1. Conceptions of Curriculum

Questions Considered:

• why some conceptions of curriculum continue to be used over time or are considered to be mainstream approaches, while others are not?
• how can I use conceptions of curriculum as tools or frameworks to analyze planning, instruction, and assessment within my practice?

Teachers are generally concerned with the curriculum document that applies to their particular province or subject area that they teach.  To this point in my teaching career, I would fit into this category where I have rarely looked beyond curriculum outside of Alberta, with the exception of investigated curriculum of other subject areas when considering potential cross curricular tasks or looking into alternative activities for my classes.

Different approaches to curriculum and understanding those different approaches does provide insight into what the student/teacher experience will look like.  Understanding the framework by which curriculum is created also lets us know who the curriculum is written for and what is expected to be accomplished by outcomes within.  

For this post, I will organize some curricular frameworks into two categories.  The category I will consider 'mainstream' is where society guides what students will be learning.  The other category I will consider to be less common is where students are the leaders in learning how they can and will impact society.  

Mainstream curricular frameworks are when outcomes will guide what students will need to fit into society in the future.  This traditional approach that stems from an industrial, Eurocentric approach to education where stakeholders are primarily concerned with the benefits they will receive out of the curriculum.  This framework is where social, economic, and political interests apply their interests to curriculum design to guide future citizens.  

Curricular conceptions where students are guided through the outcomes that prioritizes societal needs over indivudual needs in reflected in an academic rationalist approach (Eisner & Vallance, 1974) and A systems approach (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013).  In these curricular frameworks, societal needs are put at the forefront of curriculum and students are organized into categories of who will successful in a system established for them.  In the academic rationalist approach, students are able to inquire and ask questions, but at the same time are guided to answer these questions using mainstream ideas and approaches that have already been established.  A systems approach is also common demonstrated by an overwhelming number of standardized tests used in the United States as well as Provincial Achievement Tests or Diploma Exams used in Alberts in grades 6, 9 and 12.  This approach gives future academic institutions and future employers information on the skills and knowledge that they value and use that classification to organize populations of students.  These curricular conceptions prioritize the skills or knowledge that students may or may not have in their lives.  

The other understanding of curriculum that may be less common, while no doubt growing, is when the outcomes of the curriculum are targeted to promote student growth and provide opportunities of discovery to enable students to have an impact on the world they will be a part of.  This approach to curriculum promotes the benefits that come from individuality.  It also recognizes universal competencies such as collaboration, research skills, and critical thinking that individuals need for success.  In frameworks that promote these ideas, students are encouraged to have an impact on the larger world around them.  

Curricular conceptions that where students are the leaders in their learning are the the Development of cognitive processes, a Self-actualization approach ( Eisner & Vallance, 1974), Social-reconstructionist, and the Humanisic approach (McNeil, 2009).  A priority on developing cognitive processes establishes the how of learning and the process of learning is the focus rather than the product.  Through a self-actualization conception of curriculum students are provided opportunities to discover and personally integrate themselves and their experiences into curriculum.  While the humanistic approaches to curriculum allows students to see the impact their actions and experiences have on others.  These approaches relate to focusing on issues and problems in society and in an individuals own life.   

One potential factor into why these conceptions of curriculum are less mainstream is because our society values results and aims to want a way to quantify how effective curriculum is.  When institutions in society are in the position to rate and rank the effectiveness of curriculum, they will prefer to structure curriculum in a form that can be measured.  When students are making contributions to their learning within a more flexible curriculum framework, their learning may not fit into the structure that mainstream institutions are looking for.  Simply because there may not be a way to quantify how students are learning does not mean that there is not learning occurring within a curriculum.  To go further, our definitions of what quantifies a successful curriculum and a successful graduate from that curriculum may need to be adjusted as well.  

As a social studies teacher, I can see the benefits of how putting students in a position to develop their own understanding can have a positive impact in the world around them.  McNeil (2009) identifies how learning about the Holocaust in Germany, Israel, and the United States has contributed to critical thinking and establishing moral judgement.  The curriculum in this example, includes relating personal experiences to history and opportunities to enhance awareness of human flaws.  This example is also shown in Michael Moores Film where to invade next (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MixO_amdabs) where it exemplifies how powerful learning can be when students can see how each one of them individually or collectively can impact the world.  These profound insights stem from designing questions and outcomes that put students in a position to develop their understandings of history.  

Overall, when I want to analyze my planning, instruction, and assessment within my practice I feel like the most powerful learning can occur when students can see themselves making an impact on the world around them.  The reality of a transition from the more mainstream frameworks of curriculum may not be realistic in the sort term, but I do want to look for more ways to put students in a position to innovate, create, and solve problems for the world around them. 



Eisner, E., & Vallance, E. (Eds.). (1974). Five conceptions of the curriculum: Their roots and implications for curriculum planning.In E. Eisner & E. Vallance (Eds.), Conflicting conceptions of curriculum (pp. 1-18). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.

McNeil, J. D. (2009).  Contemporary curriculum in thought and action (7th ed.).  Hoboken, NJ:  John Wiley.  Pages 1, 3-14, 27-39, 52-60, 71-74.

Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2013). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Read part of Chapter 1, pp. 1-8.