1

CURRICULUM PLANNING: A TASK FOR MORE THAN ONE

Master's program in English Didactics

Curriculum Design and Development

Milagro Agudelo

Novozhenina

May 4th, 2021

CURRICULUM PLANNING: A TASK FOR MORE THAN ONE

After reading the first chapter of The Learner-Centred Curriculum, I became

conscious of the hostile relationship between theorists and practitioners. It is a kind of war

for control fought long ago. The control of determining what and how to teach has been a

fervent point of discussion among them. According to MacDonald and Walker (1975), as

cited in Nunan (1994), the relationship between Educational theorists and educational

practitioners is an antagonistic one, and the mistrust characterizes it. The result is that in

different schools, teachers have been deprived of autonomy. Teachers receive a

curriculum and a mandate to deliver it as presented. Thus, the decision about what to

teach is removed from their control. Within the framework of this discussion, It is

necessary to point out that teachers are one of the biggest contributors to student success,

so they should not be pushed out of the discussion. Conversely, I dare to state that

teachers are the precise professional needed for planning the courses they teach for two

main reasons.

The first reason to state is the educator's knowledge. The educator knows the

subject, the students, and the context. In my belief, teachers' knowledge is over the

standard curriculum. As practitioners, the knowledge acquired through their experiences

 2
CURRICULUM PLANNING: A TASK FOR MORE THAN ONE

has led them to understand better the way students learn and what is appropriate for them.

A teacher is an artist that can give shape to the knowledge to make it fit in the students'

requirements. Teachers understand what knowledge students require, and they can use

that knowledge to develop a curriculum that fulfils those needs. Teachers understand

students' learning process. Thus, they can design an accurate and pertinent curriculum

that considers their personal experiences and beliefs to enrich the learning process.

According to that, beliefs play an important role in planning a course since educators teach

accordingly to what they believe, know, and experience. But also considering students'

beliefs, which brings me to the other reason why teachers should plan the courses they

teach.

This second reason is that teachers are the ones in contact with the students, and

consequently, they exert an instructional influence on them. Wang et al. (1993) state that

the instructional variable is one of the variables that most influence students' learning

processes. Thus, since educators have the most direct impact on the instructional

environment, they play an important role, so they cannot be omitted from planning their

courses. But, despite being a figure of authority, the teacher should not use that influence

to be a controller. Many teachers like the controller's role because it allows them to rule

everything that happens. That preference is ironic since, as Kohn (1999) states, teachers

cannot stand that someone else tells them what to teach and how to manage the

classroom, but so many of them treat their students in that dominant way. Here, it is

important to remark that as teachers are in contact with students and influence them, they

have the opportunity to know learners' beliefs and articulate those beliefs in the curriculum.

If the educators have the chance to plan the curriculum, they should share that power with

students, considering their beliefs and opinions. Due to the closeness between the teacher

and the student, the teacher can involve students in curriculum planning. According to
 3
CURRICULUM PLANNING: A TASK FOR MORE THAN ONE

Chesler (1970), the curriculum content, the choice of classroom method, and the

organization of classes should be reviewed, guided and managed by students. In my

opinion, it would be an appropriate way for teachers to involve students in curriculum

planning.

Finally, it is vital to remark that planning a course should not be monopolized or an

exclusive task of someone. It does not need to be a war of power. Or at least, we should

be advocating the end of this war between practitioners and theorist by "calling a truce," as

Nunan (1994) states. To conclude, I would say that the end of this antagonistic era should

start by restoring the teacher to a role in curriculum making. I believe that a course

planned exclusively by someone other than the teacher will be out of context and lacking

authenticity. Further, and as I have mentioned before, the end of this era should also be

characterized by including the students in the process of curriculum planning. The above

does not mean excluding the administrators. On the contrary, Curriculum planning should

reflect teamwork that considers all the various elements that make up a curriculum,

resulting in a curriculum design seen from all angles. In other words, the end of the

"theorist vs. practitioners" era should not be only about teachers planning their courses. It

should be about all the agents involved participating in the curriculum design.
 4
CURRICULUM PLANNING: A TASK FOR MORE THAN ONE

References

Chesler, M. (1970). Shared power and student decision making. Education Leadership, 9-

14.

Kohn, A. (1999). The schools our children deserve: Moving beyond “traditional classrooms

and. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Nunan, D. (1994). The Learner-Centered Curriculum. New York: Cambridge University

Press.

Wang, M., Haertel, G., & Walberg, H. (1993). Toward a Knowledge Base for School

Learning. Review of Educational Research, 249-294.