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

i ) Idealism
The doctrine of idealism suggests that matter is an illusion and that reality is that which
exists mentally. It emphasizes moral and spiritual reality as the chief explanation of the
world and considers moral values absolute, timeless and universal.
If we apply this view to education what would be the implications for the role of teachers
and curriculum in education?
Obviously, teachers would act as role models of enduring values. And the school must be
highly structured and ought to advocate only those ideas that demonstrate enduring values.
The materials used for instructions, therefore, would centre on broad ideas particularly
those contained in great works of literature and/or scriptures. Since it is based on broad
ideas and concepts, idealism is not in line with the beliefs of those who equate learning with
acquisition of specific facts from various Proponents of realism view the world in terms of
objects and matter. They believe that human behavior is rational when it conforms to the
laws of nature and is governed by social laws. Applied to education, those ideas begin to
reveal a second possible philosophy of education.
ii) Realism
What kind of philosophy will that be? 'Realists' consider Education a matter of reality rather
than speculation. Application, The paramount responsibility of the teacher, then, is to impart
to learners the knowledge about the world they live in. What scholars of various disciplines
have discovered about the world constitutes this knowledge. However, like the idealists, the
realists too stress that education should reflect permanent and enduring values that have
been handed down through generations, but only to the extent that they do not interfere
with the study of particular disciplines. Clearly, unlike the idealists who consider classics
ideal subject matter for studies, the realists view the subject expert as the source and
authority for determining the curriculum.
iii) Pragmatism
In contrast to the traditional philosophies, i.e., idealism and realism, Pragmatism gives
importance to change, processes and relativity, as it suggests that the value of an idea lies
in its actual consequences. The actual consequences are related to those aims that focus on
practical aspects in teaching and learning (Nash, 1995).
According to pragmatists, learning occurs as the person engages in transacting with the
environment. Basic to this interaction is the nature of change. In this sense, whatever
values and ideas are upheld currently would be considered tentative since further social
development must refine or change them. For instance, at a particular period of time it was
generally believed that the earth was flat which was subsequently disproved through
scientific research.
To consider, therefore, what is changeless (idealism) and inherited the perceived universe
(rea1ism) and to discard social and/or perceptual change is detrimental to the overall
development and growth of children. You can now visualize how pragmatism would have
influenced the framing of curriculum.
Curriculum, according to the pragmatists, should be so planned that it teaches the learner
how to think critically rather than what to think. Teaching should, therefore, be more
exploratory in nature than explanatory. And, learning takes place in an active way as
learners solve problems which help them widen the horizons of their knowledge and
reconstruct their experiences in consonance with the changing world. What then might be
the role of the teacher? The role is not simply to disseminate information but to construct
situations that involve both direct experience with the world of the learner and opportunities
to understand these experiences.
Having seen three basic philosophical positions that have influenced curriculum
development, let us now look at the fourth one.
iv) Existentialism
This doctrine emphasizes that there are no values outside human beings, and thus,
suggests that human beings should have the freedom to make choices and then be
responsible for the consequences of those choices.
According to this philosophy, learners should be put into a number of choice-making
situations, i.e., learners should be given freedom to choose what to study. It emphasizes
that education must centre on the perceptions and feelings of the individual in order to
facilitate understanding of personal reactions or responses to life situations. Of primary
concern in this process is the individual. Since life is based upon personal meanings, the
nature of education, the existentialists would argue, should be largely determined by the
learner. Individual learners should not be forced into pre-determined programmes of study.
Whatever the learner feels he/she must learn should be respected and facilitated by the
system. An existentialist curriculum, therefore, would consist of experiences and subjects
that lend themselves to philosophical dialogue and acts of making choices, stressing self-
expressive activities and media that illustrate emotions and insights. The teacher, then,
takes on a non-directive role. The tender is viewed as a partner in the process of learning.
As a professional, the teacher serves as a resource facilitating the individual's search for
personal meaning rather than imposing some predetermined values or interests on learners.
