The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2050-7003.htm

Curriculum up-gradation practices Curriculum

up-gradation
among higher education practices

institutions of Pakistan: does

curriculum ideologies
make difference? Received 9 July 2020
Revised 4 September 2020
16 October 2020
Muhammad Mujtaba Asad and Amjad Ali Rind Accepted 30 October 2020
Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan
Zahid Hussain Khand
Computer Science, Sukkur Institute of Business Administration,
Sukkur, Pakistan, and
Irfan Ahmed Rind and Shahid Hussain Mughal
Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this study was to find out the perception of prospective teachers and teacher
educators regarding the curriculum ideologies. The student–teachers and teacher educators from a public
university of Pakistan participated in the study.
Design/methodology/approach – The current study has employed quantitative approach and used
descriptive survey research design. The data was collected through the convenience sampling techniques. The
data was collected through a questionnaire developed by Schiro in 2008. The questionnaire consisting of six
parts and each part contains four statements on the curriculum ideologies of Scholar Academy, Social efficacy
learner centered and social reconstruction ideology. The population of study comprised of 200 Prospective
teachers of education department of a public sector University of Sindh, Pakistan. The data was collected by
using 4-point Likert scale. The likert scale was ranging from the first priority to least priority. The reliability
statistics was computed through Cronbach alpha α 5 0.763. The data was analyzed through Statistical
package for social science (SPSS) version 23.0 and mean and percentages were computed in this study.
Findings – The findings of the study revealed that most of the prospective teachers as well faculty members
are following the scholar academy ideology to align with national goals of curriculum. The prospective teachers
and faculty members believe that knowledge should be transferred from the institutions to the learners rather
than the knowledge can be disseminated from the other sources as per the new dimensions for updated
curriculum.
Practical implications – The current study suggests curriculum ideology awareness programs should be
given to prospective teachers and faculty members before their induction. The study also recommends that a
survey study can be conducted from teachers and teacher educators before designing the national curriculum
of Pakistan because majority of participants believed that knowledge can only be transferred from institutions.
Originality/value – This empirical study has given thoughtful insights to investigate the curriculum
ideologies with new dimensions for those who are studying in teacher education courses and for their mentors.
So, this study has contributed new knowledge in the context of Sindh, Pakistan specifically in the domain of
curriculum ideologies and frameworks.
Keywords Curriculum ideologies, Curriculum assessment, Teacher trainers, Higher education
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The modern era is the era of changes in all aspects of daily life. Every day new changes are
taking place around the world. The advancement of technology has accelerated the process of Journal of Applied Research in
Higher Education
change. In such rapidly changing world the education is not exempted from such changes © Emerald Publishing Limited
2050-7003
(Wallace and Priestley, 2011). The majority of the people living in this modern world would DOI 10.1108/JARHE-07-2020-0207
JARHE agree that changes have come in all areas of the society. According to Wang (2009) the society
is undergoing numerous changes because of the emergence of new technology and
abundance of information available on different sources. These societal as well as
technological changes have great impact on teaching and learning, educational theories,
assessment practices and specifically the curriculum.
The curriculum is always written in the context of the society so that the need of society
can be fulfilled (Farahani and Maleki, 2014; Schiro, 1978). The development of curriculum is
the work of educators, educational leaders, parents, community members and society. The
curriculum is focused on the significant learning of students because curriculum is designed
in such a way to improve students learning experiences (Schubert, 1996). The curriculum
development is a hectic and ambiguous process. However, it is also stimulating and
rewarding (Schiro, 2008). A curriculum is designed to bring outcome of whole teaching and
learning process. It consists of teaching practices, assessment procedures, learning
experience and evaluating mechanism to measure the specific objectives of desired course
(Trem, 2014).
Every curriculum is based upon some ideology. Curriculum ideology is an effort made by
people to engage in activities related to curriculum and discuss the issues of curriculum
(Schiro, 2008). In addition, curriculum ideologies are related to theories of curriculum which
are concerned about philosophical and educational fields (Amin Khandaghi and Pakmehr,
2012). Schiro (2008) argued that philosophies, curriculum visions, conceptual frameworks,
opinions and teachers’ beliefs are named as curriculum ideologies. An ideology is a set of
ideas in which people or group of people believes and functions in the society. People see the
world through the lenses of their ideology. Curriculum ideology is the lenses through which
people see the curriculum of institutions because they want to see what intuitions are
teaching. In addition, it contains the end results and reasons of the teaching curriculum.
Moreover, Cotti and Schiro (2004) identified four categories of curriculum ideologies.
These four ideologies are the scholar academy ideology, the learner centered ideology, the
social reconstruction ideology and social efficacy ideology. All of ideologies have their own
epistemological believes about schooling, content knowledge, instructional process
(teaching), the learner, learning and assessment.

