This document provides an overview of a lecture on curriculum theory. It discusses different conceptions of curriculum, including curriculum as the explicit, planned lessons and objectives, as well as the implicit and null curriculums which refer to the unintended learning of values and attitudes and ideas that are excluded. It also examines different approaches to curriculum, such as the academic idealist, techno-rationalist, learner-centered, and social reconstructionist perspectives. The lecture emphasizes that curriculum constitutes particular ways of reasoning and standards at the expense of others, and functions both to reproduce and transform society and culture.

1. +
Common Methods Lecture
Series
Lecture 3
Robert J. Parkes, PhD
Senior Lecturer in Curriculum Studies
The University of Newcastle, Australia

2. +
Understanding Curriculum Theory
[or How to understand where this lecture is coming from!]
 “Curriculum theory is a distinctive field of study, with
a unique history, a complex present, an uncertain
future . . . [that] has its origin in and owes its loyalty
to the discipline and experience of education” (p. 2).1
 The practice of curriculum theorizing and design is
not singular or uniform but multiple, fractured and
contested;2 and conceptions and cultures of
curriculum vary, sometimes dramatically.3
1. Pinar, W. F. (2004). What is curriculum theory? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
2. Wright, H. K. (2000). Nailing jell-o to the wall: Pinpointing aspects of state-of-the-art curriculum theorizing. Educational
Researcher, 29(5), 4-13.
3. Joseph, P., Bravmann, S., Windschitl, M., Mikel, E., & Green, N. (2000). Cultures of curriculum. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

3. +
What is curriculum?
 THINK: Take a minute to write down
your own definition of curriculum.
 PAIR: Compare it with the definition
written down by your neighbours.
 SHARE: Be ready to share your
definition with your peers in the lecture
theatre.
The first step in understanding curriculum is
a regressive autobiographical one. Here we
move to understand “where we are coming
from” with regard to curriculum. For the
“method of currere” see: Pinar, W.
F. (2004). What is curriculum theory?
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Publishers.

4. +
What is curriculum?
 All of the learning planned and directed
by the school to attain its educational
goals.4
 Refers to the learning experience of
students, as expressed or anticipated in
goals and objectives, plans and
designs, and their implementation.5
4. Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Or see: Tyler, R. W.
(2004). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (pp. 51-
60). New York: Routledge.
5. Skilbeck, M. (1984). School based curriculum development. London: Harper & Row Ltd.
The most common answer to this
question:
The Syllabus as a set of
educational prescriptions
[ Usually a set of official Aims,
Knowledge, Skills, & Values ]

5. +
Example: The International Baccalaureate Curriculum Map
Curriculum as cartography?

6. +
So what is the curriculum?
 the collection of all school subjects?
 the Syllabus for a specific school subject or Key Learning
Area?
 a Scope and sequence that maps how the syllabus
prescriptions will be met in an individual school?
 a Unit of Work that outlines the teaching and learning
strategies and goals for a specific set of syllabus topics?
 Lesson Plans for individual lessons that work towards the
achievement of unit goals?
The
Explicit, Plan
ned, or
Official
Curriculum

7. +
“Currere” the lived experience of
education?6
 What the teacher actually
does to enact the lesson
plan during a specific class or
period?
 What students actually
experience in the classroom
during a specific lesson . . . or
even over the course of their
entire schooling?
6. Pinar, W. F. (1975). Currere: Towards reconceptualization. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists. Berkeley,
CA: McCutchan.
Image from Paramount Picture‟s School of Rock

8. +
The Three Curricula that
all Schools Teach
To understand curriculum we must explore“what is valued and given
priority and what is devalued and excluded” (p. 297).7
Explicit Implicit / Hidden Null
The official written syllabi,
programmes, lesson plans,
and policies.
The learning of attitudes,
norms, beliefs, values and
assumptions often expressed
as/by rules, rituals and
regulations… common-sense
knowledge… rarely
questioned or articulated.8
What is not included in the
curriculum and consequently
those ideas and skills that
are withheld from students
that they might otherwise
have used.9
Whose interests are being served by the explicit, implicit, and null curriculum?
7. Cherryholmes, C. H. (1987). A social project for curriculum: Post-structural perspectives. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 295-
316.
8. Seddon, T. (1983). The hidden curriculum: An overview. Curriculum Perspectives, 3(1), 1-6.
9. Eisner, E. W. (1979). The educational imagination: on the design and evaluation of school programs. New York: Macmillan Publishing
Co. Inc.