Existentialism has gained greater popularity in recent years. Today, many educationists talk
about focusing on the individual, promoting diversity in the curriculum and emphasizing the
personal needs and interests of learners. Here, perhaps, we can recall the philosophy that
underlies the open distance education system. Learner-autonomy, which the existentialists
seem to suggest, has been and remains the prime characteristic feature of the distance
mode of teaching-learning. Because of the explosion in knowledge and tremendous growth
in information technology, the curriculum of the past seems to be obsolete.
To plug the gap between the needs of the learner, the society and the curriculum content,
rethinking in the area of curriculum development appears to be unavoidable. What might
have been relevant in a particular situation need not necessarily always be so. In essence,
social changes demand changes in the existing pattern of education. The inherent
potentiality of the system of distance education enables it to accommodate and cater to
these changes. It should be clear from the above discussion that by and large, in
operational terms, both pragmatism and existentialism find ample expression in open
distance education.
.
Each of the four major philosophies just described begins with a particular view of human
nature and of values and truths, and then proceeds to suggest what such a view implies for
curriculum development. Before we conclude our discussion on the philosophical foundations
of curriculum, we should make note of a few educational philosophies in order to reinforce
what has been said so far.

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
Let us discuss each one of these in this very order.
i) Perennialism
It advocates the permanency of knowledge that has stood the test of time and values that
have moral and spiritual bases. The underlying idea is that education is constant, absolute
and universal. Obviously, "perennialism" in education is born of "idealism" in general
philosophy.
The curriculum of the perennialist is subject-centered. It draws heavily on defined
disciplines or logically organised bodies of content, but it emphasizes teaching leaming of
languages, literature, sciences and arts. The teacher is viewed as an authority in a
particular discipline and teaching is considered an art of imparting inforrnation knowledge
and stimulating discussion. In such a scheme of things, students are regarded immature as
they lack the judgement required to determine what should be studied, and also that their
interests demand little attention as far as curriculum development is concerned.
There is usually only one common curriculum for all students with little room for elective
subjects. According to this point of view putting some students through an academic
curriculum and others through a vocational curriculum is to deny the latter genuine equality
of educational opportunity. Such views appeal to those educators who stress intellectual
meritocracy. Their emphasis is on testing students, enforcing tougher academic
standards/programmes, and on identifying and encouraging talented students.
ii) Progressivism
This emerged as a protest against perennialist thinking in education. It was considered a
contemporary reformist movement in educational, social and political affairs during the
1920's and 30's. According to progressivist thought, the skills and tools of learning include
problem solving methods and scientific inquiry. In addition, learning experiences should
include cooperative behaviour and self- discipline, both of which are important for
democratic living. The curriculum, thus, was interdisciplinary in nature and the teacher was
seen as a guide for students in their problem-solving and scientific projects.
Although the progressive movement in education encompassed many different theories and
practices, it was united in its opposition to the following traditional attributes and practices:
the authoritarian teacher; excessive dependence on textbook methods; memorization of
factual data and learning by excessive drilling; static aims and materials that reject the
notion of a changing world; and attempts to isolate education from individual experiences
and social reality.
Although the major thrust of progressive education waned in the 1950's with the advent of
"essentialism", the philosophy has left its imprint on education and educational practices of
today. Contemporary progressivism is expressed in several movements including those for a
socially relevant curriculum, i.e., a match between subjects taught and student needs which
is one of the theoretical bases of distance education.
iii) Essentialism
This philosophy, rooted partly in idealism and partly in realism, evolved mainly as a critique
of progressive thought in education. Yet, the proponents of essentialism do not totally reject
progressive methods as they do believe that education should prepare the learner to adjust
to a changing society. Thus, in essentialism learning should consist in mastering the subject
matter that reflects currently available knowledge in various disciplines. Teachers play a
highly directive role by disseminating information to students. According to this viewpoint,
the main arms of the institution (be it a school or a college) get sidetracked, when, at the
expense of cognitive needs, it attempts to pay greater attention to the social and
psychological problems of students.
