Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
TEACHERS’ PARTICIPATION IN CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Yagya Prasad Bhusal
A Dissertation
Submitted to
School of Education
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of
Philosophy in Curriculum and Instruction
Kathmandu University
Dhulikhel, Nepal
November, 2015
Copyright by Yagya Prasad Bhusal
2015
All rights reserved.
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this dissertation has not been submitted for the candidature for any
other degree.
……………………..
Yagya Prasad Bhusal November 22, 2015
Degree Candidate
DEDICATION
This work is profoundly dedicated...
To the memory of my late mother Mrs. Bhesh Kumari Bhusal.
To all my family and most of all.
To Kent, the love of my life and my inspiration.
i
AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF
Yagya Prasad Bhusal for the degree of Master of the Philosophy in Education presented
on November 22, 2015 at School of Education, Kathmandu University.
Title: Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process
Abstract approved
______________________________
Assoc. Prof. Bal Chandra Luitel, PhD
Dissertation Supervisor
Curriculum development, as a word and a concept, is an integral part of
education systems, used with varying additional meanings and interpretations.
Curriculum can be defined as a sequences or series of coursework, within a particular
area or content focus. The development of curriculum becomes a value laden process of
determining what “should” be taught within the institutions of schools, given the social,
cultural, political, and environmental influences upon this curriculum development
process. Teachers’ participation in curriculum development was the topic of this study.
This study has attempted to document policies and practices of teachers’
participation in curriculum development process in Nepal. It has attempted to integrate
the voices of numerous participants with my own experiences over several years, both as
a student and as an educator. Related literatures, formal and informal conversations with
stakeholders, supervisor’s insightful suggestions and clear guidelines facilitated me
during the course of this study and enabled me to reach to a set of meaningful
conclusions. A qualitative methodology was implemented using interpretivist/
ii
constructivist paradigmatic assumption, with attention afforded to the narrative approach
of qualitative inquiry. Consistent with qualitative methodology, teachers’ perceptions of
curriculum development process were explored through in-depth interviews, observation
and analysis of documents.
One of my major findings through this study is that the participating teachers of
this study were unaware concept of curriculum literally. They tried to understood and
interpreted curriculum on their own way. They have developed their understanding in
metaphorical way like as 'pathyakram ghar ko naksa'. A noticeable reality is that
teachers understand curriculum as blue print, content to be taught and learning
experiences. Participating teachers were perceive curriculum development process as
impractical and centrally dominated. They had strong emphasis that curriculum
development process needs to be decentralized so that it is inclusive and participatory.
Participating teachers' think that their participation is limited in the periphery of
implementation and evaluation so inclusion is needed during curriculum development
process. Indeed their participation seems as developer of curriculum rather than mere
implementer.
I found that various barriers that limit the teachers’ participation in the
curriculum development process. They are proximity to power, teachers' qualification,
language, influences of political and power coercive approach in education sector,
personal access in bureaucracy and teacher's satisfaction on job.
………………………
Yagya Prasad Bhusal November 22, 2015
Degree Candidate
iii
Master of the Philosophy in Education dissertation of Yagya Prasad Bhusal presented on
November 22, 2015.
APPROVED
………………………………… November 22, 2015
Associate Prof. Bal Chandra Luitel, PhD
Dissertation Supervisor
………………………………….. November 22, 2015
Prof. Mana Prasad Wagley, PhD
Research Committee Member
………………………………… November 22, 2015
Prof. Tanka Nath Sharma, PhD
External Examiner
………………………………… November 22, 2015
Prof. Mahesh Nath Parajuli, PhD
Dean, School of Education
I understand that my dissertation will be a part of permanent collection of
Kathmandu University Library. My signature below authorizes release of my dissertation
to any reader upon request.
………………………
Yagya Prasad Bhusal, Degree Candidate November 22, 2015
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to thank my supervisor, Associate Professor Dr. Bal Chandra Luitel, for
his endless encouragement, intellectual support and enthusiasm, which made this
dissertation possible, and for his patience in correcting both my stylistic and formatting
errors and emotional strength to complete this dissertation within stipulated time frame.
I always remember my respected Dean Professor Dr. Mahesh Nath Parajuli who
gave me many appropriate ideas for conducting this study. Special thanks go to him for
providing me insightful comments and valuable suggestions for selecting appropriate
research topic.
I wish to thank Professor Dr. Mana Prasad Wagley, Professor Dr. Tanka Nath
Sharma for guiding through the beginning stages of my M. Phil study, helping me define
my focus and perspectives and adding layer to my personal and scholarly identity.
I am indebted to my participants. I can’t express my sincere appreciation for
their willingness to participate in this study, engage in hours of interviews and
discussion, and their continued words of engagement. This is their study as much as it is
mine.
I wish to thank all who have aided me in the various stages of interview,
transcription, editing, formatting and proofreading. Their efforts and talents are
invaluable.
Lastly, I am grateful to my elder brother Narayan to his great contribution of my
education. I wish to thank my brother-in-law Ambika, friends and colleagues who have
given me endless support and encouragement throughout this entire process. They are
appreciated beyond words.
v
ABBREVATIONS
ACARA Australian Curriculum for the Learning Area
ARNEC All round National Education Commission
CBS Central Bureau of Statistic
CDC Curriculum Development Centre
CTCC Curriculum Textbook Co-ordination Committee
CTSC Curriculum Textbook Subject Committee
DOE Department of Education
HLNEC High Level National Education Council
HSEB Higher Secondary Education Board
KU Kathmandu University
NCC National Curriculum Council
NCERT National Council of Educational Research and Training
NCF National Curriculum Framework
NEC National Education Council
NEPs National Policy on Education
NESP National Education System Planning
NNEPC Nepal National Education Planning Commission
SLC School Leaving Certificate
TU Tribhuvan University
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
VDC Village Development Committee
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF .......................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... iv
ABBREVATIONS ......................................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. vi
CHAPTER 0 .................................................................................................................. 1
SITUATING MY SELF ON SETTING THE SCENE OF RESEARCH ..................... 1
Chapter Overview ...................................................................................................... 1
My Lived Experiences ............................................................................................... 1
Seeking the Answers of My Mysterious Questions ................................................... 3
Voyage of Kathmandu University [KU] and My Progressive Movement ................. 6
Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 1 .................................................................................................................. 8
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 8
Chapter Overview ...................................................................................................... 8
Statement of the Problem ......................................................................................... 12
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................ 15
Research Questions .................................................................................................. 15
Rationale of the Study .............................................................................................. 15
Delimitation of the Study ......................................................................................... 17
Synopsis of My Dissertation .................................................................................... 17
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER 2 ................................................................................................................ 19
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................ 19
vii
Chapter Overview .................................................................................................... 19
Understanding the Concept of Curriculum .............................................................. 20
Development of Curriculum: A Historical Perspective ........................................... 23
School Level Curriculum Development Process in Nepal ....................................... 26
Teacher’s Role in Curriculum Development Process .............................................. 29
International Curriculum Development Practices .................................................... 33
Review of Related Research Studies ........................................................................ 37
Theoretical Review .................................................................................................. 41
Lawrence Stenhouse’s Process-Inquiry Model ........................................................ 41
Habermas’s Practical Interest ................................................................................... 43
Research Gap............................................................................................................ 45
Development of Conceptual Framework ................................................................. 46
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 47
CHAPTEER 3 .............................................................................................................. 48
METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 48
Chapter Overview .................................................................................................... 48
Journey through Research ........................................................................................ 48
Research Philosophy, My Position and Research Paradigm .................................... 51
Philosophical Consideration ..................................................................................... 53
Ontology ............................................................................................................... 54
Epistemology ........................................................................................................ 55
Axiology ............................................................................................................... 56
Narrative Approach .................................................................................................. 57
Working Procedure .................................................................................................. 60
Study Area ............................................................................................................ 60
viii
Selection of the Research Participants ..................................................................... 60
Data Collection Procedure ....................................................................................... 62
Data Analysis and Interpretation .............................................................................. 63
Quality Standards ..................................................................................................... 64
Trustworthiness .................................................................................................... 65
Reflexivity ............................................................................................................ 67
Ethical Consideration ............................................................................................... 68
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 69
CHAPTER 4 ................................................................................................................ 71
UNDERSTANDING CURRICULUM FROM TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES ....... 71
Chapter Overview .................................................................................................... 71
The Concept of Curriculum...................................................................................... 72
Curriculum as Blueprint ....................................................................................... 72
Curriculum as Content .......................................................................................... 76
Curriculum as Learning Experiences ................................................................... 79
Combining the Different Perspectives of Curriculum.............................................. 85
Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 88
CHAPTER 5 ................................................................................................................ 89
TEACHERS' PERCEPTION AND EXPERIENCES IN THE CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ...................................................................................... 89
Chapter Overview .................................................................................................... 89
Practices of Curriculum Development Process in Nepal ......................................... 89
Gap in Written and Implemented Process ............................................................ 90
Centrally Dominated Curriculum Development Practice ..................................... 96
Decentralization of Curriculum Development Practice: Inclusive and Participatory101
ix
Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development............................................. 105
Inclusion on Teacher Participation ..................................................................... 106
Teacher as a Mere Implementer Rather than Developer of Curriculum ................ 109
Combining Different Perspectives of Curriculum Development Process .............. 114
Chapter Summery ................................................................................................... 120
CHAPTER 6 .............................................................................................................. 121
BARRIERS THAT LIMIT TEACHERS’ PARTICIPATION IN CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS .................................................................................... 121
Chapter Overview .................................................................................................. 121
Academic Qualification ...................................................................................... 121
Language ............................................................................................................ 123
Political and Power Coercive Approach ............................................................. 125
Proximity to Power ............................................................................................. 127
Access ................................................................................................................. 128
Job Satisfaction ................................................................................................... 129
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................... 132
CHAPTER 7 .............................................................................................................. 134
REFLECTION AND CONCLUSION ....................................................................... 134
Chapter Overview .................................................................................................. 134
Setting the Agenda of My Research ....................................................................... 134
Developing the Theoretical Perspective ................................................................. 136
Conceiving Methodology ....................................................................................... 137
Responding to My Research Questions ................................................................. 138
How do Teachers Understand and Develop the Concept of Curriculum? ............. 138
x
How do Teachers Perceive the Practice of Curriculum Development Process in
Nepal?..................................................................................................................... 139
How do Teachers express their Experience of Participation in Curriculum
Development Process? ........................................................................................... 141
How do Teachers Describe the Barriers that limit their Participation in Curriculum
Development Process? ........................................................................................... 142
My Learning ........................................................................................................... 142
Implication of this Study ........................................................................................ 145
Future Direction ..................................................................................................... 146
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 148
1
CHAPTER 0
SITUATING MY SELF ON SETTING THE SCENE OF RESEARCH
Chapter Overview
I initiate this chapter with the reflection of my own lived experiences that led me
to this crucial journey of educational research. For setting the scene of the study, I have
tried to link my lived experiences and professional practice with my present research.
In this section, I assembled some pleasant, crucial and unpleasant experiences of my life
as a student and an educator.
My Lived Experiences
I was born at Khaldanda of Shankarpokhari Village Development Committee
[VDC] which lies in Prabat district at a distance of about ten kosh/ twenty miles from
the district head quarters. People of this place basically depended on agriculture of earn
their livelihood. Apart from that, this place also famous for the people's placement of in
public service. I migrated from the place I was born to Chitwan after celebrating my
third birth day because of the job of my father in teaching profession.
I began my journey of pre-primary education in 1987 at a public school. I
joined a private boarding school for primary education and was transferred to public
school for secondary education. I remember some bitter lived experiences from my
lower secondary school age, the most struggling days of my life history, when my father
resigned from his job. Several important activities of my life have huge impact on my
learning journey. Limited income sources and father's great passion for the leadership
of dairy cooperative sector lead our family to economic adversity. Our family was
2
My Understanding in My Dredge Up
I always remember the days of my schooling,
How much the day was struggling for me?
Curriculum like Tiffin of prisoner,
Classroom is like a jail.
Where nothing other than crowd,
Everyone becomes crowd to rehearse.
It becomes serious question,
Why they are always rehearse like parrot?
This activities like me as a beaten rice of iron.
This type of rubbish education not in mind and not in
hand,
I don't like mechanistic curriculum.
Because I also victimized by this type of unskilled
curriculum,
Education without skill does not have any worth.
Curriculum without pertinence doesn't have any
meaning,
That's why I am searching that type of curriculum
which has pertinence.
compelled to do hard work in the farm land for the purpose of income generation. It has
supported me financially and made me able to continue my study.