9. +
Curriculum constitutes particular
rationalities at the expense of others
 “Curricula are historically formed within systems of ideas that
inscribe styles of reasoning, standards, and conceptual
distinctions in school practices” (p. 151). [Offering] “an
ensemble of methods and strategies that inscribe principles for
action” (p. 163). . . [and particular] “styles of reasoning” (p.
151). Curriculum must therefore be understood as “a practice
of governing and an effect of power” (p. 151).10
 Curriculum forms our ways of reasoning about the self and the
world, and the rationalities that emerge from this process are
constituted not only by what it includes, but by what it implies
and neglects.11
10. Popkewitz, T. S. (2001). The production of reason and power: Curriculum history and intellectual traditions. In T. S. Popkewitz, B. M.
Franklin & M. A. Pereyra (Eds.), Cultural history and education: Critical essays on knowledge and schooling (pp. 151-183). New York:
Routledge Falmer.
11. Parkes, R. J. (2011). Interrupting history: Rethinking history curriculum after 'the end of history'. New York: Peter Lang.

10. +
12. Kemmis, S., & Fitzclarence, L. (1986). Curriculum theorizing: Beyond reproduction theory. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University.
13. Green, B. (2010). Rethinking the representation problem in curriculum inquiry. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(4), 451-469.
What is the function of curriculum?
Lessons from the Deakin School
 The double problem12 of the relationship between:
 theory and practice
[curriculum provides a set of representations of a ‘world outside’]
 education and society
[curriculum operates as a site of cultural reproduction]
 Re-examing the work of Ulf Lundgren and the Deakin
School, Green13 refers to this as the unresolved problem of
representation and reproduction.

11. +
14. Gundem, B. B., & Hopmann, S. (Eds.). (2002). Didaktik and/or curriculum: An international dialogue. New York: Peter Lang.
The Key Curriculum Question/s
 Anglo-American Curriculum Tradition:
What knowledge is of most worth?*
[What should be taught?]
 European Bildung-Influenced Didaktik Tradition:14
What will the student become?
[What should the student become?]
* Whose knowledge is being taught?

12. +
Vertical and Horizontal
Knowledge Structures15
Horizontal Knowledge
Structures
 Everyday “common-sense”
knowledge, that is typically
oral, local, context
dependent and specific,
tacit, multi-layered, and
contradictory across but not
within contexts.
 Culturally specified
knowledges and practices.
15. Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157-173. Note, that
Vygotsky made a very similar distinction in the 1930s, when he referred to “everyday” and “scientific” knowledge, and based a good
deal of his psychology on the pedagogical implications of such a distinction. See: Vygotsky, L. S. (1934/1997). Thinking and speech
(N. Minick, Trans.). In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1: Problems of general
psychology, pp. 39-288). New York: Plenum Press.
Vertical Knowledge
Structures
 Either coherent, explicit, and
systematically principled
structure, hierarchically
organised, as in the sciences.
 Or a series of specialised
languages with specialised
modes of interrogation and
specialised criteria for the
production and circulation of
texts, as in the social
sciences and humanities.

13. +
Curriculum as Induction into Powerful
Knowledge
Young (2007) argues that the curriculum‟s job is to induct students into “powerful knowledge”16 (not
just “knowledge of the powerful”). Key features of “powerful knowledge”:
 it provides reliable and in a broad sense provides „testable‟ explanations or ways of thinking;
 it is the basis for suggesting realistic alternatives;
 it enables those who acquire it to see beyond their everyday experience;
 it is conceptual as well as based on evidence and experience;
 it is always open to challenge;
 it is acquired in specialist educational institutions, staffed by specialists;
 it is organised into domains with boundaries that are not arbitrary and these domains are
associated with specialist communities such as subject and professional associations, and in that
way is typically discipline-based.
16. Young, M. (2007). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. London:
Routledge.

14. +
Constructions of Curriculum
[or Different answers to the double problem of curriculum]
17. Eisner, E. W., & Vallance, E. (Eds.). (1974). Conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Berkley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
18. Schiro, M. S. (2008). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Eisner’s Model17 Schiro’s Model18
academic rationalism concerned with “enabling
the young to acquire the tools to participate in
the Western cultural tradition.” (p. 12)
Academic Idealist Curriculum
the development of cognitive processes
concerned with “the refinement of intellectual
operations.” (p. 5)
Techno-Rationalist Curriculum
technology concerned with “finding efficient
means to a set of predefined, unproblematic
ends.” (p. 7)
self-actualization concerned with education “as
an enabling process.” (p. 9)
Learner-Centred Curriculum
social reconstruction concerned with “social
reform and responsibility to the future of society.”
(p. 10)
Social Reconstructionist Curriculum