In recent years, the essentialist position has been stated vociferously by critics who claim
that educational standards softened during the 1960s and early 1970s. The most notable
achievements of the essentialists have been the widespread implementation of competency
based programmes, the establishment of grade-level achievement standards, and the
movement to reemphasize academic subjects in schools/colleges. In many ways, the ideas
of essentialism lie behind attacks on the quality of education by the media and by local
pressure groups, which includes, to a good extent, attaces on distance education.
iv) Reconstructionism
It views education as a means of reconstructing society. The reconstructionists believe that
as school/college is attended by virtually all youth, it must be used as a means to shape the
attitudes and values of each generation. As a result, when the youth become adults they
will share certain common values, and thus the society will have reshaped itself.
As for the curriculum, it must promote new social, economic and political education. The
subject matter is to be used as a vehicle for studying social problems which must serve as
the focus of the curriculum. The following gives you a view of the reconstructionist
programme of education: critical examination of the cultural heritage of a society as well as
the entire civilization; scrutiny of controversial issues; commitment to bring about social
and constructive change; cultivation of a planning-in-advance attitude that considers the
realities of the world we live in; and enhancement of cultural renewal and internationalism.
Stemming from this view, reconstruction expands the field of curriculum to include intuitive,
personal, mystical, linguistic, political and social systems of theorizing. In general, the
curriculum advocated by reconstructionists emphasizes the social sciences-history, political
science, economics, sociology, psychology and philosophy-and not the pure sciences. The
thrust is on developing individual self-realization and freedom through cognitive and
intellectual activities, and thus, on liberating people from the restrictions, limitations and
controls of society. The idea is that we have had enough of discipline-based education and
narrow specialization, and that we don't need more specialists now, we need more "good"
people if we want to survive.
Before we proceed further, let us ask ourselves a question. What insights do we gain from
the discussion on the philosophical foundations of curriculum'? Foundations of Curriculum
Ideas about curriculum and teaching do not arise in a vacuum. As curriculum development
is heavily influenced by philosophy, those involved in such planning should be clear about
contemporary, dominant philosophy.
If we are unclear about our philosophy of education,our curriculum plans and teaching
procedures will tend to be inconsistent and confused. This being so, we should be aware of
the fact that development and awareness of a personal philosophy of education is a crucial
professional responsibility. Further, we need to be constantly open to new ideas and insights
that may lead to a revision or refinement of our philosophies. Our position should be that no
single philosophy, old or new, should serve as the exclusive guide for making decisions
about curriculum. What we, as curriculum specialists, need to do, is to adopt an eclectic
approach, in which there is no emphasis on the extremes of subject matter or socio-
psychological development, excellence or quality. In essence, what we need is a prudent
philosophy-one that is politically and economically feasible and that serves the needs of
students and society. It is here that open distance education comes forth with its promises
for the future.

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.
Let us take up each of them in the given order and examine its contribution to curriculum
development.
i) Behaviorism and curriculum
The behaviorist school, which represents traditional psychology, is rooted in a corresponding
philosophical speculation about the nature of learning. It has particularly dominated
psychology in the first half of the twentieth century. After a few decades of being in the
wilderness lt has recently gained currency once again with the advent of individualized
education.
Without going into the details we shall touch upon the main, characteristic features of the
behaviorist school of thought.
Essentially, learning is considered a habit-formation and teaching is regarded as arranging
learning experiences in such a way as to promote desirable behavior. Further, behaviorism
maintains that what is learnt in one situation can be transferred to other situations as well.
Broadly, behaviorists advocate that: behavior is likely to be influenced by the conditions
under which learning takes place; attitudes to and abilities of learning can change or
improve over time through the application of proper stimuli; learning experiences can be
designed and controlled to create desired learning; selective reinforcement is essential; and
rote learning and memorization of knowledge are unnecessary.
Having thus touched upon the crux of behaviorism, we shall now turn our attention to its
contribution to curriculum development. It provides the following significant guidelines.
