (1995). What your Fifth Grader Needs to Know: Fundamentals
of Good Fifth-Grade Education. Los Alamitos, CA: Delta Publishing.

Holmes, B. and, McLean. M. (1989). The Curriculum , A Comprehensive

Perspective. London : Unwin Hyman.

Huenecke, D. (1982). What is curricular theorizing? What are its implications for
practice? Educational Leadership, 39, 290–294.

Johnston, S. (1999). Introducing and supporting change towards more flexible

teaching approaches. In Tait, A. and Mills, R (Eds.). The convergence of
distance and conventional education: Patterns in flexibility for the
individual learner. London : Routledge.
24
Knowles, M. (1984). "Introduction: The art and science of helping adults learn."
In M. Knowles and associates (eds.). Andragogy in Action: Applying
Modern Principles of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
McNeil, J. D. (1988). Curriculum: a Comprehensive Introduction (3rd ed).
Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Miller, J. P., & Seller, W. (1990). Curriculum, Perspectives and Practice.
Mississauga: Copp Clark Pittman.

Narayana, P.V. V. , Kirshna, G. , and Rao, D.(2011) . Curriculum Development and

Management .New Delhi : Discovery Publishing House.
Nicholls, A. & Nicholls, H. (1981). Developing a Curriculum: A practical
approach. George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Oliva, P. F. (1982). Developing the Curriculum. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.

Ornstein, A. and Hunkins, F. (1988). Curriculum: Foundations, Principle and

Issues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
------------------------------------(1998). Curriculum: Foundations, Principle and
Issues. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
------------------------------------(2004). Curriculum: Foundations, Principle and
Theory (4th ed). Boston : Allyn & Bacon.

Peyton, J., Crandall, J. (1995). Philosophies and approaches in adult ESL literacy
instruction. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and
Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 386 960).

Pinar, W.F. (1978). The Re-conceptualization of Curriculum .Journal of Curriculum

Studies, 10, 205-214.

Rani, J. S. (2007). Educational Measurement and Evaluation . New Delhi :

Discovery Publishing House.

Schwab, J. (1970). The Practical: A language for curriculum. Washington, DC:

National Education Association.

Sharma, D., B. S. Sahay, and A. Sachan. (2004). Modelling Distributor

Performance Index Using System Dynamics Approach. Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics 16(3): 37–67.

Smith , M. K. (1996,2000). Curriculum Theory and Practice . The encyclopedia of

informal education … http://www.infed.org./biblio/b-curric.htm.
25
Stern, P. C. (1984). Improving Energy Demand Analysis . Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.

Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago,

IL: University of Chicago Press.

Taylor, M. (1992). The Language Experience Approach and adult learners. National
Center for ESL Literacy Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No.EDO LE 92 01).

Van Crowder, L. (1997). A Participatory Approach to Curriculum Development.

Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO): http://www.fao.org/sd/
EXdirect/EXan0017.htm.

Appendix 1
Approaches of Curriculum by Hemphill (1999:2)

26
 Curriculum –
What are the Knowledge Issue
Assessing learning Classroom action Determiners

-Objective, observable -A classroom with -Pre-determined -Appears neutral and - Curriculum

"scientific" means lesson plans, goals equitable in its developer (publisher,
homework, grades -Learning happens availability state, institution)
-Can provide possibly in a linear, step- -Exists "out there," can sets goals and
comparative scores by-step fashion be organized and chooses learning
-Skills-Based transmitted experiences,
/sequenced -Is observable and evaluates, plans and
textbooks or -Expert knowledge measurable proposes curriculum
workbook with is important
pre- determined
Traditional Approach

learning goals

-Performance of the -Apolitical on the -Learning happens -Created through the - Students articulate
student's surface in social contexts interaction  learning goals that
contextualized goal -Instruction is of student and text spring from their
-Drawn from transparent and -Builds on what learners real-world roles.

27
-Continuing, adults' lives in based on purposes already know - Students help plan
involving their everyday students determine -Relevant to students' curriculum

Appendix 2
metacognitive contexts real-life context
strategies
-Abandons -Learners actively
technician build on

Curriculum Approaches
Learner-Driven Approach

mentality knowledge and

-Addresses social
and community -Education is
-Portfolios, self- issues of political -Not fixed - dependent - Teacher leads the
assessment importance upon interaction among class while following
instruments -Language and students, text, and the lead of learners
-Measures of social power are teacher - Students, rather
and personal change -Curriculum not connected -Autobiographic - than "outsiders,"
set in advance; depends on the politics become experts
-Levels of critical emerges from of identity brought to
consciousness reached "action and learning
interaction of the -Complex interaction
participants" between text, the
Critical Approach

-External performance teacher, and what is

levels do not apply. taught
-Knowledge is created,
rather than taken in
 ron Saylor, Alexander Saylor, Alexander
Ornstein &
ors

l. Ornstein Hankins
Hunecke Wiles & Bondi Schubert
Theories

& Holmes,& Miller

Commentat

Hankins

,78)
Date

(1981,78) (1981,78) (1982,290-94) (1984, 45 ) (1986, 58 ) (1998:90) (1989,87) (1990,66) 1998:90

System
Objective

Managerial
Approaches

Subject/
Subject Subject
Discipline
Classical / Rational
Behavioural- Rational
Technical – Scientific

ture Conservatives &

Subject Matter Subject Matter Structural Matter Centered Essentialism Administrative
The Intellectual- Academic
Liberal Arts
Academic

Tech. Competency Tech. Competency behaviorism Behaviorism

Educational Learning
Technology & outcomes &
Technical

Vocational Discrete task

Cycle

Cognitive
Human Traits Human Traits Pragmatism Systemic
Interactive
Procedural

process
Participatory

Reconceptualist

ent Process Process Substative

28
Process

Language Experience
Humanistic- Atheistic
Scientific Approaches
Non - Technical / Non-
Intellectual

Humanistic/
Social Functions Social Functions Polytechnicalism Humanistic Humanistic
Social social
ess Social Problem
Activities Activities Reconstructi Development
Social

Reconstruction Centered
Primary Focus of Curriculum Theories

on Activities
& Cultural

De-schooling
Individual Needs/ interests Individual Needs/ interests
& Encyclopaedism Trans-personal
/activities /activities
Praxis
Critical

Process

Eclectic
Flexible

ue Experiences Learning
Morrison

Integrated
Herbartian

Evaluation

Generic
Traditional

End-product

Competence
Person

Performance
Approaches

& Cultural Centered

Learner-Driven

Humanistic
Scientific & Non Scientific

Transmission of Information
Technical & Non Technical /

Theories
Appendix 3
Some of the
Curriculum