On the other hand it has bad impact on me socially, emotionally and morally
because in our society doing a hard manual work being a son of headmaster is not
considered good. We were the middle class family members according to the social
stratification at that time. But I had to do such hard manual work at any cost for my
study and my mother used to
repeat a Nepali proverb 'Rope
Pachhi Falchha' (If you plant a
seedling it will give product)
encouraged me in doing
manual hard work related to
agriculture and also my
learning. My mother was very
much tactful in the matter of
income generation in spite of
being an illiterate person and
took burdens upon her own
shoulders. I always appreciate
her great management skills to
manage home, family matters
and our education.
As I flashback my schooling at primary level, I was considered smart (sharp
minded) at my study, compared to other elder brothers. I did very well in lower
secondary level. But in secondary level my position decreased gradually and was
3
unstable because of our family's economic liquidation and hard work. Unfortunately, I
secured second division in my School Leaving Certificate [S.L.C] examination.
Seeking the Answers of My Mysterious Questions
Looking back at my days of schooling, my journey to formal education began
from the public school. I joined this school because my father was assistant head
teacher at secondary level. Then for three years I studied in a boarding school. There I
found child friendly teaching learning environment. Students from privately managed
school are involved in various extracurricular and co-curricular activities which create
sound environment for their learning. Again when I studied in public school at grade
four, I feel that the teachers there were nothing more than political activists. I usually
saw that my father was engaged in home tuition rather than upgrading himself and
doing actual classroom teaching.
I wondered why students used to come to my house to attend this tuition class.
At that time I had no answer to this question. With the passage of time my journey of
learning went ahead towards higher class and I came to know that our education system
was centrally controlled. I was also victimized by this system and finally passed my
S.L.C examination in second division. Then I joined science stream at a government
college in Chitwan district. After completing 2 years, I left science stream and joined
Higher Secondary Education Board [HSEB] and my dream of being an engineer was
broken down. The number system of university led me to join humanities faculty under
HSEB. I passed B. Ed and M. Ed degree in mathematics education from Tribhuvan
University [TU]. My learning journey was stopped for some time after the completion
of master degree. I looked for suitable job in many institutions but I could not find. I
thought to continue my family occupation of cow farming and modernize it because I
had the experience and knowledge of this occupation since my childhood. My
4
mysterious question is related with ownership of curriculum development and its
applicability everyday life of people.
My personal philosophy of education is that education should be technical and
vocational so that everyone has the certain types of skill at his/her hands after
completing some level of education. This makes people self reliant and make them
capable to acquire some types of job opportunities locally. But cultural hegemony of
my society doesn’t provide me freedom to do such types of agriculture based profession
because the social expectation to see educated people in white collar jobs.
Employment oriented education and practicable curriculum develop skills
among learner’s so to enable them to earn money. It makes people self dependent after
some level of academic degree. This motivated me to be involved in agriculture along
with my education. At that time I was able to produce fresh vegetables in our farm land
professionally and sell them in the market. As I had no any academic qualification but
there was need of money to give continuity of my study, I was compelled to do so. I
don't know whether I did this work knowingly or unknowingly. But I did it and I still
have such types of skills.
After the completion of my bachelor's degree I joined a boarding school as a
mathematics teacher for some time. As a teacher, I encountered various curricular
problems and issues and they directly influenced teaching learning activities. Our
school curriculum seems to be very much traditional than that of other countries. Most
of the contents placed in our school level curriculum appeared not useful in solving
daily life problem which made students lost attention for their learning in the classroom.
As a researcher I have felt that the dropout rates in school become a problem in school
education. I felt that the hindrance of our education was nothing other than the
curriculum. Learners suffered because of the curriculum and wanted a curriculum
5
applicable to everyday life. This problem hit my mind again and again. When I went
through literatures in my learning journey of curriculum studies, I was able to find that
teachers can only bring those things in curriculum content so as to make it useful in
everyday life of students. I think that the tendency of teachers’ representativeness in
curriculum development process and its success are related to each other because to
make education successful, good curriculum is needed. Curriculum becomes good if
only it addresses the need and interest of learners. Also curriculum can be successful if
it is able to fulfill the needs of pupils in everyday life. Teacher is the only person who
understands the children closely and is able to fulfill their needs because he/she lives in
the society where the children live. Therefore, teachers' involvement in curriculum
development process appeared to be an important issue.
Indeed teachers need to participate in curriculum development process from
designing to revision. If adequate responsibility is provided to teachers they can
incorporate the local concepts in curriculum in accordance with the need and interest of
the learners (Slattery, 2006). Our curriculum policy has also declared such type of
provision to involve teachers in curriculum development process (National Curriculum
Framework [NCF] 2005, [review, 2007]). But a question arises why we are unable to
introduce usable curriculum until now. How teachers will have opportunity to be
involved in curriculum development process?
I bear the experience of theoretical aspect of learning as a student and teacher. I
could not get any job opportunities even after completing my academic degree of
different levels. I am still trying to seek the answer to my question that whose
ownership is best suited in the curriculum development process? To what extent it
fulfills the learners need and interest in their context? Here I used narrative as a tool of
6
my autobiography to reflect my lived experiences. The essence of my reflection and
narration is that the practical aspect of curriculum.
Voyage of Kathmandu University [KU] and My Progressive Movement
While I decided to get enrolled in master of philosophy [M. Phil] program in
Kathmandu University School of Education as a student of Curriculum and Instruction,
I wanted to improve my knowledge and skill in the field of education and in general
curriculum and Instruction in particular. The unique and enlightened culture and sound
environment of KU provided me with various opportunities to advance my prior
knowledge and skills. Highly qualified and professional professors and tutors have
always encouraged and helped
me in whatever support I
needed. After some time at KU
gradually I experienced some
progress in me and became able
to develop my own ideas.
Finally I became aware of the
burning educational issues in my
field of curriculum studies both
the academic and the personal
ones.
Over the past decades,
the stakeholder's participation in
the field of education and curriculum development or curriculum decision making
became one of the challenging issues everywhere. It seems that many developed
countries around the world have emphasized the teacher’s greater role in the curriculum
Other than In KU…
After joining to K.U. to do M. Phil,
I got sound educational environment and various
opportunities within having the expertise and
experienced professor/tutors and scholarly culture.
Which are not other than in K. U.?
I fulfilled my great passion of quality education.
I became successful to achieve my day dream of
M. Phil in every step.
On defending dissertation proposal, I left all the
fear of research.
Accepting the warm guidance and willing to
completing everything on time.
I became successful because of the cooperative
and friendly culture of K.U.
Which are not other than in K. U.?
7
development process. Also Nepal's government gives emphasis on stakeholder
participation in developing school level curriculum in policy (NCF, 2007).
But teachers, one of the major stakeholders who bring the curriculum in front of
the student seem to be in shadow. This is very much crucial in the field of teaching and
learning. Situating this issue in mind, I tried to study in this area with a purpose of
being able to contribute in the understanding of teachers’ participation in the process of
curriculum development. After thinking for a long time, I discussed with my own soul,
along with professors, tutors and colleagues before finalizing the research issue for my
M Phil Degree.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I tried to justify the reason of selecting my research topic
“Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process”. Here I wrote my story
as personal reflection for the background of this study and tried to depict how I crossed
my school life as well as higher education. Then, I discussed my personal feeling and
circumstances during the several modes of my life.
8
In My Words
Why Good Curriculum?
For every nation to make a basic
foundation, development, growth and
new innovation it is crucial to make
good, effective and efficient curriculum.
Curriculum is priority to live in today’s
society.
Curriculum is the key to make us free
from worries and tensions.
Good, effective and efficient curriculum
is necessary, for economic satisfaction
and ecological sustainability.
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Chapter Overview
Before introducing this dissertation, I would like to throw light on the present
scenario that provides the justification for the need of this research. To establish my
argument in this chapter, I have discussed the concept of curriculum process,
curriculum development, and teacher's participation in curriculum development process.
I have highlighted the statement of the
problem, rationale of the study, purpose
of the study and research questions as a
researcher. I have delimited my study
within a certain boundary and made a
synopsis of my dissertation before ending
the chapter summary. 'Curriculum' is a
word repeatedly used in education with
different meanings, definitions and levels
of development. Every nation has certain
standards of curriculum development and
is developed by the teams of teachers and administrators at the local or national level.
Whatever be the process of development of the curriculum that is directly associated
with the classroom teacher.
Before one can understand curriculum development process, one needs to
understand the meaning and definition of curriculum. The knowledge of curriculum is
9
important for every professional teacher. Null (2011) said that teachers need to be
knowledgeable about curriculum and the process by which curricula may be developed.
When teachers consider the curriculum issues there are raise up fundamental questions
about why, what, how and when to teach? Why do we teach in the first place? What do
we expect out of the activity called teaching? After these general questions, many other
curriculum directed questions are arising for the teachers and the curriculum developers
such as: What knowledge is of most useful to the learners? What activities are most
effective in enabling learners to acquire this knowledge (information, facts, skills,
values, attitude, etc)? What is the most appropriate way to organize these activities?
How do I know if learners have acquired this knowledge?
The process of curriculum development is essential for successfully achieving
educational goals for students. The term or the concept 'curriculum development'
provides itself to different interpretations and is not easy to capture in one description or
process. It is a complex but dynamic process which tends to lead to many
interpretations and perspectives. Normally a curriculum is developed by designers at
various levels (governmental or departmental) and implemented by practitioners at the
other levels, by teacher in schools (Mostert, 1986‘b’ as cited in Carl, 2009).
Curriculum development is an umbrella concept for the process which is
characterized by the presence of phases such as curriculum design, dissemination,
implementation and evaluation. It is ongoing and dynamic process which involves a
variety of persons and role players (Carl, 2009). NCF (2007) has defined curriculum
development as the process of planning learning opportunities intended to bring about
certain desired changes in pupils, and the assessment of the extent to which these
changes have taken places. NCF emphasizes the importance of professional
development of teachers with a focus on curriculum development and implementation
10
in order to ensure that teachers understand the curriculum content and the process
involved in supporting curriculum to make sound decisions about what is important for
students to learn. "Teachers play fundamental roles in the application of curriculum
process in their classrooms. Whether teachers are directly responsible for curriculum
development or whether they interpret, implement, modify existing curriculum
documents, they require a sound, substantive understanding of how it may affect them
and their students" (Bishop, 1989 as cited in Print, 2007, p. 3). Clearly, teachers
participate in multiplicity of curriculum activities at classroom level. These are the very
substance of their daily teaching tasks and include such activities as selection of specific
content, selection of teaching strategies, use instructional material and so forth. As
implementers, teachers' role is to apply curriculum developed elsewhere and has a
minimum responsibility and involvement in the curriculum development phase of the
curriculum process (Print, 2007, pp. 16-17).
“Teachers may undertake the vital role of curriculum researcher as teachers
become involved with school-level curriculum decision making, they require a sound
understanding of curriculum concepts and processes” (Kelly, 2004, p. 118). Planning,
design and development in curriculum are closely related terms. Once a curriculum has
been conceptualized, through the process of curriculum planning and incorporating a
curriculum design, it may then be developed, usually to become a written document and
finally to be implemented and evaluated. All this curriculum process become
successful and applicable whenever a teacher gets directly involved in the whole
process (Wiles, 2009).
In Nepal, the Education Act and Regulations 8th amendment (2004) has
entrusted the Curriculum development centre (CDC) for the development of curriculum
for the school level. So the centre plays a vital role for curriculum development,
11
updating, revision and improvement and has developed a mechanism for collecting
information and feedback on curriculum from its users (students and teachers) and other
stakeholders. One of the most important elements in a successful school teaching
program is the existence of a well articulated curriculum. Definitely, a teacher is the
primary audience of the curriculum development. Only professional and efficient
teachers can serve the curriculum development process because they are the ones who
have authentic knowledge on what students have already learned and what is required to
prepare for the uppers levels (Joshi, n. d). Therefore, curriculum articulation becomes
smooth if the teachers are involved in the curriculum development process.
Furthermore, their engagement in the curriculum development process helps to
develop their ownership and commitment for the effective implementation of
curriculum. Traditional view of curriculum implies that curriculum is developed by one
set of people, implemented by another and received by yet another. This is the way of
perceiving curriculum which is sometimes described as naturally occurring "thing"
(Grundy, 1987; Maphosa & Mutoppa, 2012). Curriculum is also viewed as an activity
or plan of action (Stenhouse, 1975; Su, 2012). But "curriculum is in the mind of the
curriculum transmitter, and can only be learned from the words and actions of such a
mind" (Sharpes, 2013, p.19). What is the situation of curriculum development in Nepal
in terms of ‘developer’, ‘implementer’ dichotomy? How teachers are talking and
fulfilling their roles in curriculum development? There are some important questions
relating to the process of curriculum development in Nepal and the participation of
teachers in it.
