Notes for further reading

Overview

In seeking to understand the curriculum, an insight into historical developments and a consideration of the development of education policy provides a useful starting point. Cunningham; Aldrich; Coffey; Tomlinson: Docking; and Jones all provide a historical perspective.

Cunningham, P. (1988) Curriculum Change in the Primary School Since 1945: Dissemination of the Progressive Ideal. London : Falmer

 

Aldrich, R. (2001) A Century of Education. London : Routledge/Falmer

 

Coffey, A. (2001) Education and Social Change. Buckingham: Open University Press

 

Tomlinson, S. (2001) Education in a Post-Welfare Society. Buckingham: Open University Press

 

Docking, J.W. (1990) Primary Schools and Parents. London : Hodder and Stoughton

 

Jones, K. (2003) Education in Britain , 1944 to the Present. Cambridge : Polity Press

Numerous writers, such as Oliver and White, examine education policy and change:

Oliver, A. (2004) Primary Education in England, in Browne, A. & Haylock, D. (eds) Professional Issues for Primary Teachers. London: Paul Chapman

White, J. (ed) (2004) Rethinking the school curriculum: values, aims and purposes. London: Routledge Falmer

They provide challenging and illuminating perspectives for anyone considering the impact of education policy on the nature of current and future curricula in schools. Writers in this area include Whitty and Altrichter & Elliot:

Whitty, G. (2002) Making Sense of Education Policy: studies in the sociology and politics of education. London : Paul Chapman

 

Altrichter, H. and Elliot, J. (eds) (2000) Images of Educational Change . Buckingham: Open University Press

Chitty; Alexander; Osborn et al; Claxton et al.; Burbules & Alberto Torres; Matheson; Ward; Meyer & Kamens (Reading 8.1), Thomas (Reading 4.2) and Schiro provide revealing international comparisons and perspectives:

Chitty, C. (2001) Understanding Schools and Schooling. London : Routledge Falmer.

 

Alexander, R. (2000) Culture and Pedagogy: International Comparisons in Primary Education. Oxford : Blackwell

 

Osborn, M., Broadfoot, P., McNess, E., Ravn, B., Dlanel, C., and Triggs, P. (2003) Comparing Learners Across Europe : A World of Difference? Buckingham, Open University Press

 

Claxton, G., Pollard, A. and Sutherland, R. (eds) (2003) Learning and Teaching Where Worldviews Meet. Stoke-on-Trent : Trentham

 

Burbules, N. and Alberto Torres, C. (2000) Globalization and Education. London : Routledge/Falmer

 

Matheson, D. (2004) An Introduction to the Study of Education. London: David Fulton

 

Ward, S. (2004) Education Studies: A student’s guide. London: RoutledgeFalmer

 

Schiro, M.S. (2007) Curriculum Theory: conflicting visions and enduring concerns. London:Sage.

Hargreaves & Fullan and Quicke, in different ways, examine what curriculum it is worth having in the 21st. century:

Hargreaves, A. and Fullan, M. (1998) What's Worth Fighting For In Education? Buckingham: Open University Press

 

Quicke, J. (1999) A Curriculum for Life: Schools for a Democratic Learning Society. Buckingham: Open University Press

Alexander and others have produced helpful, and challenging, analyses of primary education and primary teaching. Riley and Prentice make clear the central need for a broad and balanced curriculum for primary pupils.

Alexander R. J., Wilcocks, J., Kinder, K. and Nelson, N. (1995) Versions of Primary Education. London : Routledge

 

Alexander, R. (1998) Basics, Cores and Choices: Towards a New Primary Curriculum, in Education 3-13, Vol. 26, No. 2

 

Riley, J. and Prentice, R. (1999) The Curriculum for 7-11 Year Olds. London: Paul Chapman

In considering how the concept of the 'whole curriculum' is much wider than the official curriculum, Jackson (Reading 6.2) and Meighan point to the profound effects that the 'hidden curriculum' has on pupils' self esteem. Bonnett provides an incisive philosophical overview of issues that are fundamental to the construction of the curriculum, whilst Moore addresses key issues and dominant theories of teaching and learning that impact on its nature.