A curriculum, according to behaviorists, should be based on the following concerns:
i) Remedial measures, acquisition of skills, considerations of basic or advanced learning;
ii) Well-defined, short-term and long-term objectives;
iii) Appropriate instructional materials and media to suit the learner's abilities;
iv) Shaping behavior through prescribed tasks, phase by phase activities, close supervision
of activities and positive reinforcement; and The Field of Curriculum
V) Diagnosing, assessing and reassessing the learners’ needs, objectives, activities, tasks
and instruction with a view to improving the curriculum.
We can observe manifestations of these guidelines in the theories, principles or trends
related to: individualized education (and to some extent, open system of education);
instructional design and systems; teacher-training techniques such as simulation teaching,
microteaching, competency-performance based teacher education; educational technology
including programmed instruction (which provides, with modifications, a base for self-
instructional materials in use in the distance mode of teaching/learning).
ii) Cognitivism and curriculum
Today most psychologists explain the phenomenon of human growth and development in
cognitive, social, psychological and physical terms. They also note that learning is primarily
cognitive in nature. Growth and development refer to changes in the structure and function
of human characteristics. Most cognitivists believe that growth and development occur in
progressive stages. One example is Piaget's (Piaget, 1950) description of cognitive
development in terms of stages from birth to maturity. Most curriculum specialists tend to
show greater adherence to cognitivism than to behaviorism. This might be because the
cognitive approach leads to logical methods for organizing and interpreting learning; and
the cognitive approach is rooted in the tradition of teaching based on subject matter.
Even contemporary behaviorists incorporate cognitive processes in their theories of
learning. Because learning in schools/colleges emphasizes the cognitive domain, it follows
that most educationists feel that learning is synonymous with cognitive development. As a
corollary, a problem solving approach in teachingllearning gains currency.
But, if we take an actual teaching/learning situation into consideration we tend to realize
that this learning model is incomplete and that something is lost in its processes of actual
transfer in the classroom. In reality, the teaching/learning process boils down to the teacher
talking predominantly and students mostly responding to what is said by the teacher.
What should be of concern to the curriculum specialists?
They should be aware of the fact that a school/college should be a place where students are
not afraid of asking questions, making mistakes, taking cognitive risks and playing with
ideas. Further colleges/schools should be more humane places where students can explore
and fulfill their human potentials. Obviously, curriculum has to play a vital role to actually
realize this objective.
iii) Phenomenology and curriculum
Phenomenologist point out that the way we look at ourselves is crucial for understanding
our behavior and that we respond to an organization or pattern of stimuli and not to an
isolated stimulus.
It emphasizes that learning must be explained in terms of the "wholeness" of the problem.
Here you can draw a parallel with cognitivism. But what differentiates phenomenology from
cognitivism is that the former stresses the affective and the latter the cognitive aspects of
learning.
Because each individual has specific needs and interests related to his or her self-fulfillment
and self-realisations, there can't be a generally prescribed humanistic curriculum.
Humanistic learning may enhance the mental health of the learners, harmonize personal
feelings among students and teachers, and improve various aspects of human awareness
among students, teachers, and curriculum specialists, yet its processes rely mainly on
personal experiences and subjective interpretations that leave them open to criticism.
Therefore, there is a great need to examine and understand what is relevant in humanistic
curricula.
Please note that most textbook writers tend to be cognition-oriented. However, one should
propose that behaviourist components are needed for planning and developing a sound
curriculum. Further, humanistic components of teaching and learning must also be
incorporated into the curriculum. Let us say, therefore, that each theory of learning has
something significant to contribute towards explaining various aspects of human behavior
and learning.
Basic human needs and curriculum
Physical well-being and health are generally recognized and frequently dealt with through
various programmes such as those on fitness, nutrition and health problems. Mental health
needs such as those pertaining to acceptance, belonging, security and status have been
widely studied but little emphasized in the area of curriculum.
In this sub-section, we shall touch upon just two points which concern the topic under
consideration:
i) Self-actualization; and
ii) Developmental tasks.
