PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS:
Based upon fundamental beliefs that arise from one's philosophy of Education, curricular decisions involve consideration of several topics and issues. Precisely for this reason, we consider philosophy one of the major foundation areas in curriculum. In this section, we shall explore several different philosophies of education that influence curricular decisions.
Philosophy and Curriculum
Studying philosophy helps us deal with our own personal systems of beliefs and values, i.e., the way we perceive the world around us and how we define what is important to us. As philosophical issues have always influenced society and institutions of learning, a study of the philosophy of education in terms of Curriculum development is essential.
In essence, a philosophy of education influences, and to a large extent determines, our educational decisions and alternatives. Those who are responsible for curricular decisions, therefore, should be clear about what they believe. If we are unclear or confused about our own beliefs, then our curricular plans are bound to be unclear and confusing. One important step in developing a personal philosophy of education is to understand the various alternatives that others have developed over the years. Here we shall look into the following four major philosophical positions that have, hitherto, influenced curriculum development.
i ) Idealism
ii) Realism
iii) Pragmatism
iv) Existentialism
Educational philosophies:
Although aspects of educational philosophy can be derived from the roots of idealism, realism, pragmatism and existentialism, a common approach is to provide a pattern of educational philosophies which derives from the major schools of philosophy some of which have been touched upon above. Here, we shall be looking into the following four educational philosophies for their implications in the area of curriculum development.
i) Perennialism
ii) Progressivism
iii) Essentialism, and
iv) Reconstructionism
PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS
By providing a basis for understanding the teaching/learning process, educational psychology deals with how people learn. By implication, it emphasizes the need to recognize diversity among learners. However, it is also true that people share certain common characteristics. Among these are basic psychological needs which are necessary for individuals to lead a full and happy life. In this section, we shall be talking about the major learning theories and their contribution to curriculum development. Besides, we shall touch upon the basic psychological needs of individuals and reflect on their translation into curriculum.
We shall at this juncture remind ourselves that our main thrust will be on the contributions made by the theories of learning for curriculum development. Let us therefore make it clear that we are not, right now, interested in studying the theories of learning in detail, which has already been done to some extent in earlier courses on distance education.
Learning theories and curriculum
For the sake of convenience we have classified the major theories of learning into the following groups:
i) Behaviorist theories which deal with various aspects of stimulus- response and reinforcement scheme;
ii) Cognitive theories which view the learner in relationship with the total environment; and
iii) Phenomenology which emphasizes the affective domain of learning.
TRENDS IN CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
To understand contemporary curricular problems and proposals, it is ideal that we acquaint ourselves with the history of curricular thought and practice that stretches back to antiquity. However, let us start this section with the assumption that we rarely find histories that focus exclusively on curriculum and, therefore, turn to an overview of general histories of education in an effort to get a few glimpses of the history of curriculum.
The curriculum field may be viewed as a formal area of academic inquiry, but as a basic human interest, its concerns are perennial. Parents and other members of society throughout history have wondered how best to help their young ones grow and mature. Their response to this problem constitutes an unwritten history of informal curricular thought and action. As societies became more formal and as institutions developed within them to meet specialized needs, schools/colleges evolved to help students grow more efficiently, to introduce them to the ways of their society and to help them acquire an understanding of their cultural heritage.
If we recall the earlier sections, curriculum has always been and continues to be influenced by educational philosophers, besides societal needs. In the ancient times, though a formal curriculum (of the shape it has obtained today) did not exist; young people were oriented towards meeting cultural and social demands. Depending on the influence of educational philosophies, however, curriculum-content for such orientations varied from one period to the other. Tracing the historical antecedents of curriculum may give us a framework of its gradual growth. However, for our immediate purposes we shall restrict ourselves to an overview of the twentieth century curriculum and a speculation of the possible future trends in curriculum development.
Twentieth century curriculum
Early 20th century curriculum affirmed the shift in emphasis from sectarian education to liberal education. Traditionally, curriculum was confined to religion-related orientations and classics. Gradually, more and more subjects were added to the curriculum. As the focus was on mental discipline, social needs, student interest or capabilities were given little emphasis. Further, during this period, compartmentalization and not interdisciplinary subject matter was considered the norm. There was an unwillingness to recognize the values of arts, music, physical and vocational education. This was based on the theory that these subjects had little mental or disciplinary value. If we pause for a moment here and think, we shall realize that even though we offer vocational, industrial and/or technical programmes now, there is a tendency to consider traditional academic programmes superior to them.
Gradually, demands were made for curricular changes. Industrial development led a growing number of educators to question changes, as well as the authenticity of the traditional curriculum and its emphasis on mental discipline. This shift was also influenced by the scientific movement in child psychology (which focused on the whole child and learning theories in the 1900’s).
Thus, the early twentieth century was a period of educational reform characterized by the following:
i) Idea of mental discipline was replaced by utilitarian modes of thought and scientific inquiry.
ii) Curriculum tended not to be compartmentalized but to be interdisciplinary.
iii) Curriculum tended not to be static but dynamic-changing with the changes in society.
iv) Needs and interest of students came to be considered of primary importance. And now curriculum is viewed as a science with principles and methodology not just as content or subject matter.
What are the implications of these observations?
Job patterns will constantly change dramatically and so workers will be moving frequently from one job to another. Accordingly, to keep them abreast with each task/job that they take up, we will need to give them periodic training. The speed of change we have been referring to suggests not only that fields will be dynamic, but also that new ones will emerge. By implication, education and orientation will, of necessity a lifelong process. In essence, unlike the past, we cannot consider our education complete just because we have attended schools/colleges or graduated from an educational institution. Nor will we be able to enter a job or profession and expect to remain in it for life without regular training.
What are the implications of the above discussion?
In the main, there will be radical changes in the socio-academic ecology of school/college environment. Barring a few, if any, schools/colleges have so far been functioning as bastions of autocracy with little importance given to students' needs and teachers' competence. Because of the changing societal needs and greater awareness of the need for purpose-oriented education.