1.1 Problem statement

The reforms in the curriculum have become very rapid in the wake of technological
development. Presumably, the teaching and learning is at the heart of curriculum. The
curriculum developers and policy makers are debating that which curriculum should be
taught in schools to meet the requirements of the fast-forwarding world. Also, they are
concerned about the quality of teaching and learning at schools. The curriculum designers
and policy makers are pitching different concepts within the curriculum in order to enhance
the overall quality of teaching. However, still they lack the proper direction (Jenkins, 2009;
M€akinen, 2018). In such situation, teachers are at crossroads and confused because they have
direct impact at the classroom level in day-to-day educational settings. Teachers are
accountable for treating all students equally without any prejudice of caste, creed, religion
and race and gender bias (Turunen et al., 2012). Moreover, they are also responsible for
promotion of participation, equity and equality among the learnings. Therefore, it has become
utmost important to know the perceptions and beliefs of teachers regarding the application of
new curriculum and implantation of innovative practices during the period of curriculum
reform (M€akinen, 2018). So, it is crucial to identify the attitudes and beliefs of teachers in the
time of continuous radical changes taking place in curriculum. If teachers’ input has been
considered, there may arise a resistance from the teacher’s side, as a result, the change may be
limited to few aspects. According to Schubert (1996) teacher’s personal beliefs are reflected
through the application of curriculum. More specifically, teacher’s attitude and beliefs have Curriculum
been reflected through curriculum and their teaching methodology shows their curriculum up-gradation
ideology. According to Suchiro (2008) curriculum ideologies of teachers consist of attitudes,
beliefs, curriculum visions, conceptual frameworks and philosophies hold by them. Ideology
practices
is a based on the collective believes and functions hold by the peoples in the society. It is a lens
through which one can see the world. Whereas, through the lenses of Curriculum ideology
people can look down upon the curriculum of institutions because they are more concerned
about what is being taught in institutions and what will be the end results of teaching
curriculum (Winter, 2012).
The recent reforms in the preparation of pre-service teachers in Pakistan have motivated
the researcher to investigate perceptions of pre-service teachers as well as teacher educators
who are preparing them for teaching in twenty-first century learners in Pakistan. The
purpose of selecting pre-service teachers for current study is that they considered as change
agents in the society because they have been acquiring updated knowledge and innovative
pedagogies. According to Hanies et al. (2017) the teachers’ confusion on curriculum signals
the need of gathering data from pre-service and teacher educators in order to identify their
perceptions and beliefs about curriculum ideologies hold by them in Pakistan. The findings
may suggest practical way forwards for the implementation of curriculum ideologies and
develop teacher education policies based on the new practices around the world.

1.2 Research objectives

The aim of the study was to explore perceptions and beliefs of pre-service teachers who are
studying in Bachelor of Education (Hons) and teacher educators of the Education Department
of the one of small size Public Sector University of Sindh, Pakistan. In this study, the
curriculum ideologies of the prospective teachers and teacher educators will be revealed
through this study. The participants’ curriculum ideologies were found out on the basis of
four ideologies of curriculum. Scholar academy, social efficacy, learner centered and social
reconstruction ideologies.