Taba (1962), as cited in Ornstein and Hunkins, (2013) said that the teachers
should participate in developing curriculum. She felt that the administrative model was
really in wrong order. Curriculum should be designed by the user of the program that is
12
classroom teacher. Curriculum perceived in this light requires active teacher
participation in its making. In other words, a teacher is the most important person in
designing and improving the curriculum. Sharpes (2013) explains that "curriculum is
what the teacher does and what the teacher knows, and who the teacher is, the teacher's
behavior, knowledge and personality" (p. 11). Since teachers are the critical agents for
bringing changes into their classrooms, the teachers themselves should be the major
focus of analysis and source of evidence regarding the introduction of curriculum
development (Doyle & Ponder, 1977as cited in Anthony, 2008).
Thus, this study aims to seek teachers’ participation in existing curriculum
development process of Nepal. Also this study aims to uncover the existing curriculum
development practices of Nepali schools from teacher’s perspective. It also tries to see
the teachers’ understanding as well as perceptions about curriculum concepts and
curriculum development practices. This dissertation derives from interpretive research
paradigm, which is depended on qualitative information gathered during fieldworks
carried out in schools of Chitwan district. On the basis of my research purpose, this
study is qualitative in nature which required in-depth understanding of these
phenomena. What I experienced, what I saw, what I observed and what I argued about
curriculum development process and teachers’ participation would always be
insufficient for a comprehensive and representative study. Therefore, I selected three
teachers as my research participants to strengthen and support my study.
Statement of the Problem
After analyzing related documents, discussion made with teachers and
classroom observation during my pre-proposal fieldwork, I have come to know that
there are several barriers and problems to make curriculum development process
participatory.
13
NCF (2007) has mentioned that;
Curriculum development process is required to be highly participatory such that
curriculum experts are teamed up with parents, teachers, gender experts, experts
of child-centered teaching and learning, and representative ethnic minorities,
dalits, and people with disabilities so that curriculum becomes non-
discriminatory and based upon principles of social inclusion and equity (p. 25).
Without seriously considering the participants' voices, this study could not have
provided detailed and deep understanding about the curriculum concept, curriculum
development process and teachers’ participation in it. So it was imperative for me to
understand and appreciate the voices of my participants. Being a teacher myself,
educator and a student of curriculum and instruction, my keen interest made it easier for
me to conduct this study.
As I have experienced in teaching learning process, there are a number of
curriculum reform initiatives taken in school education in Nepal. But there are not any
studies that analyze the curriculum development process from teachers' perspectives
and that explore the extent of teacher's participation in this process. Carl (2009) noted
that teachers must not be mere implementers of curriculum. They are able to develop,
apply and evaluate the relevant curriculum dynamically and creatively.
Teachers have many roles and responsibilities in the process of curriculum
development apart from implementation and evaluation. To make a curriculum
participatory, inclusive, applicable and successful teachers’ participation in each and
every phase of curriculum development seems to be crucial. Teacher explores student
reactions and interactions with learning experiences and uses this information to design
the curriculum in a way that is responsive to their needs (Glanz & Horenstein, 2000).
14
A curriculum should be grounded in practice, students’ needs and interests.
Curriculum development is an attempt to describe the work observed in classrooms to
ensure that it is adequately communicated to teachers and others (Stenhouse, 1975 as
cited in Smith, 2000). Literature of scholars has explained differently about the
curriculum development process in accordance with the context of education.
Curriculum development process itself has different phases. Government of Nepal has
tried to make an effort to participate teachers in each phase of curriculum development
process (NCF, 2007). However, behaviorally teachers are not seen to be participated in
other process except form implementation and evaluation overtly. Indeed there has been
a place to raise questions about the roles and representativeness of teacher in the
process of curriculum development. So, it is crucial to investigate not only the question
of teacher participation, but also what is expected of them when their participation is
sought.
Certain key questions such as the following arise: How the teachers understand
and explain the curriculum? What are teachers' perceptions in respect of their present
role in curriculum development, or what should they be? To what extent are the voices
of teachers who wish to become more involved taken in cognizance for ensuring their
access and participation? If such opportunities do exist, what is the nature and scope of
their participation? What is the present tendency regarding teacher's participation in
terms of being recipients or partners in curriculum development process? How the
teachers utilize the curriculum in the teaching learning process? What factors are more
responsible to limits the teachers' participation in curriculum development process?
These questions seek answer to the key questions. With these questions in mind,
research was undertaken to investigate teacher's participation in curriculum
development process.
15
Purpose of the Study
The main purpose of this study is to explore the teachers’ perception of
curriculum development process, their concept of curriculum itself and their ownership
of the curriculum. More specifically, the study attempted to explore teachers'
conceptualization of curriculum, perceived roles of teachers in curriculum development
and barriers of teachers' participation in the curriculum development process.
Research Questions
As a researcher, I understand that research questions are crucial for every
researcher to snapshoot the whole research. Whole research processes is controlled
according to research questions during the study of any research.
Clearly, good research questions not only provide right direction to the research
but also give solution to the study problem. Keeping this in mind, I have constructed
following research questions to hold my research problem.
1. How do teachers perceive and develop the concept of curriculum?
2. How do teachers perceive the practice of curriculum development process in
Nepal?
3. How do teachers express their experience of participation in curriculum
development process?
4. How do teachers describe the barriers that limit their participation in curriculum
development process?
Rationale of the Study
As a researcher, gaining the perspective of the teachers in the curriculum
development process through this research allowed me to better facilitate the process
and provided me with an ‘emic’ perspective from which to drawn upon. Emphasizing
the importance of gaining the ‘emic’ perspective to understanding phenomena saying,
16
“The very rigidity of definition may lead to misunderstanding of the essential problems
involved. If it is our purpose to understand the thoughts of people, the whole analysis of
experience must be based on their concepts, not our” (Pleto & Pleto, 1978, p. 55 as cited
in Lauridsen, 2003). I was engaged in this study of the process of curriculum
development and attempted to uncover and bring to light teachers' perceptions of their
roles in this process. I had needed to do so from various perspectives, while exploring
the phenomenon as a researcher. I needed to respect and reflect the voices of classroom
teachers’ as the participant in this process.
Currently educational changes have been taking place in Nepal. These changes
require curriculum development strategy for school level. Efforts are being made to
make education based on local needs. Further, the necessity of local curriculum is also
being emphasized by persons from different sectors as well as research reports. NCF
declared ten to fifteen percentage of authorities to local need based education in
secondary level. Curriculum will be developed by teacher themselves locally (CDC,
2005). But, my concern is not local curriculum; it's just a scenario of teacher
participation in curriculum development process of Nepal.
Curriculum development is an integral part of education and is a phenomenon
critical to education and deserving examinations. But, exploration of this phenomenon
from voices of the teachers who engage in the curriculum development process is
significant with respect to the process of curriculum development itself, the actual
curriculum construction/development and the implementation of curriculum. It may
provide alternative feedback to the concerned bodies so that they maximize teachers'
participation. So, this study might be efficient and effective for increasing quality of
future activities.
17
Thus, this study is crucial to analyze teachers’ participation in the curriculum
development process of Nepal. Also, the study plays a prominent role to investigate the
extent of teachers’ participation in curriculum development process of Nepal. Thus this
study intends to bring change in existing practices of curriculum development process
and to contribute in the academic field. At the same time it aims to draw lessons to
improve the curriculum development and implementation process in Nepal and provide
lessons for policy and practice.
Delimitation of the Study
This study largely focuses on exploring the ideas of teacher’s participation and
curriculum development practices in Nepali schools. Also I have tried to argue about
existing policies and practices of curriculum development and teacher’s participation.
Due to time constraint and lack of resources, this study was limited in Chitwan district.
During the study, only three public schools were selected. The information was
collected from the purposively selected key informants, one teacher from each of the
selected schools. So informants of this study were three secondary level mathematics
teachers.
Synopsis of My Dissertation
This study consists of seven chapters. First three chapters focus on introduction
of the study, literature review and methodological and paradigmatic considerations to
justify my thesis. I would like to say that first three chapters lay the foundation of my
study which directs the further discussion and guides the whole study. I have discussed
and analyzed participants' feeling and understanding in chapter four, five and six
through empirical materials that are directly derived from the fieldwork. The final
chapter includes the reflection of overall process and the discussion of outcomes.
18
The first chapter gives a scenario about curriculum concept and curriculum
development process as an introduction of the study. This chapter includes statement of
the problem, purpose of the study and research questions. I justify my study in the '
rationale' of the study and I delimit my study in the delimitation of the study. At the
end of the first chapter, I introduce the synopsis of my dissertation.
Chapter two forms the backbone of my study from the theoretical perspective
where I have reviewed literature about curriculum concepts and practices of curriculum
development and participation of teachers in it. My third chapter has introduced my
philosophical lens as the methodological aspect of the study. In this chapter, research
paradigm, research design, tools and procedures are discussed with suitable
justification. In fourth, fifth and sixth chapters, I have presented empirical finding from
my fieldwork. Seventh chapter is the last chapter of my dissertation where I have tried
to draw the meaning of my study as findings and conclusion.
Chapter Summary
This chapter forms the introduction to my research study. I have defined
curriculum and curriculum development, practices of curriculum development process
using some evidences in my brief introduction. Highlighting teachers’ role in
curriculum development process, I have presented some statements as statements of the
problem. Based on this, I have tried to justify my purpose of the study.
I have raised some research questions that have been addressed in this
dissertation. Ownership of curriculum practices is a burning issue of the 21st century in
the academic field all over the world. So I have justified my study in rationale of the
study. My study was qualitative, the required fieldworks for the study were conducted
in Chitwan district, and I was selected three teachers as participants from different
schools, it has been was explained in the delimitation of the study.
19
Review of Literature
Develops the new insight and tries to
summarize the literature.
Tries to seek the systematic, explicit and
replicable knowledge.
Fills the gaps and extends the prior study.
Integrates the summary of broad themes,
theories, experiences, policies and practices.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter Overview
“Literature review is the comprehensive study and an interpretation of the
literature that relates to a particular topic for the research tries to develop the new
insight, relevant information”
(Aveyard, 2010, p. 5). Reviewing
the literature is important in any
research study because it tries to
summarize the literature that is
available on any topic. “A research
literature review is a systematic,
explicit and replicable method for identifying, evaluating and synthesizing the existing
body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars and
practitioners” (Fink, 2010, p. 3). Literature review is crucial and essential aspects to
justify and to make sense of the particular research topic.
It provides essential support and information to make the study more reliable
and helps to make the research contextual. Creswell (2013) says that literature review
relates a study to larger ongoing dialogue in the literature about a topic, filling in gaps
and extending prior studies. Literature review can be accepted as the integrative
summary of broad themes, theories, experiences, existing policies and practices in the
research topic. Indeed, I had gone through the different sources to review related
literature to finalize my topic of research, filling the gaps of knowledge and extending
20
prior studies. They are books, journal articles, empirical studies, policy related
documents, historical documents and theories related to curriculum development.
I have organized this chapter with the beginning of reflection over literature
review and ends with chapter summary. Throughout this chapter I have highlighted
concept of curriculum and reviewed it from the philosophical point of view. Also some
effort has been made to see the development of curriculum from historical perspective
and school level curriculum development process in Nepal. Curriculum development
process and teacher’s role in it and international scenario of curriculum development
practices are also reviewed. I have tried to review previous research and two theories
related to curriculum development. Finally I have mentioned the research gap and tried
to develop my own conceptual framework for this study.
Understanding the Concept of Curriculum
The word curriculum steams from the Latin verb Currere, which means to run.
The Latin noun curriculum refers to both a 'Course' and a 'Vehicle' (Mckernan, 2013).
In the context of education, the most obvious interpretation of the word is to view it as a
course of 'Learning'. The very short definition of curriculum as a 'plan for learning'
used by the Hilda Taba in 1962, therefore seems quite adequate. Therefore the word
'Curriculum' means different things to different people. To some, curriculum is the text
books used in the course. To others it means daily actions taken by the teachers and the
students in the classroom for learning achievement. To some others it is the content of
instruction (Kelly, 2004). Moreover, it is a set of skills targeted for instruction and also
assessed for instruction. In this sense, curriculum does not refer to the materials (text
books, information material, lab materials) utilized and does not refers to the education
tools and methods used by teachers to achieve the instructional targets i.e. Curriculum.