Here, we shall discuss these and draw inferences as to how each one contributes to the
enrichment of a curriculum.
i Self-actualization
The notion of self-actualization characterizes individuals’ need for self- fulfillment in life by
actualizing/achieving their own potential. A curriculum should therefore provide learning
activities that allow students to identify themselves with those things they can do well. It
should also assist them to succeed in other activities that are difficult for them. Learners are
thus helped to find personal meaning in the learning experience.
Those responsible for curriculum development must pay attention to the concept of self-
actualization. We all recognize the importance of school/college and community based goals
for learners. Self- actualization on the other hand includes satisfying the desire to know and
understand in relation to personal needs and interest. Moreover it has been noticed that
when personal purposes are ignored, learners seem to be less successful in meeting the set
goals. If curricular plans reflect a balance between institutional and personal needs, the
impact on both may be substantially enhanced.
ii) Developmental tasks
We can define a developmental task as a task which arises in relation to a certain period in
the life of an individual, success in which leads to his/her happiness and to success in later
tasks, while failure in it leads to unhappiness in the individual and difficulties in subsequent
tasks. This fact is regarded as one of the most specific considerations in organizing tasks.
The needs of individuals are governed by the stage of development and age they have
reached, and also grow out of their need to respond to societal expectations. The
implication is that educators/curriculum planners should understand behaviors manifested
by a learner indicating her/his readiness and need to deal with a particular developmental
task.
As we facilitate the learners' success in these need tasks, their overall success can be
ensured.
Further, in developing a curriculum, the development of an environment in which learners
feel genuinely secure should be ensured. When a curriculum develops such an environment,
learning takes place smoothly because the needs of students and what has been provided
by the curriculum are complementary to each other.
In our discussion of the psychological foundations, we dealt with the contribution made by
learning theories towards curriculum and also tried to see how much more effective a
curriculum may be framed if we consider the nature of basic human need while forming it.
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).
The argument that classics had no greater disciplinary or mental value than other subjects
eventually appeared and meant that mental discipline (which emphasized drill and
memorization) was no longer considered conducive for the overall growth and development
of children. In essence, societal changes and the emerging demands there from; the stress
on psychology and science; and the concern for social and educational reform made evident
the need for a new curriculum. Thus, the aims of education went hand in hand with the
particular type of society involved: conversely, the society that evolved influenced the aims
of education.
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.
Possible future trends
Keeping in view the prevalent political, economic and academic climate, it is not difficult for
us to visualize (of course, only to a certain extent) future trends and the influence they may
have on education, particularly on curriculum development. (However, we should also
confess here that such a speculation is fraught with risks that normally go with it.)
Although in this Unit we have been underlining the fact that social changes will have a vital
role in determining a curriculum. If the present day growth of information is any indication
the information flow will increase rapidly in the future. Clearly, the increasing flow of
information negates the traditional notion of content-mastery. Students, therefore, will need
to acquire critical thinking, and problem solving abilities rather than static and/or absolute
knowledge and skills of factual recall.
Further, in the 21st centuries, the need for change will accelerate. For example, it took us
more than one century to shift from an agricultural society to an industrial one. But it took
hardly two decades to shift from an industrial to an information society.
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.
Traditionally, organizations have followed hierarchical structuring with power and
communication flowing in a pattern from top to bottom. Increasingly, however, centralized
institutions are being replaced by smaller decentralized units. Much of the impetus for this
change has come from the inability of hierarchical structures to effectively solve problems.
Rigid and efficient organizations are no longer as efficacious as fluid and flexible ones in
which experimentations and autonomy call thrives. Applied to education, this kind of
decentralization gives recognition to an individual’s need for self-determination and
ownership in the decision making processes.
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, the needs of every individual in the school/college will have to
be recognized. In other words, there will be a change in the treatment of students as a
homogeneous entity. Rapid growth in information will result in the emergence, every now
and then, of varied curricula for purposes of reeducation and retaining. The number of
consumers will obviously be more than the programmes available. In such a situation, the
mode of the teaching/learning process cannot be the one which is prevalent now, i.e., face-
to-face. Obviously, a viable alternative mode is distance education.