15. +
Academic Idealist Curriculum
Concept Detail
Knowledge is: Statements and Propositions
Source of Knowledge is: Objective reality as defined by an academic
discipline
Curriculum Goal: To advance students‟ knowledge and skills
within a discipline / form of knowledge
Teacher’s Role: Transmitter of Knowledge or “Sage on the
Stage”
Children’s Role: Passive Receivers
Assessment: Ranks students for a future in the
disciplinary field

16. +
Techno-Rational Curriculum
Concept Detail
Knowledge is: Capabilities for action
Source of Knowledge is: Objective reality as socially agreed upon by
experts
Curriculum Goal: To induct children into culturally powerful
knowledge in the most effective and
efficient way possible.
Teacher’s Role: Learning Manager
Children’s Role: Active Practice
Assessment: Certifies to a client (ie. Business) that the
student has attained certain skills

17. +
Learner-Centred Curriculum
Concept Detail
Knowledge is: Personal Meanings
Source of Knowledge is: Individual‟s personal creative response to
experience
Curriculum Goal: To stimulate individual growth and assist
students‟ to realise their full potential
Teacher’s Role: Facilitator or “Guide on the Side”
Children’s Role: Active Participants
Assessment: Diagnoses students‟ abilities to inform
future lesson planning to best support
children‟s learning

18. +
Social Reconstructionist Curriculum
Concept Detail
Knowledge is: Critical Intelligence & Moral Clarity
Source of Knowledge is: Individual‟s interpretation of society‟s past,
present, and future
Curriculum Goal: To liberate, emancipate and empower
students‟ to critique culture and transform
society towards a more just and fair world
Teacher’s Role: Transformative Intellectual and Colleague
Children’s Role: Active Participants & Leaders
Assessment: Measures progress with respect to a
student‟s perceived capacities and abilities

19. +
Tensions Between the four major
Curriculum Discourses
Social
Reconstructionist
Academic Idealist
Learner Centred
Techno-Rational

20. +
Academic Idealist
Learner Centred
Teaching Subjects?
Teaching Students?
Tensions Between Academic Idealist and
Learner Centred Curriculum Discourses

21. + Tensions Between Techno-Rational and
Social Reconstructionist Curriculum
Discourses
Social
Reconstructionist
Education as Social
Transformation?
Techno-Rational
Education as Social
Reproduction?

22. +
Reflection on Curriculum
[Three Questions to Consider]
 What approaches to
curriculum did you
experience as a
student in school?
 What approaches to
curriculum have you
encountered at
university?
 What is your own
preferred way of
thinking about
curriculum?
Social
Reconstructionist
Academic Idealist
Learner Centred
Techno-Rational

23. +
Curriculum Perspectives
How do teachers respond to and negotiate these multiple and
conflicting curriculum ideologies?
According to Schiro (2008):19
 Dualistic
 Hierarchical
 Relativistic
 Contextual
Social
Reconstructionist
Academic Idealist
Learner Centred
Techno-Rational
19. Schiro, M. S. (2008). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.

24. +
Recent Curriculum Reforms through
the Lens of Curriculum Theory
 What type of curriculum discourse
underpins Queensland‟s New Basics
and Rich Tasks?
 What type of curriculum discourse
underpins the structures of the new
Australian Curriculum?
 What type of curriculum discourse
underpins NAPLAN and other forms
of national testing?
 What type of curriculum discourse
underpins the NSW Quality Teaching
model?
 What type of curriculum discourse
underpins the Early Years Learning
Framework?
 What are the dominant
curriculum discourses
circulating in contemporary
Australia?
 Whose interests do these
discourses serve?
 If other discourses were
dominant, what might the
construction of contemporary
curriculum look like?

25. +
Etymology
Course of the Circus Maximus
Race Track, Running Race
Kleibard’s Metaphors20
Production, Growth, Travel
Tracking Meanings of Curriculum
[Curriculum as ‘the course’]
Circus Maximus
20. Kliebard, H. M. (1975). Metaphorical roots of curriculum design. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 84-
85). Berkley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
Piccadilly Circus
Does the end
have to be
known in
advance?
(Re-Tooling the
Metaphor)
Circus, Road
Trip, Map, Rhizom
e, or Lines of
Flight?
3-Ringed Circus

26. +
Curriculum needs to be understood
as a Complicated Conversation21
“Curriculum discourse should be marked by
richness, diversity, discordant voices, fecundity,
multiple rationalities, and theories, and should be
touched by humanity and practicality in a
hundred thousand contexts.” (p. 487)22
21. Pinar, W. F. (2004). What is curriculum theory? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
22. Morrison, K. R. B. (2004). The poverty of curriculum theory: A critique of Wraga and Hlebowitsh. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(4),
487-494.