1.3 Research question

The current study explores the perceptions and beliefs of pre-service teachers and teacher
educators in initial teacher education program. Keeping the objectives of study in mind,
following two research questions were formulated to comprehend the perceptions and beliefs
of the pre-service teachers and teacher educators in the context of Sindh, Pakistan.
Q1. What are perceptions and beliefs of pre-service teachers and teacher educators
related to curriculum ideologies?
Q2. Which are the most influential curriculum ideologies hold by pre-service teachers
and teacher educators?

2. Literature review
The objective of education is to impart knowledge to the learners. The intelligence of students
must be elevated in order to give them power to think. The objectives of the education have
been also referred as curriculum ideologies. The purpose of curriculum ideologies is to
determine the beliefs about instructional process, outcome of education and purpose of
teaching (Schiro, 2008). According to Schiro (2008) curriculum ideology provides a particular
direction to school practices, classroom practices and subject areas. Thus, it is the vision of
education to determine the process of student learning outcomes in terms of their
development. Students’ progress can be forecasted based on the curriculum ideology used in
JARHE the schools. It is evident that there is dearth of consensus on the adopting of universal
approach for curriculum ideologies. Therefore, current study has adopted the Schiro’s (2008)
for analyzing the curriculum ideologies of pre-service teachers and teacher educators. The
Schiro’s (2008) framework provides a clear analysis and classification of curriculum over the
past few years.

2.1 Theoretical framework

The current study has used curriculum ideology framework developed by Schiro (2008) as a
theoretical framework which includes, the scholar academy ideology, the social efficacy
ideology, learner centered ideology and social reconstruction ideology. All of the four
curriculum ideologies represents the specific features of curriculum including objectives of
subject, content knowledge, methods of teaching, role of students and role of teachers and
purpose of assessment (Schiro, 2008; Mnguni, 2018).

2.2 The scholar academy ideology

Scholar academy ideology believes that a lot of knowledge has been gathered through the
academic disciplines. This ideology promotes the intrinsic purpose of intellectuality and field
of knowledge. Those teachers who believe on scholar academy ideology has view that
knowledge can be transferred through institutions. In this ideology, the curriculum is created
on the basis of academic discipline. It means curriculum developers design contents by
keeping institutions in mind (Alanazi, 2016).
The curriculum developers assume that knowledge, intellect and academic disciplines are
loosely connected with each other. However, the learner is viewed as the acquirer of
knowledge who just receive knowledge. The learner remains passive in scholar academy
ideology. Learners get knowledge which are already accumulated and there is no room for
construction of knowledge. Moreover, the learning students get knowledge through
systematic way within an institution.
The purpose of education in scholar academy is to impart education through institution to
young learners. These institutions admit students in their respective disciplines and raise
them as in hierarchal way so that they can promote their institution. In this way, institutions
transfer their own knowledge and thinking to the young students. The role of teacher is of
transmitter of knowledge rather than creator of knowledge. Student’s knowledge is evaluated
on the basis of prescribed academic disciplines (Kasuga, 2020). Therefore, students have to
follow traditional way of being passive. The scholar academy view teaching as it flows from
higher to lower and knowledge is fixed because truth is same everywhere in the world
(Marulcu and Akbiyik, 2014).
Moreover, to conclude that the scholar academy ideology deals with making students
disciplined to learn specific skills. It transmits knowledge related to subject specific
competencies. In this ideology, students develop subject-specific thinking abilities and
mastery the particular disciplined knowledge in specialized field of study. This ideology has
been supported by the intellectual traditionalist theory (Schubert, 1996).