Alexander (Reading 8.9) considers the nature of 'good primary practice', as do Johnston, Chater & Bell in a quite different way. Ross presents an analysis of the curriculum in the context of how society is constituted and in terms of views of assessment. Katz (Reading 8.4) examines the ‘curriculum-as-experienced’ in terms of how children's developmental needs determine what becomes meaningful to them Kelly takes a global look at the curriculum, questioning the form it should take in a genuinely democratic society.

Egan attempts a different approach to the problems of structuring a curriculum linking pupil development, imagination, and learning to it.

Section 1: Developing an official curriculum

In considering the two traditional alternative strategies for curricular planning within primary schools - by focusing on separate subjects or by planning forms of integration between subjects - a good place to start is with the Plowden report (Reading 8.3).

A consideration of Plowden leads inevitably to thinking about appropriate aims, values and views of knowledge that might pertain to the curriculum. Bernstein (Reading 8.2) provides a seminal analysis of curriculum structure, knowledge and power. Taylor points to some international concurrence on these issues, though Proctor notes that they are always the product of an enormous complexity of debate, interest and political activity both within and outside the teaching profession.

For incisive reviews of the relationship between aims, values and structures in the National Curriculum for England , see Bramall & White; and (again) White.

And for a detailed consideration of the key question, 'whose values?', that underlies the process of curriculum construction, see Cairns , Gardner & Lawton .

It is clear that curricula are informed by different cultural imperatives. For example, in Scotland the 5-14 curriculum is presented as non-statutory guidance and this seems to have an effect on the extent to which aims are elucidated and underlying values are stated (Reading 9.2). And whilst Ross points out the 'pattern of international conformity' in national curricula, Galton et al. point out the problems of transfer of educational policies from one country to another.

Davies, Gregory & McGuin take a different perspective, focusing on the purpose of education, education policy and the contribution of education to society.

Underpinning the aims of any national curricula are a set of understandings about the nature of knowledge. If we look at views of knowledge, we find that there are four basic positions. First, there are those who argue from a `rationalist' perspective - see Blenkin & Kelly for an analysis, and Wilson (Reading 8.5) for an example.

Second, there are those who are sometimes termed 'empiricists', such as Dewey and Piaget.

Third, a more sociological view is termed 'interactionist', a view taken by Light & Littleton and that has some resonance with the work on learning of Bruner and Vygotsky (a useful guide to Vygotsky is written by Daniels).

Finally, knowledge can be seen as being influenced by powerful social groups who define certain types of knowledge as being important or of high status. We will call this view of school knowledge 'elitist' - see Youngand Bernstein (Reading 8.2).

Views of knowledge have a direct influence on views as to the efficacy of subject-based and integrated curriculum approaches. See Katz (Reading 8.4), ACCAC (Reading 9.3), Alexander (Reading 8.9), and Dadds (Reading 9.4). Bernstein (Reading 8.2) uses the term 'collection curriculum' to refer to a separate subject curriculum, which has a philosophical rationale outlined by Barrow and Woods.

In terms of the primary curriculum as it is manifested in schools, a 'two curriculum syndrome' has, historically, been a consistent feature of practice.

The focus on 'the basics' often impinges upon national and state government policy. As an example it is worth considering two key initiatives in England - the Literacy and Numeracy Strategies.

OFSTED's analyses of the strategies note the 'major impact' that they have had on the teaching of English and Mathematics, whilst the OISEUT reports provide an account and findings from an external review procedure. These reviews are, on the whole, favourable, though studies such as that carried out by Anderson & Urquhart point to some negative effects of the literacy hour.

The place of the arts in the modern primary school curriculum is considered by Robinson, whilst Craft considers the whole notion of creativity across the curriculum:

The development of national curricula in the UK has many antecedents. For a range of political perspectives, it is interesting to read the DES document 'Better Schools'; Lawlor; Hatcher, Jones, Regan and Fichards; Ashcroft & Palacio; Docking; Fielding; and party political documentation (e.g. Reading 8.8).

A range of perspectives on recent changes to the English education system appear in Richards, whilst Elliot critiques the currently fashionable school effectiveness and improvement movements in providing a framework for curriculum policy making and development. Goldstein et al., meanwhile, examine the educational standards debate that is an integral part of any discussion about national curricula.

