This paper examines the gap between curriculum theory and its practical application in the classroom. Beginning with foundational definitions of curriculum as a purposeful body of knowledge delivered through effective methods, the paper critiques overly managerial, quantitative approaches that prioritize standardized testing over genuine learning. It then outlines how teachers can responsibly translate curriculum theory into practice by designing flexible, skill-based programs that remain responsive to student needs, community events, and collaborative learning opportunities. The paper argues that the best curricula empower active student engagement rather than passive reception of facts.
One of the first problems of translating curriculum theory into praxis is that many educators who think they understand curriculum theory merely know how to create a syllabus — a list of books and activities made up of "disjointed clusters of content" that is not a true curriculum (Ornstein & Hunkins, 1999, p. 2). Rather, "curriculum is a body of knowledge-content and/or subjects" (Blenkin et al., 1992, p. 23, cited by Smith, 1996, 2000). A curriculum in the fullest sense is the process by which knowledge concepts are "transmitted or delivered to students by the most effective methods that can be devised" by the teacher (Blenkin et al., 1992, p. 23, cited by Smith, 1996, 2000).
Thus, "the central theory [of curriculum] is simple. Human life, however varied, consists in the performance of specific activities. Education that prepares for life is one that prepares definitely and adequately for these specific activities … [and] shows the abilities, attitudes, habits, appreciations, and forms of knowledge" necessary for future learning (Bobbitt, 1918; 1928, cited by Smith, 1996, 2000).
A problem with this theory of curriculum design is that it renders the process of education as something to be measured quantitatively, like a "technical exercise," whereby classroom objectives for performance cover the teaching of certain skills in rote form, and the outcomes or products of student learning are measured by standardized testing (Smith, 1996, 2000). The state of Wisconsin even offered public school teachers an online tool called a "Curriculum Wizard" to help teachers generate conceptually based curricula that adhere to state standards according to performance objectives ("About the Curriculum Wizard," 2006, WNSS School Guide). However, an overly managerial approach to curriculum theory means the program and the standards for judging the success of a curriculum exist before the teacher has had the opportunity to know the students. Ideally, the process of learning should take place through collaboration between teachers and students (Ornstein & Hunkins, 1998).
Some degree of structured curriculum is necessary before a teacher enters the classroom on the first day of a new school year. A teacher must research the curriculum she or he will teach over the summer to ensure that it is grade-appropriate and meets certain standards. The teacher must also remain open to new possibilities — willing to try different approaches to structuring the syllabus and to changing the types of skills taught as part of the curriculum, based on reading educational journals, talking with colleagues, and reflecting on the previous year.
But the process of curriculum design does not end when school begins. The teacher must assess the abilities of the students and gain a sense of how the class functions as a unit. Are there many different levels of ability in the class? If so, the teacher may need to work with certain groups of students independently to remedy current deficits in knowledge. The teacher should also be ready to alter the activities used to convey curriculum skills if the students show a strong level of interest in a particular subject matter — such as dinosaurs — that can be deployed to teach those skills. World or community events, such as a war or the opening of a homeless shelter, might present opportunities to make the curriculum more relevant to students' daily lives.
"Principles for active, collaborative student learning"
You’re 79% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.