Chapter 2: Philosophical Foundation of Curriculum

1. 1. Chapter 2: Philosophical Foundation of Curriculum NICOLETA MARTINEZ, DANI MORRIS-
WHITE, SHAUNA MARTIN TEXT FACILITATION GROUP 1 - 1.29.15
2. 2. Philosophy and the Curriculum Worker There are two major issues that influence the curriculum worker.
 Conflict – Curriculum workers can be very passionate in their views about curriculum. If the curriculum
worker is too inflexible with their philosophy it will be very difficult to work together with others who do
not share the same ideals.  Lack of clear philosophy – If the curriculum worker is not clear on what
exactly they believe in. The specialist would be to easily influenced by the philosophies of others and
 therefor would have difficulty making important curricular decisions. A good curriculum worker should be
clear about what philosophies they believe in but also be able to adapt their views when presented with
information that may question their original principles.
3. 3. Philosophy, the main curriculum source In order to develop curriculum one must begin with a basic
philosophy or set of beliefs in which to govern the curricular decisions. According to our text
Ornstein&Hunkins (2013), Dewey had the idea that one’s philosophy is the starting point in curriculum
development. And although Tyler believed that philosophy was one of a five component system in creating
curriculum he places more emphasis on philosophy and refers to it as “the first screen” in curriculum
development. Goodlad’s ideas were that one must first reflect upon the social order before curriculum
development can occur but Dewey reminds us that even the idea of thinking about the social aspect of
education versus the individual has been a philosophical issue in it’s self. So, just the idea of beginning
with the nation-state already had philosophical ideals at heart.
4. 4. Major Philosophies Paradigms on the basis of which we interpret and understand the world Idealism
Realism Pragmatism Existentialism
5. 5. Major Philosophies  they shape and influence educational philosophies  how/what we believe about
what is real and valuable or the meaning of life shapes who we are as teachers  how/what we believe
about how knowledge is acquired shapes our approach to teaching  our beliefs about what is
right/good/beautiful/valuable impact the learning in our classroom
6. 6. Idealism Knowledge  timeless ideas & concepts  rethinking latent ideas  abstract  gained through
reasoning, intuition and religious revelation Values  absolute & eternal  based on conformity to ideals 
can be classified and ordered into a hierarchy
7. 7. Realism Knowledge  physical objects &matter  concrete  gained through senses and the exercise of
rational thought Values  absolute & eternal  based on conformity to nature
8. 8. Pragmatism Knowledge  based on one's experiences  process  gained through the use of scientific
method & trial and error Values  situational & relative  subject to change& verification  determined by
norms established by society
9. 9. Existentialism Knowledge  life-long goal  gained through personal decisions and perceptions Values
 freely chosen  determined by one's responsible choice and reflection
10. 10. Educational Philosophies  They emerge from one or more of the four major philosophical traditions. 
They range from traditional and conservative to contemporary and liberal. Perennialism Essentialism
Progressivism Reconstructivism
11. 11. Perennialism - stems from realism Content  universal curriculum  one for all the students  subject-
based: language, literature, mathematics, sciences are the context for developing intellectual skills 
stresses the 3 Rs: reading, writing, arithmetic Method  Socratic method: explicit teaching, oral exposition,
explication  teacher-centered
12. 12. Essentialism - stems from idealism and realism Content  core skills, essential facts and concepts 
solid subjects aligned with high-stake tests  subject-centered: English, mathematics, history, science 
 stresses the 3 Rs: reading, writing, arithmetic  clear measurable goals Method  Socratic dialogue 
discussion  lecture  recitation
13. 13. Progressivism- stems from pragmatism Content  need-based and relevant  relates to students'
personal lives and experiences  skills to cope with change  interdisciplinary and interactive  emphasis
on how to think (affective outcomes), not what to think(cognitive outcomes) Method  problem solving 
scientific method  cooperative learning  projects: students interact with nature and society  experiential
methods
14. 14. Reconstructionism- stems from pragmatism with some views linked to existentialism Content  focus
on present and future trends and issues of national and international interests  global  skills needed to
identify and ameliorate society's problems  emphasis on personal expression and reflection Method 
discovery  community based learning  critical thinking, praxis  social research
15. 15. Reconstructionism - in what way are reconstructionists both realistic and idealistic? Mainstream and
radical? Reconstructionists want to improve and reform the society through education. They question
everything and everyone in order to create change rather than conform or adjust to norms. 