21
As defined in this fashion, curriculum is simply the list of skills that we wish our
students to learn (Null, 2011). In a broad sense Mckernan (2013) says, "A curriculum is
more like a musician's folio than an engineer's blue print" (p. 7). Carl (2009) said that
curriculum is therefore a broad concept which may include all planned activities and
thus also subject courses which take place during a normal school day. It also includes
after school planned activities, such as societies and sports.
This all takes place within a specific system, is continuously subject to
evaluation and the aims lead to accompany the child to adulthood so that he/she can be
a useful citizen with in community. (Schubert, 1986 as cited in Anderson, 2004) tries to
makes different images or characterization of understanding of the curriculum.
Curriculum as Subject Matter is the most traditional understanding of curriculum as the
combination of subject matter to form a body of content to be taught.
Curriculum as Experience is a more recent understanding of curriculum as the
set of experiences that learners encounter in educational contexts. Most of these
experiences have been purposively planned by means of the written curriculum but
many more experiences are encountered by learners in educational contexts. By
experiencing the hidden curriculum learners acquire many forms of learning that were
not planned but are usually highly significant.
Curriculum as Intended Learning Outcome argues that curriculum is a
comprehensive planning of learning experiences for students, predetermined before
they commence and is the best way to address learners’ needs. Curriculum as Cultural
Reproduction, views that curriculum should reflect the culture of a particular society.
The role of school, it is argued, and hence the curriculum, is to pass on the salient
knowledge and values used by one generation to the succeeding generation. Curriculum
as Currere refers to curriculum as a process of providing continuous personal meaning
22
to individuals that emphasizes the individual’s capacity to participate and re-
conceptualize up on one’s experience of life. Curriculum is the interpretation of lived
experience. Through the social process of sharing, individuals come to a greater
understanding of themselves as well as others and the world. Curriculum as an Agenda
for Social Reconstruction holds that schools should provide an agenda of knowledge
and values that guide students to improve society and the cultural institutions, beliefs,
and activities that support it.
Curriculum as Discrete Tasks and Concepts is seen as a set of tasks to be
mastered, and they are assumed to lead to a pre-specified end. Curriculum as a Program
of Planned Activities focuses on a comprehensive view of all activities planned for
delivery to students and incorporates scope and sequence, interpretation and balance of
subject matter, motivational devices, teaching techniques, and anything else that can be
planned in advance.
After analyzing the above concepts of curriculum, I have come to know to that
curriculum indicates content to be taught in the classroom to the way of providing the
personal meaning of individual through the lived experiences. Not only that,
curriculum is a set of learning experiences that learner encounter in educational context.
Similarly, Curriculum is intended plan which reflects what student should learn and
must acquire after the end of entire year of schooling and also the competencies to be
mastered by student. Society should be improved by curriculum because no society or
culture is perfect and curriculum reflects the culture of particular society where it is
being taught. Hence the concept of curriculum may depend on the thought of people,
their place and their culture.
23
Development of Curriculum: A Historical Perspective
Undoubtedly, curriculum is a bottom line of education. It is an essential and
crucial aspect of education. Education exists due to curriculum and without education
curriculum does not exist too. They are interrelated each other and so are human being
and education. The development of human beings and the development of education
seem to be taking place simultaneously. That’s why development of human,
development of education and development of curriculum go hand in hand helping one
another (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013).
However no clear time can be traced on when the curriculum started to exist,
though education is found to be changing according to the change of time. Education
and curriculum seem to be changing to meet the needs and aspirations of individual and
society. Throughout the western as well as eastern history of education, it is found to be
used as a means of getting salvation however no written curriculum existed in the past.
At that time, education remained confined within the religious doctrine. In the other
words, religious institutions provided education which was dedicated to the religious
principles to promote religious impact. Religious scriptures like Bible and Koran were
taught by Christian and Muslims respectively. And, Geeta, Chandi, Veda etc were
taught in Gurukul education system so far as Hindu religion is concerned. At that time
the main objectives of education were to preserve, develop, promote and transfer
culture and religion to the successive generation by evoking an individual to have self-
actualization (G. C, 2007).
All human activities take place within the particular time and context. So do the
curricular activities. Curriculum is not so an old field because it is emerged after the
publication of Franklin Bobbitt’s book 'The Curriculum' in 1918 (Ornstein and Hunkins,
2013). Nepal has its own history of understanding curriculum and its development
24
process. At the ancient age, the families and the society took the place of educational
institutions in the Nepali society. The religious scriptures like Veda, Upanishad, Puran,
Astrology, Geeta etc were the means of education in Hindu society and curriculum was
based on these religious scriptures, according to different religious principles (G. C,
2007).
At the time of Amnshubarma, in the 7th century B. C, the means of education
were “Gurukul”, “Devekul”, “Rajkul” and “Rishikul” etc. However in Malla period in
Nepal, curriculum was constructed including different cultures, arts, handicrafts and
other vocational subjects. Also in the time of king Prithivi Narayan Shah, Veda, Puran,
Astrology, Grammer, Tantrik Bidhya were highly emphasized in curriculum (Sharma,
1993). Overall the ancient period of Nepalese education emphasized morality,
spirituality and discipline through the religious scriptures. During medieval age, the
education system of Nepal was comparatively more developed. English education
systems as well as religious scriptures were established. However, the education
system was based on “Gurukul” though the curriculum was made by some British
scholars. And, at the end of this age, curriculum was implemented in Nepal which was
based on the curriculum of Patna University of India (Sharma, 1993).
After, the establishment of democracy in 1950 education became a right of the
people. In 1952, Nepal National Education Planning Commission [NNEPC] was
formed and it determined the curriculum of primary and secondary level formally for
the first time in Nepal. It also encouraged making necessary curriculum for non-formal
education. It emphasized to make national education planning to make new curriculum
as a national curriculum. The new curriculum was centrally controlled was based on
top-down approach and was same for all students all over Nepal. Role of teacher in the
curriculum development activities was not ensured because the responsibility was given
25
to national board of curriculum writing committee but there was a little freedom
provided for teachers to make local curriculum placed in the periphery of
national/central curriculum framework (Sharma, 2009).
To address the real need of Nepali education arena, National Education System
Planning [NESP] was implemented 1971 and it brought a change in pattern, structure
and organization of educational, national and grade wise objectives, teaching materials,
teaching methods, teaching learning activities, teacher training and evaluation methods.
Undoubtedly, it was the first effective step in the development of education in Nepal.
NESP considered “Curriculum as the educational program to meet the objectives of
education”. For this, curriculum should be directed on the basis of national objectives
and principles of education. NESP was proved to be the first scientific educational
planning because it clearly referred to establish a curriculum development centre to
make the curriculum according to the need of time. But it also emphasizes centrally
directed same curriculum for all levels based on the objective model of curriculum
development and no more role was provided for local teachers to participate in the
activities for development of the central curriculum (Sharma, 2009).
After the peoples’ movement and re-establishment of the democracy in 1989,
relevant changes were made in education sector. National Education Commission
[NEC] was formed. The commission recommended further strengthening of the
Curriculum, Textbooks and Supervision Development Centre. The centre was expected
to bring reforms in the matter of curriculum, textbooks, and teaching-materials,
teaching procedures, evaluation, observation and methods of examination through
research, development and innovation. The commission further recommended to made
school level curriculum relevant to local environment and useful for daily lives of
students. This certainly has some implications to curriculum making and teaching-
26
learning processes. The commission also highlighted the need for continual
development and renewal of curriculum. In this regard, it has recommended to updates
curriculum in every five years based on research and experience (Sharma, 2009).
NEC has emphasized to make the curriculum scientific and relevant to the
national needs and aspirations. For this the commission recommended to encourage the
participation of teachers in designing and developing the curriculum. National
Curriculum Framework (NCF, 2006), in line with the policies proposed in School
Sector Reform Program [SSRP], recommended to re-structure the school level. NCF
also highlighted the need for encouraging the participation of civil society in the
different phases of curriculum development process. Based on the provisions made by
NCF, Curriculum Development Centre [CDC], plays the main role for the development
of centrally directed curriculum leaving limited space for the involvement of teachers
and civil society in the conceptualization and development of national curriculum
(Sharma, 2009). NCF (2007) declared ten to fifteen percentage of authorities to local
need based education in secondary level. Curriculum will be developed by teacher
themselves at local.
School Level Curriculum Development Process in Nepal
The concept of curriculum and the process of curriculum and textbook
development have been changed in recent years. Curriculum is now viewed as a
process and it includes intended, taught and learned curriculum. In this context, we
need to capture the interactive, dynamic nature of the curriculum process where national
education goals are established. Also, the curriculum development process needs to be
changed so that many actors such as female and male teachers, other educators with
recent teaching experience, curriculum experts, and members of the wider community
become actively involved.
27
Figure: Curriculum Development Process in Nepal
A Continuous Process
Source: The Development of Education: National Report of Nepal. Ministry of
Education and Sport, Kathmandu, 2004.
As indicated in the ‘Curriculum and Textbook Development Guidelines’ (2002),
CDC draws from the following sources for the development of new curriculum:
• Recommendations given by education commissions formed at the national level.
• Suggestions provided by teachers.
• Suggestions and reactions obtained through workshops and interaction programs
attended by teachers, guardians, social workers, and intellectuals.
• Suggestions received from various sectors established to develop human
resources.
• Objectives, policies and programs determined for the purpose of updating
curriculum on timely manner.
• Innovations, research and development outcomes and philosophy of education.
• Suggestions and advice received from different channels of communication.
According to (Ministry of Education [MOE], 2004), National Curriculum
Council [NCC] chaired by the minister of education, approves all curriculums and
guides the detailed development work of the CDC by setting operational and
Curriculum
Development Process
in Nepal Stakeholder
Regional Curriculum & Textbook Co-ordination
Committee
National Curriculum Development and Assessment Council
Subject Committees
Curriculum Development Centre
28
administrative policy. NCC forms technical committees when additional advice is
required. Matters concerning the relevance of curricula drafted by CDC may be
redrafted by such a technical committee if the NCC feels the need of additional advice.
CDC is responsible for the maintenance, transmission and renewal of the school
education curriculum.
The wide ranging activities of the centre include developing, revising and
disseminating textbooks and teacher’s support materials. A program of seminars and
workshops supports these activities. CDC’s development and monitoring work is
carried out by curriculum subjects units, advised by curriculum subject specialist
committees. Subject unit covers languages, sciences and math, social studies, health
and physical education. To support CDC’s activities, various studies and surveys are
conducted on curriculum related issues and problems. The activities of CDC give rise to
a wide range of relationships with other institutions. The most important of these
relationships is with teachers and student in schools who are the immediate end users of
the centre’s products (MOE, 2004).
CDC claim that it has developed a mechanism for collecting information and
feedback on curriculum from its users (students and teachers) and other stakeholders
such as parliamentarians, guardians, school management committees, members of
district education committees, special needs groups and civil society. Furthermore,
curriculum updating, revision and improvement also claimed to be done according to
the feedback received from different types of stakeholders and through piloting of the
curriculum (NCF, 2007).
29
The curriculum development process described in any the 8th amendment of
education and education act 2004, appendix-7, rule 32 is followed the following steps.
1. In any subject area, a write-up subcommittee consisting of the Curriculum
Officer of the CDC and other subject experts first draft the curriculum.
2. The subcommittee then submits the draft curriculum to the Curriculum
Textbook Subject Committee (CTSC) consisting of subject teachers, teacher
educators, and university professors for comprehensive review.
3. CTSC reviews the draft curriculum on the basis of objectives, content, curricular
weighting, instructional materials, and assessment methods.
4. If deemed necessary, the CTSC makes necessary additions or deletions and if
major revision is needed the CTSC sends it back to the subcommittee for
redrafting or revising the draft curriculum.
5. In Nepal with deep study, detailed analysis of experts and curriculum officers,
drafting and redrafting and revising curriculum was developed and improved.
6. The final draft is submitted to the national curriculum committee for approved.
After reviewing the curriculum development process in Nepal, I have come to
know that the centre plays a vital role for curriculum development, update, revision and
improvement and has developed a mechanism for collecting information and feedback
on curriculum from its users (Students and teachers) and other stakeholders.
Teacher’s Role in Curriculum Development Process
As we are saying teachers are the curriculum themselves. They do not need to
implement the curriculum as they adapt from some agency. They can develop their
own curriculum. Carl (2009) said that the direct participation of teachers in the
curriculum process will ensure the levels of successes, they must therefore, demand
their voices to be heard while developing curriculum. Teachers want to be partners in
30
the process of curriculum development and not mere passengers or onlookers.
Teachers' involvement, co-operation and their role is said to be crucial for consultation
and receiving feedback before and during the design phase; while there will be greater
participation during implementation and evaluation. Hence teacher is a core person
whose responsibility in regard to curriculum development cannot be entirely ignored
(Print, 2007).