Further work on similar themes is provided by Matheson, whose book includes a brief history of state intervention in British schooling; Tomlinson, who provides a concise and critical overview of education policy that notes the changes that have occurred in the move to a society increasingly dominated by private enterprise and competition; and Coffey, who undertakes a systematic sociological analysis of contemporary educational change.

In structuring National Curricula in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, priority has been given to English, Mathematics and Science. Restructured in England and Wales in 1995 in the 'Dearing review', national curricula for the UK experienced a further substantial revision in 2000 - see Reading 9.2, Adams and CCEA. 

The non-statutory guidelines for Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) and Citizenship are the parts of the National Curriculum that link most strongly with stated aims and values - see QCA; Beck & Earl; Inman, Buck & Tandy. For a consideration of the citizenship agenda see Klein; Claire; Holden and Clough; and Gardner et al. By contrast, the statutory subject orders sometimes sit uncomfortably with the aims and values that are intended to inform them.

To a large extent the curriculum for schools has been placed in a linear form within each subject - and this is, of course, backed up by formal assessment procedures. There are several disadvantages in this approach, some of which are articulated by Ernest. In addition, Dadds expresses concerns about the 'hurry along' curriculum (Reading 9.4).

However, focusing on implementing a broadly constructivist approach in the classroom, Selley shows how this is not necessarily incompatible with highly structured national curricula. McNamara, and Woods & Jeffrey, reflect the scope of the teaching role in the modern primary school, whilst Paechter provides a re-conceptualisation of the field of curriculum and its negotiation.

Osborn et al document teachers' reactions to the introduction of the National Curriculum, and the companion volume, Pollard and Triggs, describes the impact of its introduction on pupils' experiences of life in classrooms.

For a radical, revisionist view of the primary curriculum that questions the basis of many national curricula, again see Quicke; and for a seminal perspective from a renowned American educationalist, see Eisner. Another American perspective, this time on the implicit and explicit influences on the culture of the curriculum, is provided by Joseph.

It is interesting to note that, from the advice on 'loosening' of the structure of the foundation subject curriculum in 2001 to the publication of 'Excellence and Enjoyment' in 2003, government advice for schools in England and Wales has acknowledged that a tightly subject-based curriculum is not the only way to organise the curriculum for learning in primary schools.

Section 3: Subject knowledge

A simple association between sound subject knowledge and effective teaching may be unproved. However, the teacher has a crucial role in scaffolding children's knowledge and understanding. It might be suggested that this is only possible where teachers' own subject knowledge is secure, supporting the view of Alexander, Rose and Woodhead.

There does, in fact, seem to be something of a consensus that teachers with sound subject knowledge can do this more effectively. In science, for example, this consensus is strongly supported by Watt, Harlen and Osborne & Simon. This position is integrated into inspection criteria at many levels:

The most influential research-based support for this position was provided by Shulman (Reading 8.6).

Banks, Leach & Moon have re-conceptualised and extended Schulman's model.

There has always been a desire amongst teachers to develop their subject knowledge - see Harland & Kinder. However, there are issues, some of which are dealt with by Wilson . Shallcross et al. found that teacher trainees can fail to see any clear relevance to their subject knowledge studies where there is no immediate link to their teaching in schools. Sound subject knowledge is perceived as a 'good thing', but most relevantly acquired in preparation for teaching specific units of work.

In schools this heightened focus on subject knowledge has had some important effects see O'Hara & O'Hara (Reading 8.6), Campbell has noted a move to primary teachers as specialists, which may in some ways empower them but which he notes may lead to certain tensions. Bell & Ritchie consider in some detail issues connected with effective subject leadership.

In considering the relationship between teaching, testing and subject knowledge, Brown et al. make some interesting comments on changes in the culture of the primary classroom.

Murphy et al. provide a perspective on such changes in looking at effective science teaching in Year 6 classrooms.

Professional support through subject associations is now more vital than ever for teachers working in the pressured environment of the primary school - see Web Links on this site.

In addition...

For an exploration of pupils’ perspectives on their experiences of schooling in England and France see:

Broadfoot, P., Osborn, M., Planel, C. and Sharpe, K. (2000) Promoting Quality in Learning: Does England Have the Answer? London: Cassell.