2.3 The social efficacy ideology

The social efficacy ideology believe that schools should prepare young children for real
world. Schools should train the youth for future jobs in order to meet the demands of the
society (Alanazi, 2016; Schiro, 1978). The major focus of this ideology is to impart such
education which help students to perform well and be efficient. Therefore, the main focus of
social efficacy ideology is to equip children with necessary skills required according to the
need of society. This ideology considers the child as the future adult members of society who
contribute in the progress of society (Wallace and Priestley, 2011). The social efficacy
ideology gives more importance to societal needs instead of individual needs. The purpose of Curriculum
this ideology is to help students in gaining mastery of skills and so that they can be potential up-gradation
members of society. Those curriculums develop as well as teachers who believe on the social
efficacy ideology view the curriculum as an instrument for preparation of life (Alanazi, 2016).
practices
The social efficacy curriculum prepares children for workplace and to be efficient member of
society. The school is considered as the place which prepare young ones for the successful
adult life (Schiro, 2008; Winter, 2012). The social efficacy ideology advocates for the scientific
procedures of getting knowledge because it believe that one can get better education by
acquiring skills and improving their capabilities.
According to Schiro (2008) this ideology belongs to the behavioral school of thought who
believe that learning can only takes place if there is stimulus and response. Cause and effect,
action and reaction according to the suitability of context. Change in human behavior takes
place only on the basis of learning. This ideology gives less importance to the individual
needs. However, it fulfill the needs of society by preparing effective and effect members for
the society. The knowledge has been given according to the needs of society. Social efficacy
ideology emphasizes on the technical and vocational education because they assume that
ultimate goal of education is to earn for living a better life.
Moreover, this ideology teaches students to be effective and efficient in your work.
Teachers impart knowledge through hands on practice. The teachers use demonstration and
practical to teach students. The learners are active and engaged in the process of learning.
Learning is considered as learning by doing. This means learning takes place by practicing
and repeating again and again. The evaluation is done on the basis of performance in a
particular skill. This ideology follows the systematic and procedural way of assessment in
which learners are assessed on the basis of their performance and capabilities to perform
some skills. Skill-based education has been promoted by this ideology (Schiro, 1978; Wallace
and Priestley, 2011). Whereas, to summarize that social efficacy ideology aims at preparing
students for adult life so as to be productive member of society. The social efficacy ideology
advocates that the purpose of education should be preparation of life in which specific skills
and activities can be taught to students.

2.4 The learner centered ideology

The learner centered ideology neither focuses on academic discipline nor on individual needs.
On other hand, the learner centered ideology is concerned about the individual needs of each
children. This ideology believe that each individual is unique and have innate characteristics
to learn. The purpose of education in learner centered ideology is to develop students
physically, emotionally, socially and intellectually (Schiro, 2008). The central theme of learner
centered ideology is to promote the efforts of each individual’s growth. The educators should
be concerned about the learning of individuals not the whole class. Overall, the purpose of
education should be to sustain the inherent characteristic and capabilities of the learners
(Farahani and Maleki, 2014).
In this ideology, the learner has a central role because the teacher teaches according to the
needs of students. The instructions are designed according to the needs of learners. Students
participate in the process of teaching and learning. The student’s prior knowledge, interest
and abilities are checked before the start of a course so that students can learn new things
effectively. Knowing the students experiences a content of curriculum can be designed if the
likes and dislikes of students is known. Teachers use student-centered approach in which
activity-based learning is carried out in the classrooms. The assessment is taken in the
variety of ways. Both formative and summative evaluation are used in order to assess the
students leaning (Harb and Thomure, 2020). Conclusively, learner-centered ideology believes
that the objectives of education should be the enhancement of skills and abilities of students
JARHE to the next level (Schiro, 2008). It also supports the progressive theory of “learning by doing”
given by John Dewey (Roberts, 2012).