Ornstein and Hunkins (2013) argue that the politics of education is concerned
with who benefits and how those benefits are determined. Curriculum participants, both
educators and non educators, have to determine what types of curricula will benefit
what students, how to select those curricula, who will receive the benefits of particular
curricula, and how to deliver those benefits. Emphasizing the importance of
participation of stakeholders on policy formulation, Marsh (2009) says that proposals
for curriculum reform can come from various sources; teachers, teacher unions, policy
makers, academics, politicians, media and pressure groups. Teachers' general
participation in policy making helps the process of curriculum development and
innovation to be effectively and efficiently implemented. Also teachers will have an
opportunity to add to their knowledge, skills and experiences to enrich the policy.
Curriculum development process requires the participation of curriculum team to
include expertise in curriculum design. Curriculum design and planning is one of the
stages in the process involved (Carl, 2009). Regarding various design options that exist
Ornstein and Hunkins (2013) says, regardless of the particular design, educators must
be concerned with the scope and sequence of the curriculum elements. They must also
pay attention to articulation, continuity, and balance.
According to Carl (2009) planning, being one of the curriculum development
phases, it possesses different actions such as situation analysis, formation of goals, and
31
determination of criteria for the selection and classification of content and planning of
an experimental design. Wiles and Bondi (2002) said that an emphasis should be given
to the persons who should involve in curriculum designing and planning in general and
the teachers in particular. Participation of teachers in designing and planning helps in
the curriculum development of quality and implementable materials. It also enables
every staff members to know what to do at each step of activities in the process.
Tyler (2000) said that the task of curriculum development among other things is
mainly to include constructing curriculum materials such as the syllabus, text books,
and teachers' guides. The construction of the syllabus, textbook and teachers' guides
must follow systematic and logical steps and procedures from the beginning to the end.
According to Finch (1999) whether an individual or team approach is used, it is
important to keep in mind that development consists of several stages, each of which
contributes to the overall materials' quality. Although it should take place on a
continuous basis, an important following phase in which teachers can participate in
curriculum activity is curriculum evaluation.
Derebssa (2000) suggests that curriculum evaluation should be included at the
beginning and at every stage of curriculum development. Evaluation is needed to
support the successful development and use of the new program. Ornstein and Hunkins
(2013) made also an argument more or less from the same stand point. They maintain
that teachers are perhaps the most obvious professionals who should assume evaluation
roles. In some cases, they have worked alone evaluating the curriculum, and in other
cases they have been shut off from the evaluation process.
Teachers' involvement in curriculum development activity is assumed crucial for
many authors. Carl (2009) noted that the teacher must not be mere implementers but
development agent who is able to develop, apply, and evaluate the relevant curriculum
32
dynamically and creatively. Ornstein and Hunkins (2013) quoting Taba indicated that
perhaps the best reason for cooperative evaluation of the curriculum is that such;
collective effort allows all unvoiced to get a total curriculum picture. If they
collaborate, they can ascertain the program's effectiveness not only with their own
students but also with all types of students. Marew (2000) said that curriculum
improvement is another area in which teachers can involve is the development of
curriculum materials and pinpoint that teachers are in the ideal position to advice on the
appropriateness, relevance and feasibility of both teacher guides and pupil texts.
According to Finch (1999), curriculum improvement focuses on the five aspects
of curriculum materials quality: effectiveness, efficiency, acceptability, practicality and
generalizability. However, Marew (2000) says that, the results arrived at and decisions
made as a result of piloting facilitate a final revision of the curriculum program before it
is made available for implementation in the schools. The revision will affect the whole
curriculum package from the objectives through the syllabus preparation as well as the
supportive textbooks and materials.
Another area in which teachers are expected to participate on curriculum
development process is at the stage of curriculum implementation (Marew, 2000).
According to Marsh (2009) implementation is an initial use phase for varied phases of
planned change of curriculum. Curriculum development is a never-ending process it
never stops because one must always aspire to continue improving. Carl (2009) said
curriculum revision and or quality control, therefore, can be employed as part of
reviewing the materials as a result of field testing. Finch (1999) and Marew (2000)
consider it as constant follow up of the process. Aggarawal (2009) said that quality
control should be taken into consideration during curriculum implementation. He
further ascertains that curriculum must be evaluated from time to time so as to make it
33
in conformity with the changing needs. Finally, teachers are expected not only to
participate in the major steps of curriculum development processes, but also in updating
and in quality control mechanisms of curricular materials throughout their career
endeavor.
After reviewing the above section of teachers’ role in curriculum development
process I have come to know that policy formulation, curriculum design and planning,
curriculum construction, testing the materials and curriculum improvement,
implementation, evaluation, and quality control are the major areas of curriculum
practice in which the role of teacher may seems to be very crucial. Every nation has its
own policy and practices of the role of teacher to participate in curriculum development.
No one can distract the teacher from this process but the dimension may vary for nation
to nation.
International Curriculum Development Practices
The nature of curriculum development may vary in accordance with the national
philosophy, aims, goal and purpose of education. According to Ornstein and Hunkins
(2013), the state sets the broad curriculum guidelines for what students should know
and be able to do. School districts or schools generally select textbooks, adhering to
state guidelines in the U.S. Within these guidelines, schools and even individual
teachers are generally expected to determine content details and the pace of instruction
so that it is suited to the characteristics of students. Elementary schools do not
generally assign students to specific teachers or classes based on their ability (U. S
Department of Education, 2008). Hence in United State of America the main
responsibility of curriculum development is on the teachers' shoulders because teachers
know the every student’s pace of learning.
34
According to the Australian curriculum for the learning area (ACARA, 2012),
process for developing the Australian curriculum has been involved broad engagement
with, and discussion and feedback about, the shape and content of curriculum that
involves four interrelated phases. Curriculum shaping includes key periods of
consultation- open public consultation as well as targeted consultation with key
stakeholders including teachers and schools, state and territory education authorities,
parents and students, professional associations, teacher unions, universities and industry
and community groups.
Curriculum writing phase produces Australian curriculum for a particular
learning area, that is, specifications of content and achievement standards to be used by
education authorities, schools and teachers in all states and territories. This phase
involves teams of writers, supported by expert advisory groups, and includes key-
periods of consultation-open public consultation as well as targeted consultation with
key stakeholders including teachers and schools, state and territory education
authorities, teacher unions, universities and industry and community groups.
Preparation for implementation phase involves delivery of the curriculum to school
authorities and to schools in an online environment for school authorities, schools and
teachers to prepare for implementation (ACARA, 2012).
Curriculum monitoring, evaluation and review of the foundation of year 10
Australian curriculum will be ongoing, with annual reports to the ACARA board
detailing any issues identified. Monitoring will be coordinated by ACARA and when
relevant data gathering is required it will apply partnerships approach involving state
and territory curriculum and school authorities. This might include data about areas for
which teachers require ongoing support in order to teach according to the curriculum.
35
The evaluation process may result in minor changes to or a revision of, the curriculum
(ACARA, 2012).
In Finland, the national core curriculum is a framework for making at the school
level curricula. It determines a common structure and the basic guidelines that the local
curriculum makers, school officials and teachers, use in order to build a local, context
driven curriculum. The national core curriculum has two parts. It includes the
objectives and core contents of teaching for all school subjects, and also describes the
missions, values and structure of education (The Finish National Board of Education,
2011).
China has adopted three level Curriculum development and management
system. National, State and School-based curriculum account for 80%, 15% and 5%,
respectively in the whole national curriculum plan. Based on local condition, schools
can develop their own curricula or implement the national curriculum creatively, such
that students can have a wide range of choices in their studies. This was the first time
that the central government announced that schools, on a national scale should design
their own curricula to some extent. Teaching periods have also been guaranteed. These
policies guaranteed some chances for schools, including their teachers, to participate in
curriculum development (Education Committee of China, 1997 as cited in Law Hau-
Fai & Nieveen, 2010).
The process of curriculum development in India lies between the two extremes
of centralization and decentralization from time to time, the national government
formulates the national policy on education [NPEs] which includes broad guidelines
regarding content and process of education at different stages. These guidelines are
further elaborated by the national council of educational research and training
[NCERT]. Using the NPEs of 1968 and 1986, two curriculum initiatives have been
36
launched by NCERT. The curriculum framework prepared at the central level provides
a broad overview of the school curriculum, including general objectives, subject-wise
objectives, suggested scheme of studies and guidelines for the transaction of the
curriculum and the evaluation of pupil outcomes. These detailed curricula, syllabi and
instructional materials are developed at the national level.
NCERT has also develops the syllabi and instructional materials to be used in
the schools run by central organizations. However, the states consider whether to adopt
or adapt the NCERT syllabi and instructional materials. Thus, the NCERT curriculum
framework is always a suggestion rather than prescriptive and it is not enforceable by
law in the states. However, it is readily accepted by the states because of the NCERTs
credibility and the participatory development approach it follows (NCERT, 2006).
By reviewing the above literature, I have come to know that different countries
have different practices of curriculum development. United States gives priority to
individual teacher participation to determine content details and the pace of instruction.
Australia has the priority for shaping, writing, implementation, monitoring, evaluation
and review of curriculum development process. Finland values teachers as curriculum
experts in the school- based curriculum development process.
Chinese policy guarantees their teachers participation in curriculum
development process. India has more rigid policy for the teachers’ participation in
curriculum development. National curriculum framework binds the perimeters of
teachers’ involvement in curriculum development process. State should develop its
curriculum by the active participation of teachers under the curriculum guideline
provide by central government. So it seems to be the participatory approach of
curriculum development.
37
Review of Related Research Studies
Bennett (2002) did his doctoral dissertation, “Teacher Participation in
curriculum development: A History of the idea and practice” using qualitative approach
implemented through historical research. A narrative approach was used to explore the
story of participant adopting interview as a tool for data collection as primary source.
Also historical document was analyzed as the secondary source of data. The purpose of
this study is to provide historical perspective and understanding to advise current
attempts to involve teachers in curriculum development.
This study found that the practice of teacher participation was widespread,
though it never matched the rhetoric and that teachers participated at school system, and
state levels. The study also revealed that teachers participated from inception and even
initiated curriculum work, but most often were involved in the production of actual
materials. After reviewing this study I have come to know that teachers' participation in
curriculum development is essential from inception to the production of curricular
material.
Endeshaw (2003) did his research entitled "The state teachers' participation in
the process of primary school curriculum development in southern nations and
nationalities peoples' region". The purpose of this study was to investigate the
relationship between nine categorized possible curriculum development areas for
teachers' participation and the extent of present and desired participation on forty item
decisional statements, as well as education officials' practice of encouraging
collaborative and participative curriculum development activities. Both open ended and
closed ended questionnaire were used to collect the information using mixed
methodology.
38
The major findings of this study were: (i) teacher's desire of participation in all
areas of curriculum development practices was significantly higher than they actually
experienced, (ii) the concern given by educational official for encouraging teachers '
participation in curriculum development activities was at significantly lower level, (iii)
female experienced and desire more participation at instructional or classroom level
than males, who actually experienced and desire more participation at policy
formulation, curriculum designing and planning, (iv) low level of academic
qualification was found to hinder teachers' participation, (v) academic qualification,
work experience, and acquisition of nationality languages, lack of resource materials,
were found to influence to be low teachers' participation. This study shows that varied
stage of teachers' participation in curriculum development process and there are limiting
factors which are teachers' internal factors like as qualification, language etc as well as
external factors like as lack of resource material.
Lauridsen (2003) did his research entitled "What are teachers’ perceptions of the
curriculum development process?" Purpose of this study was to find out the teachers'
perception of the curriculum development process. For this, author using the qualitative
research implemented through interpretive/ constructivist-anthropological paradigmatic
assumption, with attention also afforded to the critical theory paradigmatic assumption
as well. Consistent with qualitative methodology adopting the grounded theory
approach, teachers ‘perception of the curriculum development process were explored
through interviews, participant observations and document analysis and the study found
that the teachers' internal and external factors influenced technically in the curriculum
development first. Second, teachers' affective aspects like group size engaging in the
time of curriculum development process. Teachers’ perceive the curriculum
development process as a process one could not undertake and accomplish without the
39
group work and it creates the sense of ownership. We can say from above study the
group work in curriculum development process creates the sense of ownership to the
curriculum. Indeed, maximum number of teachers' participation in curriculum
development process seems essential.
