Curriculum evolution liner to interconnection

By Sunil Sarkar, July, 2013, AIIAS, Philippines

Initially education used to be the medium of transferring religious, natural and technical knowledge in the family. The family member taught among themselves as they connected one another their ideas, values and expectations to one another for themselves and for their neighborhoods. Gradually human discovered that knowledge differs from person to person and it is important to have a core to content to each other and to make a compatible society. They had started group dialogue, defining abstract knowledge, shared past experiences and built traditional knowledge to pass on to next generation through manuscripts, paintings and informal school system. Latter religious, natural and scientific schools were built to understand the past, present and future of the societies instead of the families to practice peace and harmony among the educated and civilized people. The common flag of education were raised as it was lead and controlled by a curriculum to guide, standard, traditional knowledge, skills, ideologies, values, structures, methods and plans for societies, to societies and to connected societies. But Michael Fullan (2006) describes about the changes of educational institutions and the past century grappling of curriculum to fit the new knowledge. He explains how the standards, qualities and strategies often failed to promote effective learning due to traditional structure upheld instead of interrelation. He even suggests rejecting this present educational system and starting of a new system about what we have learned from our past centuries curriculum practices and whose bases are in motivation, collaboration, engagement, interrelation and cooperation. Posner (2009) explains about the components of curriculum organization to make wise decision comparing the basic content, objectives, experiences and
1

implementation. He describes that the art of specialists are important to analyze the different parts of elements of curriculum from macro and micro levels and vertical to horizontal dimension following the topic, course, time frame and systematic arrangement (pp. 126-129). In the 19th and 20th century we find many formal and absolute school systems to lead through different types of curriculums under the common flag of curriculum profession, specialization and partition according to the approaches of different fields, boundaries, formal subjects and prcised contents with different philosophical, social and religious approaches. The curriculum of the schools practiced and processed knowledge, information and ideas as it teach and train and control the people of the society to have common core knowledge among the societies and to the neighboring countries. Liner curriculum frames served the learning through different basic and specialized subjects, and different philosophies built different fields and structures for the common curriculum flag of education. Many books containing variety of knowledge served different ages, levels and standards of education in schools, colleges, institutions, seminaries and universities of the world. The world and ideas still continues to be evolving. Kelly (2009) describes curriculum as a programmed teaching and instruction which fits the moral, social and vocational aspect of education. He suggests coping up with the current changes of educational system to plan, evolve and develop the curriculum systematically to manage the social, moral, political, technological and economical needs and qualities of the societies to function smoother, quicker and effectively (pp.113).The application, implementation and the need of the contemporary societies find broader scopes, approaches, domains, ideologies and philosophies to inquiry, innovate and adjust to. The perspective of different philosophies in curriculum like realism, progressivism, behaviorism, industrialism, socialism, communism,
2

idealism, capitalism, and religious philosophy keeps changing the school curriculum as it filing and piling new knowledge for the contemporary and future societies. The new challenges of the contemporary and need of the future society, changes the traditional curriculum structures from liner to inner curriculum approaches through interconnection as it relates and invites new knowledge towards the common core practices. In present days the demand of technology through interrelation, engagement and involvement among the inhabitants of different societies and countries are still shaping the school curriculums. The common core ideas, knowledge, information and values are not only preserved in the pages of books, but in the face of the learner through computer and internet technology connecting to meet every need of the world of knowledge. Stewart (2012) advices that the traditional structure of curriculum is not enough and we need to adopt the new science, technology, research, inquiry, innovation and discovery and its mechanism need to be engaged with cross cultural interrelation through technology communication and relationship, among the state of countries and other countries. He suggests collaboration with other countries and a new world view for American school curriculums which will be student-centered, inquiry based, interrelated, innovative, and have multicultural collaboration among all the countries of the world (pp.156169). Now a new era begins for curriculum with individualism, postmodernism, relativitism, existentialism and technology approaches and philosophies of the people of the world which promotes inquiry based, action based, game based, technology based, discovery based and diversity based formal learning for the contemporary and future education system to adopt, implement, relate and innovate the curriculums.

Bibliography Fullan , M. (2006, Nov).Change theory a force for school improvement. Centre for strategic education: Victoria Jensen, E. (2009). Teaching with poverty in mind: What being poor does to kids brains and what schools can do about it. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum: Theory and practice (6th ed.). London, UK:Sage. Posner, G. J . (2004). Analyzing the curriculum (3rd ed.).New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Schiro,M.S.(2008). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stewart, V. (2012). A world-class education: Learning from international models of excellence and innovation. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

r,,flil$s+

/r$
NsS qid s$s
J

reNS-

N
'$$$

N.

s\* $$$

[\{! s$s

W
$ss*s
S

1$ ?s{.\

\-

Ii\

$S

ffi