Concepts of Curriculum and Purposes of Curriculum Study (pg 3 - 12)

One thing is for certain after reading this particular section and it is this; the actual definition of what precisely defines a curriculum has eluded educators and pragmatics for a very long time. Instead, what we are left with is a series of questions remaining to be answered.

1. “Why engage in curriculum study?
2. What good does it do?
3. What is a curriculum? For example, is a textbook or a syllabus a curriculum?
4. What should a curriculum include?” (pg 3)

I can totally relate to Peter’s frustration and also wonder why we as educators cannot come up with an appropriate response. Posner, in trying to answer these questions, gives his own definition yet, somehow, still remains uncommitted to actually saying “A curriculum consists of blah-blah-blah.” I agree that a set of standards (as guidelines and not a doctrine to be followed) are required in any profession. This does not seem to solve the problem but rather just adds to the confusion.

Trying to understand the difference between curriculum study and curriculum seems to be quite a daunting task. No one among what Posner calls the curriculum “cultists” is able to come to agreement. Rather he supplies us with a means of deflection—a way of saying there is no correct answer based on the large number of curriculum alternatives. This “reflective eclecticism seems to be ‘at the heart’ of curriculum study.” (pg 4)

Curriculum, as argued by “others” then, seems to be "the students" actual rather than planned opportunities, experiences, or learnings.” (pg 5) The problem here then becomes whether educators embrace the idea that curriculum is either an ends or a means (depending upon, through which end of the lens you are viewing it) or else a plan or report of “actual educational events.” (pg 5) Confused yet? Well, to further add to that confusion, “outcomes are fully understood only in retrospect or as teaching unfolds” whereas, “when we focus our concept of curriculum on education plans, standards, and intended outcomes, we are taking a political stand.” (pg 5)

Even though Posner suggests a solution, that is, to “stipulate a decision and then stick to it” (pg 5), the problem is that “definitions are not philosophically or politically neutral.” (pg 5) On pages 6 and 9, Posner examines seven common concepts of curriculum, namely:

1. Scope and sequence (Figure 1.1 pg 7)
2. Syllabus (Figure 1.2 pg 8)
3. Content outline (Figure 1.3 pg 9)
4. Standards (Figure 1.4 pg 10)
5. Textbooks
6. Courses of study
7. Planned experiences

“Each of these seven definitions has different consequences in terms of accountability.” (p 12) Overall, whoever is guiding the curriculum, that is the main “stakeholders”, then, these same stakeholders are setting their own expectations as to the delivery of that curriculum. This can be through the guise of guidelines which educators must adhere to, texts which educators must follow, or through expected outcomes of learning set in place and thus, to be reached. Posner then supports this idea further when stating that the general consensus amongst the experts is the notion of “no definition of curriculum is ethically or politically neutral.” (pg 12) The fact remains there are too many cooks in the kitchen trying to decide on a menu, meanwhile, there are hungry people wanting to eat.

Questions for discussion:

1. When it comes to teaching, who should be in the driver's seat as far as the delivery of the curriculum?
2. As educators, do you see curriculum as an ends, a means, or as a plan of learner experiences?
3. Recently I saw a news item on television where parents stated they feel that students should be learning ways of interacting socially since school provides the largest time block in the day to do so. Parents are not concerned about academics. Is this a failure of the curriculum, the education system or merely a deflection of responsibility by parents? What do you think?