2.5 The social reconstruction ideology

This ideology shows the social perspective of the curriculum. The social reconstruction
ideology assume that the present society is fragile. Therefore, the society must be
reconstructed. In the process of reconstruction school and teachers can play vital role in the
transformation of society. The purpose of education in social reconstruction ideology is to
restructure and reconstruct the society (Schiro, 1978, 2008). Social re-constructivist know that
this society is based on the injustice, inequality, gender biased, economic inequality and social
injustice. On the basis of these injustices a healthy society does not exist. Therefore, the
society need a huge reform as whole. In addition, the purpose of education in social
reconstruction ideology is to promote the creation of new knowledge by reconstructing the
society on the basis of equality in which all members of society should be treated equally
(Wang, 2009). This ideology believe that the aim of education is to facilitate the process of
transforming society in order to give equal rights to all citizens.
The undesirable practices are the part of culture. Therefore, the culture needs drastic
changes so that the reconstruction process continuous until each member of society attains
the desire level of satisfaction in society. The members of society want to be satisfied from the
material world as well as from intellectually and spiritually. The school is assumed to be the
place of nurturing and developing such minds which reconstruct the society (Farahani and
Maleki, 2014). The curriculum developers design such curriculum in which learners can
construct the meaning of the around them. The teacher’s role is like of a manager who
manages the conditions for learning in order to increase the knowledge of students. However,
the teacher’s role in the development of curriculum is missing in social reconstruction
ideology. Teachers are the sole responsible of implanting the curriculum at classroom. The
teachers should be given importance in the development of curriculum because they will
implement the curriculum at schools. Teacher should be given authority to change or amend
in the curriculum according to the needs and interest of student. This will not only help
students to construct the meaning by themselves, learn and acquire skills so that they become
productive members of the society (Alanazi, 2016). It is widely accepted that curriculum is the
way of achieving the objectives and goals of an education system and ideologies are
considered as the principals through which the decision of making curriculum could be taken
in the field (Amin Khandaghi and Pakmehr, 2012; Ellis, 2014; Schubert, 1996). Whereas, to
conclude, social reconstruction ideology advocates that the world is influenced by the
humans through their knowledge, competencies and intelligences to solve the problems faced
by the society. Therefore, the objectives of education should be to develop the intelligences
and problem-solving skills of students (Schiro, 2008). This ideology is also supported by the
theory of problem-solving which focuses on the problem solving ability to perceive the
problem, willingness to solve the problem, knowing the existing problems and making
strategies for solving the problem (Dostal, 2015).

3. Research methodology
The descriptive research study was conducted for this study. The survey research design
was used for present study. The data was collected through a questionnaire developed by
Schiro in 2008. The questionnaire was consisting of six parts and each part contains four
statements on the curriculum ideologies of Scholar Academy, Social efficacy learner centered
and social reconstruction ideology. The population study comprises of 25 prospective
teachers and 4 faculty members of education department of a public sector University of
Sindh, Pakistan. The data was collected through the convenience sampling technique. The
participants were informed that they had to fill the questionnaire by ranking the Curriculum
questionnaires by 1, 2, 3, 4 on the basis of what they like most, second most, third most up-gradation
and dislike. The statements of questionnaire were related to the view of school, learner,
learning, teacher, content knowledge and assessment. The data was collected by using
practices
4-point Likert scale. The likert scale was ranging from the first priority to least priority.
Moreover, the validity of the questionnaire was done by three experts to check constructs of
the questionnaire and all of the experts were agree that the questionnaires measured what it
intended to measure. Also, reliability statistics was computed through Cronbach alpha
α 5 0.763. Further, the data was analyzed by calculating percentage, frequency and
statistical comparison of all ideologies with respect to students and teachers.

