Reconceptualists

The curriculum, or what courses should be a part of schooling and what outcomes are appropriate for schools, has historically been a matter of considerable debate and controversy. In the 17th century, reading and the scriptures provided the basis for what should be taught in schools, with particular emphasis on Latin and Greek. In the 18th century, a gradual shift occurred with increased attention to subjects such as writing and arithmetic. Reading and religion, however, still dominated the curriculum. In the 19th century, more focus was placed on literacy, vocational competence, and democratic citizenship. In essence, as the United States matured as a democracy, a gradual expansion evolved of what was to be taught at both elementary and secondary levels.

The 20th century evidenced an explosion of ideas thought to be essential for inclusion in the elementary and secondary curriculum and a “reconceptualizing” of how schools should be structured to foster their emancipatory capacities. John Dewey, leader of the Progressive movement, caused educators to think more about the child's interests and curricular relevance and less about formal disciplinary study and teacher-centered instruction. Whereas educators in early America emphasized formal disciplinary study and rote memorization, John Dewey and those inclined toward Progressivist ideas began to explore and encourage curricular relevance and a focus on the child. Indeed, the Progressive era ushered in a time of prolonged focus on what types of topics and subjects should be covered in a society dedicated to universal schooling. It also laid the groundwork for the reform agenda of the reconceptualists, who began to systematically critique educational policy and practice during the second half of the 20th century, most particularly in the 1970s.

Curriculum content and structure are important because they are the “essence” of what knowledge is transmitted to successive generations of young people. Schools are primary cultural transmitters, and the curriculum is the accumulated wisdom or knowledge base that succeeding generations require for personal survival and development. The learner is the focus; the curriculum is offered to that learner with appropriate scope and sequence; the textbooks and other materials are the elements to be studied; and, finally, the teacher, who is responsible for mediating instruction, must be highly qualified for his or her assigned instructional role. It sounds quite simple; in fact, it is complex and political, and, for the reconceptualist, it is something that must be critically examined and structurally understood.

In the early 1970s a loosely coupled group of education thinkers and social critics began to challenge the heavy emphasis on “how to” or [Page 764]reductionistic curriculum development processes. Questions began to emerge as to what constitutes the primary goal of the educational process: Is it to prepare one “for the duties of life,” which suggests one way of structuring what and how knowledge is communicated to young learners; or is it to “free the mind of the learner,” which entails moving beyond traditional curricular structures? In addition, the reconceptualists placed more emphasis, indeed some might assert exclusive attention, on truly understanding the curriculum and doing so with reliance on significant disciplinary knowledge from the humanities.

...