Reconstructionists are idealistic because they take a holistic view at the world. They set an idealistic goal to
fix its problems, but you cannot fix everything through education.  Reconstructionists are realistic because
they aim to educate students about problems in the world and look for ways to change and fix them. Their
aim is to understand the world.  Reconstructionists are mainstream because they want students to have an
international background and understanding. There is an overall tendency nowadays to bring the outside
world into the classroom.  Reconstructionists are radical though in their approach to curriculum. Solving
the problems of the world is not always an achivable goal.
16. 16. Equality Versus Excellence Reaffirming the Best & Brightest  Essentialist model values cognitive
development over students' social and psychological needs  Ignores the concept of the uneven playing
field  Does not promote equality because it does not consider students' individual circumstances, needs,
and special talents. Humanistic Curriculum  Rooted in the Progressivism model.  Emphasizes
emotionally healthy outcomes over cognitive outcomes  Respects students' individuality and personal
circumstances.  Relies on subjective assessments of progress rather than objective data of academic
achievement.
17. 17. Equality versus Excellence Promoting equality and excellence at the same time is impractical and
unrealistic. That is not to say that both are not important, but in order to achieve one the other will go
lacking. As the previous slide shows, different philosophical models have conflicting goals. Some models
favor cognitive ability over students' social and psychological issues. While other models nurture the whole
child but at the expense of academic growth and achievement.
18. 18. The Contradictory Philosophy The reconstructionism model appears to be the most contradictory model
for mainstream education. Education has been deeply rooted in certain traditions for generations (teacher as
the authority, grading practices, content-specific classes). The reconstructionism model radically changes
those traditions and shifts the focus to social change by way of emphasizing social sciences and social
research methods. Currently, social sciences are not a focus in curriculum with the push being towards
 science and math. In order to adopt the reconstructionist model, significant shifts would have to occur in
the design of the educational system.
19. 19. Philosophy of the Future It is very difficult to see past the current essentialist philosophy in education
because that is very much where curriculum and instruction is presently living. However a claim can be
made that the model of progressivism will emerge as the most influential school of thought in the
curriculum field. In order to compete a global society, students will need to be able to problem solve and
use scientific inquiry. Additionally, it will be imperative that students see the interconnectedness of the
different content areas if they are to compete in the global market. Finally, students will need to have strong
social and interpersonal skills in order to work with people of other cultures and backgrounds. Therefore,
students’ social and psychological well being can no longer be excluded from the classroom. With all that
said, it appears that the curriculum field will be best served by the influences of the progressivism model.

Philosophical Foundations of Curriculum: Philosophy provides educators, teachers

and curriculum makers with framework for planning, implementing and evaluating
curriculum in school.I helps in answering what schools are for, what subjects are
important, how students should learn and what materials and methods should be
used. In decision-making, philosophy provides the starting point and will be used
for the succeeding decision-making. The following four educational philosophies
relate to curriculum: 1. Perennialism. The focus in the curriculum is classical
subjects, literary analysis and considers curriculum as constant. 2. Essentialism.
The essential skills of the 3 R's and essential subjects of English, Science, History,
Math and Foreign Language is the focus of the curriculum. 3. Progressivism. The
curriculum is focused on students' interest, human problems and affairs. The
subjects are interdisciplinary, integrative and interactive. 4. Reconstructionism.
The focus of the curriculum is on present and future trends and issues of national
and international interests. Educational philosophy lays the strong foundation of
any curriculum. A curriculum planner or specialist, implementer or the teacher,
school heads, evaluator anchors his/her decision making process on a sound
philosophy. (Activity: Compare the four Philosophies of Education based on the aim
of education, role of education and curriculum trends. How does a strong belief or
philosophy influence curriculum? Historical Foundations of Curriculum.