4. Results and findings

Table 1 indicates the perspectives of prospective teachers and faculty members of Education
depart of a public sector University. Scholar Academy was found to the most popular
ideology (Mean 5 3.138) among the prospective teachers and faculty members and the least
popular ideology was found to be social reconstruction (Mean 5 1.897). However, social
efficacy ideology (Mean 5 2.897) was second popular ideology and learner centered ideology
(Mean 5 2.034) was third popular ideology. To conclude that research participants consider
scholar academy ideology as the most popular ideology of curriculum. Whereas, they
consider social reconstruction ideology as the least ideology of curriculum.
Table 2 shows the concept of teacher according to the point of view of prospective teachers
and Faculty members of Education department. Among the all participants, the most popular
ideology was scholar academy (Mean 5 3.362) and the least popular ideology was social
reconstruction ideology (Mean 5 2.121) which was found less popular among participants.
However, learner centered (Mean 5 2.310) and social efficacy (Mean 5 2.069) were found as
second and third popular ideologies of curriculum respectively. Conclusively, scholar
academy was mostly liked by all participants. Whereas, the least popular ideology was found
to the social construction.
Table 3 shows the concept of learning in the view of prospective teachers and faculty
members of education department. Scholar academy (Mean 5 2.948) and social efficacy

Curriculum First preferred Second preferred Third preferred Least preferred Total
ideologies choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) mean

Social 50 25.9 8.6 15.5 1.897 Table 1.

Reconstruction Concept of school in the
Social Efficiency 5.2 20.7 53.4 20.7 2.897 view of prospective
Scholar Academy 00 32.8 20.7 46.6 3.138 teachers and teacher
Learner Centered 48.3 17.2 17.2 17.2 2.034 educators

Curriculum First preferred Second preferred Third preferred Least preferred Total
ideologies choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) mean

Social 29.3 32.8 34.5 3.4 2.121 Table 2.

Reconstruction Concept of teacher in
Social Efficiency 31 36.2 27.6 5.2 2.069 the view of prospective
Scholar Academy 13.8 00 22.4 63.8 3.362 teachers and teacher
Learner Centered 25.9 31 29.3 13.8 2.310 educators
JARHE (Mean 5 2.948) both were equally most popular among the participants and learner centered
ideology (Mean 5 1.448) was found to be least popular. However, social construction ideology
was third popular among participants.
Table 4 indicates the responses of the prospective teachers and faculty members of
education department on the concept of knowledge. The data revealed that there most
preferred ideology was scholar academy (mean 5 3.138) and the least preferred ideology was
learner centered (1.914). However, the second preferred ideology was social efficacy
(mean 5 2.086) and the third preferred ideology was social efficacy (mean 5 2.086) of
curriculum ideology of student teachers and faculty members. To conclude that most popular
ideology was scholar academy and least popular ideology learner centered.
Table 5 shows the perspectives of prospective teachers and faculty members on the
concept of learner. It was found that most of the participants preferred social reconstruction
ideology (mean 5 3.345) and they least preferred scholar academy (mean 5 1.759). Further,
the participants second choice was social efficacy (mean 5 2.345) and the third choice was
learner centered ideology (mean 5 2.603) of curriculum. To conclude that most popular
ideology was social reconstruction ideology. While, the least popular ideology was scholar
academy.
Table 6 shows the perspectives of prospective teachers and faculty members on the
concept of evaluation /assessment. Among the prospective teachers and faculty members, the
most preferred choice was scholar academy (mean 5 3.310) and the least popular ideology
found was learner centered (mean 5 1.845). Whereas, the second preferred ideology was social

Curriculum First preferred Second preferred Third preferred Least preferred Total
ideologies choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) mean

Table 3. Scholar Academy 8.6 25.9 27.6 37.9 2.948

Concept of learning in Social Efficiency 3.4 27.6 39.7 29.3 2.948
the view of pre-service Learner Centered 63.8 00 27.6 37.9 1.448
teachers and teacher Social 24.1 20.7 24.1 31 2.621
educators Reconstruction

Curriculum First preferred Second preferred Third preferred Least preferred Total
ideologies choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) mean

Table 4. Scholar Academy 5.2 29.3 12.1 53.4 3.138

Concept of knowledge Social Efficiency 34.5 27.6 32.8 5.2 2.086
for the pre-service Learner Centered 48.3 20.7 22.4 8.6 1.914
teachers and teacher Social 12.1 22.4 32.8 32.8 2.862
educators Reconstruction

Curriculum First preferred Second preferred Third preferred Least preferred Total
ideologies choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) mean