Carl (2005) did his research entitled "The “voice of the teacher” in curriculum
development: A voice crying in the wilderness?" and concluded that curriculum change
does not only require new thinking on relevant curricula; it should also realize the role
of the teachers in this process. Curriculum change should, therefore, not only include
new thinking and action concerning curriculum development, but also how it relates to
the way teachers can be optimally involved in the process, making the outdated focus
on the role of teachers as mere "recipients" redundant. By ignoring "the teacher's
voice", the outcomes of new thinking on curriculum development may in fact be
limited. So for bringing newness in curriculum, teachers' participation in curriculum
development process is crucial.
Oloruntegbe (2011) did his research, "Teacher involvement, commitment and
innovativeness in curriculum development and implementation" using quantitative
approach. This study was designed to investigate Nigerian science teachers’
involvement, commitment and innovativeness in curriculum development,
implementation and change. Questionnaire was used 630 secondary level science
teachers for data collection and used frequency counts and percentage for analysis of
data. The author found that teachers are seldom involved in the development of
curriculum and concluded that teachers are often show resistance to implement such
curriculum. This study recommended to the grass root approach of curriculum
development involving all stakeholders including teachers who would implement the
curriculum. From this study we can say that for the innovativeness in curriculum
40
development process grass root approach is more effective by participating teachers
who would implement the curriculum in local level.
Maphosa and Mutopa (2012) conducted research in, "Teacher's awareness of
their role in planning and implementing school-based curriculum innovation". Purpose
of this study was determining teachers’ awareness of their role in planning and
implementing school-based curriculum innovation. A quantitative-cum- qualitative
survey design was used. A semi-structured questionnaire was used to collect data from
242 teachers. Interview were held purposeful sample of teachers who had responded to
the questionnaire. This study found that teachers were generally aware of their role in
planning and implementation of school-based curriculum but their understanding of
their role was as limited as their understanding of the concept of curriculum. This study
recommends the emphasis of teacher training to enhance teacher's knowledge of
curriculum and their role in planning and implementing school-based curriculum
development. Indeed, teacher must have the conception of curriculum to participate and
enhance the quality of curriculum. Hence the awareness of teacher to the concept of
curriculum may increases their participation in curriculum development.
Mosothwane (2012) did his study," The role of senior secondary school
mathematics teachers in the development of mathematics curriculum in Botswana".
Purpose of this study was examines the role played by secondary school mathematics
teachers in the development of mathematics curriculum. It was conducted using a
sample of 60 senior secondary school mathematics teachers. The findings of this study
suggested that the majority of senior secondary school teachers’ play only a minor role
in the development of the mathematics curriculum, but are active in the implementation
and production stages. This study suggested that full participation of teacher in the
development of the curriculum would help them to better implement the material
41
because they would feel their own. Teachers use a variety of teaching methods and
materials to promote effective learning. An effective curriculum would develop if
teachers were encouraged to participate in the development process.
After reviewing the above empirical literatures, it seems that teacher and
curriculum development practices have the inseparable relationship. Different scholars
did their study in their own perspectives. Whatever the approach of study one thing that
is common to all of them is that the teachers’ participation in curriculum development
process was widespread. Nature of participation may vary from school to national level
and from inception of curriculum development to the revision and quality assurance of
developed curriculum. Without teacher's participation, curriculum development process
won't be success in any society and nation. So this review makes me think about the
gap in the tendency of this participation in our context and at this context a question is
pertinent. How is curriculum practice going on with teacher's role and responsibility in
our secondary education system?
Theoretical Review
Theory is a formal set of ideas that is intended to explain why something
happens or exists and it is established to suggest application of practical value. Indeed,
theories are used to explain or verify particular phenomenon according to the nature of
the study. In this research I would like to link Lawrence Stenhouse’s 'Process-Inquiry
Model of Curriculum Development' and Jurgen Habermas’s Theory of ‘Knowledge-
Constitutive Interest’. I would follow the Habermas’s Practical Interest of Curriculum
development which resonates with a process view of Curriculum development.
Lawrence Stenhouse’s Process-Inquiry Model
Stenhouse (1975) and James (2013) offered process model as an alternative to
the product driven objective model of curriculum development as Freire elucidated as a
42
“banking” concept of education. According to Stenhouse, the Process- Inquiry model
allows teachers to become artist rather than technicians in giving them a fair stake in
qualitative judgment, classroom research and evaluation (Srivastava, 2005). “It is
strongly linked with the belief that decision-making belongs to individual teacher and
that curriculum development is the province of the local school and such a model allows
for a measure of continuous improvement and organic development” (Kelly, 2004, p.
86).
The process model is premised upon the belief that curriculum planning should
not take an instrumental approach that is either based upon the nature of
subject/discipline knowledge, or upon a determination of the behavior a pupil is to
exhibit, but rather, more crucially, it should be based on what counts as an educational
procedure and the nature of the growth of that pupil.
Stenhouse suggests that;
A curriculum, like the recipe for a dish, is first imagined as a possibility, then as
the subject of experiment. Similarly, a curriculum should be grounded in
practice. It is an attempt to describe the work observed in classrooms that is
adequately communicated to teacher and others. Finally, within limits, a recipe
can be varied according to taste. So can a curriculum (Stenhouse, 1975, p.4, as
cited Srivastava, 2005).
In this sense curriculum is not like a physical thing, but is rather the interaction
of teacher, student and knowledge. In other words, curriculum is what actually happens
in the classroom and what people do to prepare and evaluate. It is an active process and
links with the practical form of reasoning, thinking, acting and feeling which the learner
is able to use for his/her own purpose. Supporting the process model, Bruner said that
knowledge is the process not a product and curriculum content needs to lie in the
43
Process Model Focuses on…
• Teacher's activities and teacher's role. • Student and learner activities.
• Conditions in which learning take place.
• Emphasis on means rather than ends. • Learner should have part in deciding
nature of learning activities.
• More individualized atmosphere. • Assumption that learner makes unique
response to learning experiences.
• Emphasis on learning skills.
Stenhouse (1975)
structure of the field of that knowledge. The subject matter to be taught is worth
knowing and is suitable beyond the situation which it is taught.
Stenhouse also argued that curriculum should provide an empirical study in
which there is a guiding principle on which to study and evaluate individual student's
and teacher's progress; guiding as
to the feasibility of implementing
the curriculum in varying school,
context, environment and peer
group situation. Curriculum should
provide information about the
variability of effects of differing
context and different pupils and
facilitate understanding of the
causes of variation (James, 2013).
Indeed the intention behind the process model is the provision of opportunity to
develop abilities identified through learning experiences in the classroom settings.
Emphasis is given on certain learning experiences as important in learners and for their
life also.
Habermas’s Practical Interest
Habermas calls historical-hermeneutics, a way of interpreting the meaning
system of people and cultures. Its goal is to achieve understanding by making explicit
the patterns of consensus and reciprocity that make human interaction possible. The
practical/hermeneutic interest refers to those aspects of knowledge and action which are
concerned with attaining and extending understanding and consensus in inter-subjective
relations so as to achieve community and mutuality. Historical- hermeneutic
44
knowledge yields ‘interpretation’ and is structured into process of understanding (Zajda,
2010). It is premised on the view that reality is socially constructed. Knowledge is
constituted in free communication between persons. Curriculum informed by a
practical interest is regarded as a process through which pupil and teacher interact in
order to construct meaning.
Hebermas claims that the link between understanding and action is the
hermeneutic concept of application. Hermeneutic knowledge is always mediated
through pre-understanding, which is derived from the interpreter’s initial situation
(Habermas, 1971 as cited in Zajda, 2010). So the curricular process is subjective and is
informed by practical interest. Habermas’s practical/hermeneutic interest (in
understanding other’s perspectives and views) resonates with a process view of the
curriculum proposed by Stenhouse. Hence practical interest gives emphasis to practice
rather than the outcome or product. Meaning making is also the form of learning for the
students and teachers as they interact with each other in their attempt to understand.
Darder, Baltodano and Torres (2003) said practical interest of Habermas
teaching learning has not become the central focus of teachers because idea takes a
different position in curriculum as practice by a practical interest. Not only that it also
states that teachers are not a mere implementers of a planned programme but act as
decision makers themselves when they exercise their own practical judgment in their
students' learning.
In fact the teacher's role would also involve in all aspect of curriculum
development. When the practical interest influences the curriculum practices, they may
be facilitated by the teachers' pedagogical skills but may depend more on teachers
exercising their judgment. Curriculum in practical interest is based on practical activity
of the process of interaction between teachers and students.
45
Research Gap
Ownership of teacher in the curriculum development process has been made a
challenging issue in academia. Reading literatures, viewing practice on it in our context
and hearing the lived experience of teachers, I feel that there is mismatch between
documented curriculum development policy and its actual practices in the context of
Nepal. What are the reasons of the gap between documented policy and its actual
practices? Do teachers understand the curriculum development policy and their
participation in it? What do teachers feel about their participation in curriculum
development work? What problems and barriers do the teachers' feel while they
participate in curriculum development process?
How do they cope with these problems and barriers? I have several curiosities in
my mind about curriculum development process and teachers' participation in it. I found
from literature that every country has controlled this process at the central level but
dimension of teacher's role in it is varying. So our country also has its own policy.
Question is raised in all places as to how much this policy is in real practice? I have
tried to seek the answer to these questions in our context from the previous research
study also but I couldn't.
So this research is helpful to explore existing situation of dimension of Nepalese
teachers’ participation in curriculum development process. There is need of research
work related with curriculum development process to enhance quality of Nepalese
education. Therefore I decided to carry out a research on this topic. I have tried to
respond this research gap by exploring the varied information from varied sources.
Primary information was collected from my respondents by taking interview about their
conception of curriculum and curriculum development process. Also information was
collected upon their role and responsibility in curriculum development. Present
46
tendency of their participation and their desire on it. What factors are limiting them to
participate in curriculum development process from the local level? Also secondary
information was collected from different empirical literatures, historical documents and
artifacts related to teachers' participation in curriculum development process from
history to present time from different countries and perspectives.
Development of Conceptual Framework
I think development of conceptual frame work provides the direction for every
research work. To give the right way and direction for my research work, I try to make
my own conceptual framework.
Figure: Conceptual Framework of the Study
Theoretical Lens � Lawrence Stenhouse’s Process –Inquiry Model of Curriculum Development � Habermas’s Theory of Knowledge Constitutive Interest: Practical Interest
Finding Teachers' Perceptions and Participations in Curriculum
Development and Implementation Process
Teachers' Understanding
Teachers' Perception
Teachers' Participation
Barriers that Limit Teachers’ Participation
Research Method
Teachers’ Participation in
Curriculum Development Process
Interpretative Paradigm
Qualitative Inquiry
Narrative Approach
Curriculum Development Process
47
After analyzing various literatures in relation to teachers’ participation and
curriculum development process, and relevant theories for my argument, I have
developed a conceptual framework for this study. I have tried to outline the inter-link
relationship between Stenhouse and Habermas theory, my beliefs and philosophical
lenses, phenomena under study and method and approaches that I adopted for this study
here.
Chapter Summary
This chapter is about review of related literature .Here I have tried to link my
study with related literatures. In this chapter, I did not only introduce different kinds of
literatures but also discussed about them in the context of curriculum development
process. I reviewed different literature such as empirical, policy related, theoretical and
other related documents. From this I have tried to find out the knowledge gap in the
existing body of literature. I have discussed Lawrence Stenhouse’s 'Process –Inquiry'
model curriculum of development and Habermas’s theory of knowledge constitutive
interest following the 'Practical Interest' of curriculum development which resonates
with process inquiry model and it is fruitful to justify the findings of my study.
48
CHAPTEER 3
METHODOLOGY
Chapter Overview
In this chapter, I have introduced my research design from my research journey.
I started with philosophical consideration and my attraction in the research. I have
discussed about narrative research design, selection of study area and participants, data
collection procedures, data analysis and interpretation, quality standards and my ethical
considerations. I have summarized this chapter before concluding it.
Journey through Research
Before submitting my M Phil dissertation proposal on "Teachers’ Participation
in Curriculum Development Process", I wanted to conduct my study on Mathematics
teacher's beliefs and curriculum reform. For this, I collected several documents related
to it. After strong discussion with my respected professors and tutors I changed my
previous plan and made proposal on ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum
Development Process’, which was other topic on which I had keen interest. When
research committee finalized my proposal, I became more ambitious and tried to tackle
many questions related to ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process’
with my small attempts.
It not only encouraged me to develop the research questions but also led me to
search several related literatures. Fortunately I got cooperative supervisor. His warm
suggestions and clear guidance made clearer me about research. Finally, I realized that
I had to focus on the limited area which can be attempted according to my capacity and
given time as well. I changed my research approach accepting the suggestion from
49
research committee and my supervisor. I previously selected phenomenology to
narrative study after the preliminary field visit. I modified my research questions many
times and finally, I got involved in my research activities with four specific research
questions.
I had already made a plan to conduct my study in Chitwan district because it is
very familiar to me. Other reason behind selecting Chitwan district is the heterogeneity
in population structure and culture. The data which I brought from education office of
Chitwan, it encouraged me to conduct this research in Chitwan. For this, I informed my
guide about my plan and he supported me. I first visited education officer of Chitwan
district who gave me detailed educational information. I tried to figure out essential
information that was relevant to my purpose of study. After first field visit, I became
able to select my study location and participants as well.
On the one hand I was very much interested to use qualitative methodology, on
the other hand my research purpose and research questions demanded the same.
“Qualitative research is a form of interpretive inquiry in which researcher makes
interpretation of what they hear, see and understand as such interpretations are not
separable from their own history, background and context” ( Creswell, 2012, p. 175).
The curriculum development process and the teachers’ participation in it is a social
phenomenon. Given the social aspect of the curriculum development, the
interpretivist/constructivist lens is appropriate to the exploration of the curriculum
development process.
The interpretivist/ constructivist paradigm was the foundation of my
positionality and underlying assumptions during this research. Keeping this thing in
mind, I prepared my research design and essential tools and shared with my respected
guide. He suggested me to modify my design and tools and I followed his suggestion.
50
Modified design and tools helped me to understand the in-depth-reality of the
participants' beliefs and feeling about ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum
Development Process’. In the process of conducting research, I knew that without
relevant literatures and appropriate theory, arguments could not be justified. Accepting
this reality, I went through different literatures related with ‘Teachers’ Participation in
Curriculum Development Process’ and so on. My concern was not to test the theory but
to justify my arguments with the help of theoretical lens. I used Stenhouse’s Process
Model and Habermas’s Practical Interest of curriculum development. These theories
also informed me to feel about the aspects which I have to identify the possible
phenomena during the research.
According to the nature of my research philosophy and research questions, I
developed research strategies and research tools as well. I was also conscious about
ensuring rigor and credibility while conducting this study. To develop the rigor and
credibility, strategies were modified again and again and tools were verified several
times according to the demand of my research study. While I went to my field to
collect information, I had collected information from my participants having
pseudonym Sanjaya, Krishna and Narayan. They were mathematics teachers of
different schools. First, I tried to collect data through informal conversation and
observation, and then I took interview. Through this process I did not only identify
their general understanding but also got the opportunity to reshape my methodology.
After the first field visit, I shared my field experiences with my guide then we discussed
about the further plan.
My keen interest, my guide’s suggestion and the nature of my research topic
encouraged me to conduct this study with qualitative methodology locating myself in
the interpretive paradigm. Then I began collecting data using interview as data
51
collection tool. I also used interview guidelines which helped me to conduct interview
according to my previous plan. Interviews were conducted individually with my
participants. On the one hand I collected data through interview and on the other hand
observation of related documents and informal discussion was used to develop deeper
understanding about the ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process’.
I had studied theoretically that data collection and analysis is the crucial task in
qualitative research but practically I felt that these tasks are not only crucial but also
challenging. In the process of data collection and data analysis, I tried to be clear on my
role and position. To make clear about my position, I introduced myself to each
participant as university researcher. I also informed them that my research was being
done for M Phil degree.
Analyzing the information and writing as a dissertation was really tough task for
me although I tried to relate my data with relevant theories and literatures. In the
process of analyzing information, I continuously modified my theoretical approach. My
concern was to be contextual. For this, I tried my best to draw the grounded reality
about ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process’ as far as possible.
Research Philosophy, My Position and Research Paradigm
Qualitative or interpretivist approach emerged in contradiction to positivist
methodologies in human science. In contrast to positivists who seek to identify
universal features of human hood, society, and history through value-free, detached
observation and to offer explanations of human phenomena that bring control and
predictability, interpretivist look for culturally derived and historically situated
interpretation of the social life world (Von Eckartsberg, 1998 as cited in Bourke, 2007).
Qualitative approach seeks to portray a world in which reality is socially constructed,
complex and ever-changing (Glesne, 2011). Therefore a qualitative methodological
52
approach tends to be based on recognition of the subjective, experimental ‘life world’ of
human beings, and description of their experiences in depth (Patton, 2014). Qualitative
researchers place themselves within constructivist tradition where quantitative
researchers put themselves within the positivist tradition. Undoubtedly, both of these
paradigms have different world view as discussed by Denzin and Lincon (2011), with
whole framework of beliefs, values and methods within which research takes place.
Talking about positivism point of view, it is believed that phenomena can be studied
from an external point of view in an objective manner as the reality can be captured
whenever required.
However, the constructivist considers knowledge as personal, subjective and
unique and deals with the direct experience of the people in the specific context (Cohen,
Manion & Morrison, 2011). I believe that the world is constructed by knower and
observer and every person can see the world from his/her own eye. According to the
Piantanida and Garman (2009) for the interpretivists, the world is constructed by each
knower and observer and is concerned with symbolic meaning and various forms of
representations that help to understand the phenomena under the study.
This study is based on interpretive paradigm. The qualitative approach of this
study was descriptive and exploratory. “Research design is the plan or proposal to
conduct research; it involves the intersection of philosophy, design, strategies of inquiry
and specific methods” (Creswell, 2012, p.5). I selected qualitative approach because it
gives full freedom to the researcher so that researcher can involve in his/her study
without any rigid framework. Qualitative methodological approaches allow the
researcher to use a range of methods to explore and interpret phenomena but are not
usually intent on generating or testing hypothesis. The research strategies are inductive,
attempting to make sense of the experiences/situation through exploration and
53
understanding (Creswell, 2012) rather than imposing pre-existing expectations on the
situation. Therefore data or “empirical material”, the preferred term in qualitative
research, consist of detailed description of situations, events, interactions and observed
behaviors of situations, events, interactions, observations, analysis of documents, video
materials, personal experiences (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011) and open- ended narrative
writings (Patton, 2014).
Philosophical Consideration
Generally, philosophy is defined as a vision of any subjects and objects. It is not
necessary that every person should have same vision about particular subjects or things.
It depends on individual’s own understanding. Keeping this in mind, I tried to
understand the teachers’ perceptions about ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum
Development Process’ from my own perspective. Philosophy is accepted as the guiding
light of research activities. As an interpretive researcher, my personal and professional
experiences shaped my beliefs, interest, and approach of the study. In order to acquire a
good perspective and to understand the phenomenon investigated in its natural context,
my assumption was that of the ground reality from the individuals involved in the
research situation.
Philosophical standpoint of research is crucial in selecting the appropriate
research methodology and design. I believe that research is positively or negatively
affected by the researcher’s bias, which is guided by his or her philosophical standpoint.
It is important to discuss philosophical concerns because they influence methodological
consideration, which paves ways to design methods and tools for data collection and
interpretation. In the process of research study, I knew that the notion of interpretation
does not imply the researcher interpreting the social world of the researched, but also
participants’ interpretation of the world. I was highly concerned with the
54
understanding, experiences and feeling of those who were involved in this research
study.
As I started to look into the issue in-depth I felt that I needed to address the issue
of curriculum development through qualitative approach. Creswell (2013) highlights
that a “qualitative approach is one in which inquirer often makes knowledge claims
based primarily on constructivist perspective or advocacy/participatory perspective or
both” (p. 18). I tried to capture every participant’s perception and experiences on
Curriculum Development Process. It is believed that every person has his/her own
unique character and interest. Every person sees the world in different way and
understanding according to his/her interest and need. I honestly, tried to uncover my
participants’ voices as far as possible.
According to Wolf and Pant (2005), descriptive research is a fact-finding
operation searching for adequate information. My research topic is ‘Teachers’
Participation in Curriculum Development Process’. So I used interpretative paradigm
which helped me to carry out the participants' feelings and understandings from
multiple perspectives.
Ontology
I understand that ontology is a branch of philosophy that regards the nature and
form of reality. Existing situation and several other factors such as time, history, and
people’s daily life activities, thinking and perceiving styles, social and cultural contexts
guide the reality. Ontology is concerned with nature of being. It explains about the
form and nature of the reality or society. Willis (2007) emphasizes that “ontology is
concerned with the nature of reality and various ontological positions reflect different
perceptions of what can be the real and what cannot be” (p. 9). Like this, I believe that
55
all individuals are different and they have different perceptions, belief system and
socio-cultural understanding.
As ontology is concerned with the nature of reality, reality is not dependent on
the observer rather it is dependent on culture, sex, age, context, and many other factors.
What I think about particular subject or object may not be the same for someone
perceive about it. Cohen et al. (2011) accept that “ontological assumption concerns the
very nature of essence of the social phenomena being investigated” (p. 7). For me, what
my participants informed me and what I observed during research study represented the
reality on the ground. My ontological claim is that knowledge is generated according to
the context and reality depends on the situation.
Every person has his or her own ways of perceiving reality. No such reality
should be considered superior or inferior to another. In this context, my participants
were encouraged to construct their realities in their own ways. I, as a researcher,
acknowledged my responsibility of understanding such multiplicity and adopted a
method, which facilitated to include this diversity of realities. In fact, my ontological
claim is that there are multiple realities of practicing and perceiving ‘Teachers’
Participation in Curriculum Development Process’.
Epistemology
Epistemology is concerned with the nature of knowledge about the reality of
society or making sense of this world. In qualitative research paradigm, knowledge is
accepted as being contextual with multiple meanings, subjective and personally
experienced. Reality is socially constructed by and between the persons who experience
the world (Gergen, 2009). Following this notion, I have tried to justify my role as a
researcher. For this, I recognized the lived experiences of my participants and I also
tried to identify the social, cultural and personal thoughts of my participants. For me,
56
perception of truth is highly guided by person’s own philosophy. I, as a constructivist
researcher, developed my own interpretive strategies during the research study.
Epistemological claim of this study is that knowledge is contextual and it is
constructed. In this context, I constructed my own meaning through the participants’
voice and existing situation as well. I interpreted each participant’s feeling and
experience regarding ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process’.
Axiology
Axiology is accepted as theory of Value. Axiology is the concerned with the
science or study of truth or worth. It is assumed that axiology is the study of values,
worth and study branch of philosophy and deals with ethics, aesthetics, human value,
and value judgment. Cohen et al. (2011) argue that “axiology concerns with human
nature, in particular, the relationship between human beings and their environment” (p.
8). Axiology is the science of human's values and value judgment. To value is to think,
to assign meaning and determine the riches of properties. These concepts are usually
considered highly subjective and therefore have meaning and understanding only to
individuals who hold that value.
I believe that all individuals have their own value. Keeping this in mind, I gave
high priority and respect to my participants' value systems. Having said this, I did not
forget my own value because it is the major criteria of judging others’ value systems.
In my research study, participants’ perceptions and value were given more importance.
I had bracketed my value during this research by acknowledging self posionality as a
researcher rather than teacher.
I firmly believe that knowledge is constructed rather than received and
transferred. I cannot believe in those so-called facts that are not meaningful for me. I
wanted to explore knowledge and truths in my own ways recognizing the values of
57
Why Narrative?
People are always tellers of tells.
They live surrounded by their stories and the
stories of others; they see everything that
happens to them through those stories and they
try to live their live as if they were recounting
them.
Jean Paul Sartre (1964)
participants. So, I collected the information from my participants through interview,
observation and other tools then I analyzed them and created own my theme in the field
of ‘Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development Process’.
Narrative Approach
As Pinar (2012) said "Curriculum is the interdisciplinary study of educational
experiences" (p.2). “Curriculum is experienced in situations and that people have
experiences which are, by nature, made up of and surrounded by other people and the
environment” (Connelly &
Clandinin, 1988 as cited in Kitchen,
Parker & Pushor, 2011, p. 7). Also
“To understand curriculum, is to
understand one’s personal lived
experiences, school experiences and
outside of school experience that make up the core of education because teacher’s
knowledge is found and lived in their narratives of experiences and then is educative”
(Kitchen, Parker & Pushor, 2011, p. 7). So I had listened and collected stories of
teachers, taking their stories and translating them into my own narratives about the
issues that concerned them. I understand story from their point of view and see the
world from their perspective because my research topic is “Teachers’ Participation in
Curriculum Development Process".
There were some logics behind choosing narrative inquiry as my research
method. One of my logics is that, it is understood to be a part of a constructive process
in which humans interpret and reinterpret their feeling and experiences according to the
phenomenon. Narrative method also tries to express persons' experience through
narration. Also Pinar and Grumet (2014) consider that curriculum is an
58
autobiographical text and it posits narrative as a theoretical basis for curriculum
development. Beyond the variation in definition of autobiography, it is a form of
narrative inquiry that is situated within historical and autobiographical context of the
research and the researcher. As I following postmodern research paradigm, narrative
inquiry is suited for me to explore my autobiography aligning the respondents' lived
experiences and my own too.