Table 5. Scholar Academy 55.2 25.9 6.9 12.1 1.759

Concept of learner in Social Efficiency 25.9 32.8 22.4 19 2.345
the view of pre-service Learner Centered 19 22.4 37.9 20.7 2.603
teachers and teacher Social 5.2 10.3 29.3 55.2 3.345
educators Reconstruction
reconstruction ideology (mean 5 2.190) and the third popular ideology was social efficacy Curriculum
(mean 5 2.759) of curriculum. To conclude that the most preferred choice of participants up-gradation
was scholar academy and the least preferred choice was learner centered ideology.
practices
5. Conclusion and recommendations
The findings of the study revealed that most of the pre-service teachers as well teacher
educators were following scholar academy ideology. Scholar academy ideology was the most
preferred ideology for the concept of school, teacher, learning, knowledge and evaluation.
Hence, both pre-service teachers and teacher educators believe that students should learn
specific competencies related to their discipline and specialize in particular area of a subject.
So, the pre-service teachers and teacher educators supported the intellectual traditionalist
theory (Schubert, 1996) that specific abilities of students should be enhanced for specific
disciplines (Kasuga, 2020). While, for the concept of learner the prospective teachers and
faculty members first preferred choice was social reconstruction ideology because they
believed that a child must construct meaning from the society. Whereas, the second and third
preference of the participants varies from concept to concept. Thus, the findings showed that
scholar academy was the most popular among the participants. Both prospective teachers
and faculty members believe that knowledge should be transferred from the institutions to
the learners rather than the knowledge can be disseminated from the other sources. The
curriculum ideology surveys are essential for the development of curriculum because these
require theoretical framework for curriculum development. The theoretical frame works can
be developed on the basis of epistemological orientation. The national curriculum can be
developed according to the curriculum ideology which needs the collaboration of all
educational experts and curriculum developers.

5.1 Implications of the study

Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended that curriculum ideology awareness
programs should be given to prospective teachers and faculty members because they have
neglected the social reconstruction and learner centered ideology. In addition, it is also
recommended that a survey should be conducted from teachers and teacher educators before
designing the national curriculum of Pakistan because majority of participants believed that
knowledge can only be transferred from institutions. However, modern world is rapidly
changing due to technological advancement. Therefore, it is suggested that curriculum should
be designed by keeping the changing world in mind where information spreads in seconds and
the institutions are less in number to transfer knowledge to the members of society.

5.2 Limitations of the study

The present study has a few limitations as like other studies. The results of this study are
limited to only one public sector university of Sindh, Pakistan. This is because the researchers
have limited access to the participants and lack of time and resources. Furthermore, the

Curriculum First preferred Second preferred Third preferred Least preferred Total
ideologies choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) choice (%) mean

Scholar Academy 15.5 20.7 36.2 3.310 Table 6.

Social Efficiency 15.5 20.7 36.2 27.6 2.759 Concept of evaluation
Learner Centered 48.3 30 6 00 1.845 in the view of pre-
Social 8 64 24 4 2.190 service teachers and
Reconstruction teacher educators
JARHE sample size of the study is small, therefore, the findings of the study may not be generalized
on the larger population. However, the findings are significant for the policy and practice in
the context of Pakistan because there is not much research available in Pakistan. So, this
study has laid the foundation for future research studies. The findings of the study are based
on the questionnaires collected from the participants and it is limited to the perceptions of pre-
service teachers and teacher educators on curriculum ideologies.

5.3 Future research directions

The study has provided an opportunity for further research. For instance, this study was
confined to a single institution; however, further research can be extended by researching
more than one University. Also, a comparative study may be conducted in public and private
higher education institutions and gender-based exploration to increase generalizability.
Moreover, the data was collected through the only questionnaire. However, it is recommended
for future studies to use observation tools and conduct interviews from pre-service teachers
and teacher educators of higher education institutions to validate the findings of research
studies from multiple sources. This might give new insights and help researchers to explore
various other variables associated with the perceptions of the pre-service teachers and
teacher educators about the curriculum ideologies.

References
Alanazi, S. (2016), “Comparison for curriculum ideologies”, American Research Journal of Humanities
and Social Sciences, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Amin Khandaghi, M. and Pakmehr, H. (2012), “Critical thinking disposition: a neglected loop of
humanities curriculum in higher education”, Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, Vol. 7.
Cotti, R. and Schiro, M. (2004), “Connecting teacher beliefs to the use of children’s literature in the
teaching of mathematics”, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 329-356.
Dostal, J. (2015), “Theory of problem solving”, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 174,
pp. 2798-2805.
Ellis, A.K. (2014), Exemplars of Curriculum Theory, Routledge, New York.
Farahani, M.F. and Maleki, M. (2014), “A survey on tendency toward curriculum ideologies among
academic board members in educational sciences faculties–Tehran 2010–2011”, Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 116, pp. 2392-2396.
Haines, S.J., Kervick, C.T., Shepherd, K.G. and Levitt, M.J. (2017), “Enhancing quality: listening to
participant voices to improve our Master’s program in special education”, Teaching and
Teacher Education, Vol. 66, pp. 24-32.
Harb, M. and Thomure, H.T. (2020), “Connecting literacy to curriculum ideologies”, Curriculum
Perspectives, pp. 1-7.
Jenkins, S.B. (2009), “Measuring teacher beliefs about curriculum orientations using the modified-
curriculum orientations inventory”, The Curriculum Journal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 103-120.
Kasuga, W. (2020), “Curriculum ideologies underpinning curriculum in Tanzania: a pre-service science
teachers perspectives”, European Journal of Education Studies.
M€akinen, M. (2018), “Curriculum ideologies reflecting pre-service teachers’ stances toward inclusive
education”, Contemporary Pedagogies in Teacher Education and Development, Vol. 37.
Marulcu, I. and Akbiyik, C. (2014), “Curriculum ideologies: Re-exploring prospective teachers’
perspectives”, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, Vol. 4 No. 5, p. 1.
Mnguni, L. (2018), “The curriculum ideology recommended by novice teachers for life sciences in
South Africa”, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Vol. 14
No. 7, pp. 3099-3108.
Roberts, J.W. (2012), Beyond Learning by Doing: Theoretical Currents in Experiential Education, Curriculum
Routledge, New York.
up-gradation
Schiro, M. (1978), Curriculum for Better Schools: The Great Ideological Debate, Educational
Technology, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
practices
Schiro, M.S. (2008), Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA, 2008.
Schubert, W.H. (1996), “Perspectives on four curriculum traditions”, Educational Horizons, Vol. 74
No. 4, pp. 169-176.
Trem, K.R. (2014), “Curriculum theory, conflicting visions and enduring concerns”, Education þ
Training.
Turunen, T.A., M€a€att€a, K. and Uusiautti, S. (2012), “Forty years of Finnish pre-school education: the
development of curricula between 1972 and 2000”, Curriculum Journal, Vol. 23 No. 4,
pp. 585-599.
Wallace, C.S. and Priestley, M. (2011), “Teacher beliefs and the mediation of curriculum innovation in
Scotland: a socio-cultural perspective on professional development and change”, Journal of
Curriculum Studies, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 357-381.
Wang, T. (2009), “Toward a productive and creative curriculum in architecture”, Arts and Humanities
in Higher Education, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 277-293.
Winter, C. (2012), “School curriculum, globalisation and the constitution of policy problems and
solutions”, Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 295-314.

Further reading
Picower, B. (2009), “The unexamined whiteness of teaching: how white teachers maintain and enact
dominant racial ideologies”, Race, Ethnicity and Education, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 197-215.
Schubert, W.H. (1986), Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm, and Possibility, Pearson College Division.

Corresponding author
Muhammad Mujtaba Asad can be contacted at: m.mujtaba@iba-suk.edu.pk

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com