So I decided to choose narrative as my research method. “Narrative inquiry is
the telling (or retelling) of a story or set of events in a specific time sequence and is a
human meaning making tool, the process by which individuals explore and later explain
their experiences” (Baden & Major, 2010, p. 73). Conducting in-depth interviews and
involving in informal conversations with participants, I tried to gather information
through my participants’ stories. My belief is that my research problem, paradigm,
personal experiences, and my respondents are the criteria for choosing narrative inquiry
as my research methodology. According to Creswell (2012) narrative research is best
fit for capturing the detailed stories or life experiences of a single life or the lives of a
small number of individuals. I tried to capture my respondents' views through in-depth
interview and observation.
It is assumed that narrative inquiry is a particular subtype of qualitative inquiry.
Narrative may be oral or written and may be elicited or heard during the field work, an
interview, or a naturally occurring conversation.
59
Creswell (2012) has again highlighted that;
Narrative might be the term assigned to any text or discourse, or it might be text
used within the context of a mode of inquiry in qualitative research with a
specific focus on the stories told by individuals. It can be both a method and the
phenomenon of study, as a method it is the experiences as expressed in lived and
told stories (p. 54).
I tried to see participants' experience through their stories. I am aware that
narrative research is a challenging approach to use. I need to collect extensive
information about the participating teachers and needs to have a clear understanding of
the context of the teachers' lived experiences. So I can able to explain the multi-layered
context of their experiences on the process of developing curriculum. I had actively
collaborated with participants of this study and discussed their stories. Keeping this in
mind, I used narrative approach as my research method. During the research process, I
tried to include my participants' views and experiences which I collected through in-
depth interview and observation.
Denzin and Lincon (2011) highlight that “narratives are socially constrained
forms of action, socially situated performance, ways of acting in and making sense of
the world” (p. 641). It means narrative can be understood as a part of constructive
process. I tried to interpret and reinterpret my participants' stories according to the
notion of narrative structure. My main concern was to see the participants' perceptions
and understandings about the concept of curriculum itself and curriculum development
process. I tried captured their stories through narration of their everyday life
experiences which they experienced inside the classroom and aside the classroom
situation.
60
Working Procedure
Working procedure has a noticeable role to develop overall study. It includes
the research site, information collection strategy, data collection and selection of
research participants as well. I discussed how I planned my working procedure in
different section.
Study Area
For me, Curriculum Development Process concerns not only with schools but
also affects societies and eventually the whole nation. I believe that curriculum
development process is mainly guided by existing rules and regulations, curriculum,
teachers' attitude, nature of learner, school environment, culture and traditions.
Curriculum development process is the concern of parents, students, teachers and
people from different walks of life. This is why both the teachers who are teaching in
school and students who are learning in the school make the study area for this research.
In this regard, researcher is interested to know how Curriculum development
process is going on. This is why I selected schools of Chitwan district as my study area
because I have been spending my twenty five years of educational experience either as
student or as a teacher. Chitwan is also rich in terms of culture, ethnicity and religious
perspectives. Therefore I selected Chitwan as my study area.
Selection of the Research Participants
I seek to understand the meaning of phenomena from participants’ perspective.
Without active and appropriate participants, my study would not have reached a
meaningful conclusion. Thus, it was really important for me to select participants who
could provide rich information and relevant data to answer my research questions.
Having this concept in mind, I selected my participants purposefully according to the
nature of study and my research questions.
61
In fact, selection of participants in qualitative research is accepted as a crucial
task although there are no any specific criteria for selecting respondents. The general
trend is to consider small sample size in qualitative research is best suited to reach in
the depth of information. I followed the same technique as the purpose of my study.
According to Patton (2014), “sample size depends on what you want to know, the
purpose of the inquiry, what’s at stake, what will be useful, what will have credibility
and what can be done with available time and resources” (p. 184).
My focus in this study was to identify the perception and understanding of
teachers about their experiences of participation in the curriculum development process.
My focus is on secondary level teachers. I selected three teachers purposefully who
could address my study purpose. I emphasized basically three things to select my
respondents. They are richness of information, accessibility and whether they were
approachable at any time to discuss about my problem. In the selection of participants, I
have tried to include three teachers of community school from the different parts of
Chitwan. They are as follows:
Sanjaya. He is a retired head teacher of a community school. He is working in
private school after his retirement from community school and has a B. Sc. degree. He
was from suburban area named Ratnanagar of Chitwan. He was selected because he has
an experience of thirty years in the field of teaching learning. He is experienced and
trained teacher of secondary level in middle part of Chitwan. Instead of a lot of teaching
learning experiences, he has so many curricular experiences. He had an experience of
writing and editing textbook of mathematics in secondary level education of Nepal as
he is a subject expert of mathematics in Chitwan. Based on my purpose of study, he was
selected as one of my research participant.
62
Krishna. He is a teacher at a community school and has a qualification M. Ed.
degree. He is currently working as a trainer of mathematics in an educational training
centre at Chitwan since 10 years ago. He was from urban area Narayanghat lying at the
western part of Chitwan. He is also a well trained teacher and has the different
experiences like making teacher training course and related instructional material as
well. He attained different seminar, training and workshop related to the education
sector of Nepal. He is senior and experienced teacher of western part of Chitwan
district. Because of the several experiences in curriculum related work I had selected
him as the participant of the study.
Narayan. He is currently working at a community school as an assistant head
teacher as well as secondary level mathematics teacher. He has a qualification of B. Ed.
degree and was selected from Chainpur, village area of eastern Chitwan. He had
different experiences of more than 20 years in the sector of education sector. He is also
a trained and experienced teacher of secondary level at eastern part of Chitwan. He had
experiences of participating different workshop, seminar and training related to
curricular practices and selected as the participant of this study.
Though I had confined my study in secondary level mathematics teacher of
Chitwan district, I was unable to find women mathematics teacher at secondary level
having the experiences of curricular and teaching.
Data Collection Procedure
The use of multiple data collection methods contributed not only to
trustworthiness and validity of interpretation, but also to the creation of thicker and
richer description in the data (Glesne, 2011). In accordance with my research purpose, I
collected data through interviews, observations, document analysis and informal
conversations with participants.
63
As we study Patton (2014) we come to know that data collection in qualitative
research consists of various activities such as direct quotations about the experience of
people, opinion, feeling, knowledge, people’s behavior, actions, interpersonal
interactions, organizational processes, excepts, quotation from documents, program
records, memoranda and correspondence, personal diaries, and open ended written
responses to questionnaires and survey.
My major data collection procedure was in-depth interview. Through in-depth
interview, I tried to gather my participants’ understanding and experience about
curriculum development process. Cohen et.al (2011) emphasize that “Interview is the
process of interchanging view with one another. It is a flexible tool for data collection,
enabling multi sensory channel to be used verbal, non-verbal, spoken and heard” (p.
349). Using interview guide, I conducted interview keeping in mind the participants’
interests and backgrounds.
Furthermore, I encouraged my participants to answer my question in natural
way as far as possible. My participants were secondary level school teachers having
bachelors and masters degree, so they did not face any difficulties during the interview
period.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Data analysis and interpretation is a continuous process that begins as soon as
data are received. Every research study requires precise decision about how the
analysis and interpretation of data will be done. In qualitative study analyzing the
textual and other form of data presents quite challenging and difficult tasks for
researcher. In this section, I have tried to discuss procedure of narrative data analysis
that I adopted in my study.
64
In narrative analysis and interpretation of data, I adopted sequential process of
description, analysis, and interpretation (Wolcott, 1994 as cited in Creswell, 2012).
When I finished my field work, I managed and organized data by creating different files
for different data. I have tried to organize very essential data from the textual data and
field notes after the transcription of raw data. Then I read through these text data and
made some margin notes from initial codes. I tried to make different stories and themes
with the help of field note, key note and transcription of conversations and again wrote
the stories based on narrative elements into a chronological sequence (Creswell, 2012).
I felt that analysis of data is the fact of transforming the data with the aim of
extracting useful information. I have tried to interpret the field data by giving
appropriate meaning to the persons' stories. Finally, I tried to represent and visualize
the field data by the help of narration of different theories and themes which are directly
linked to my research questions and objectives. I did not analyze and interpreted
information taking from in depth interview but also try to link what I was observed in
my research field. I also collected secondary information reviewed and collected from
different journal, books and artifacts. Not only that I also had used my experiences and
reflection at analysis and interpretation of the information.
Quality Standards
Quality standards are required to enhance the trustworthiness and to provide
quality in a research work. Rigorous tools and technique are needed for data collection
and analysis; so that it is possible to maintain trustworthiness in research. Keeping this
in mind, I tried to capture the participants' voice and deeply immersed in the research
field. I didn’t only take interview with my participants but also observed their
classroom instruction, techniques of curriculum management before implementing in
classroom teaching and interacted many times to draw out the authentic information.
65
Denzin and Lincon (2011) argue that any research be considered worthwhile
when it has truth value, applicability, consistency and neutrality. Following these
arguments, I was highly concerned about whether or not I was telling a truthful story as
far as possible as per my positioning. To maintain quality in my research, the following
tools of quality standard were used.
Trustworthiness
Trustworthiness is the degree to which the research is deemed valid or
warranted, as dictated by all of those involved in the process and by those evaluating
the process (Lauridsen, 2003). Lather (2002) identifies four techniques for establishing
trustworthiness which are credibility, transferability via thick description, dependability
and conformability via audit trial, and reflective journal. I used rigorous methods of
data collection and data analysis to enhance the trustworthiness in my research.
I followed as Glesne (2011) point out that the researcher must demonstrate
prolonged engagement, persistent observation, triangulation, peer review, debriefing,
negative case analysis, clarification of researcher bias, member checks, rich, thick
description, and external audits to establish the trustworthiness of the research. I tried to
adopt these through the journey of my research. For this, I used different evidences,
arguments, personal beliefs and my honesty. I also addressed multiple voices of my
participants. I used different strategies like working in a natural setting, understanding
the context, interacting with participants, capturing the multiple voices of participants,
using reflective analysis and applying multiple layers of interpretation. Whatever I tried
to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness in practice are listed in following table
below.
66
Table: Trustworthiness in Practice
Technique Implementation during research
� Credibility • Letter of recommendation
• Member checks of interview and
observation notes
� Prolonged engagement • Student of curriculum research
• Continuous working in research from
November 2011 through present
� Dependability and conformability via an
audit trail
� Member checks
• Member checks of interviews and
observation notes
� Triangulation • Use of interviews, observation and
document analysis
• Member checks
� Reflective journal • Kept throughout study
• Observation, notes pertaining to
interview included
� Rich and thick description • Conclusion grounded on field data
• Conformation through interview and
follow up prompts
• Conformation via member checks
� Clarification of Research Bias • Acknowledge dual positionality as
researcher and curriculum student
67
In addition, to enhance the credibility of my research I tried to adopt rigorous
techniques and methods of gathering high-quality data that was carefully analyzed
(Patton, 2014). To maintain the trustworthiness in my research, I also tried to recognize
participants’ hidden meaning through informal conversation and observation. I deeply
immersed in the research site to analyze participants’ voices. Conducting interview,
observation and involving in informal conversation again and again, I got deeper and
deeper into the theme of my research.
This study is the product of my fulltime involvement in the study area which is
demanded by my research. Beginning from the concept paper for proposal development
and conducting fieldwork and analysis, I spent nearly one and half years. My prolonged
involvement in research field made me more comfortable to answer my research
questions. I also discussed the findings from the field several time with my dissertation
supervisor and developed the idea of conducting this study in more systematic way. My
daily field note, record keeping of participants’ voice and everyday activities during the
field also helped me to develop trustworthiness of my research.
Reflexivity
Reflexivity of the researcher feelings and experiences are crucial in
interpretive/ constructivist research. Kincheloe and Mclaren (2005) emphasize that
“the notion of self reflection is central to the understanding of nature of critically
grounded qualitative research” (p. 147). Narrative research has also emphasized that
reflexivity is the major identity of qualitative paradigm. Accepting this reality, I tried
to be reflexive through voices of participants and existing context. I was alert for
maintaining research result as well as participants’ social, political, cultural, and
linguistic aspect.
68
Further, Berry (2006) said that a practice of emancipation, inclusiveness, social
justice, plurality, multiplicity, diversity, complexity and chaos are entering the academic
circles. Indeed, in research periphery, I tried to reflect my positionality and subjectivity
in emic perspective as an insider or through direct involvement in participants’ different
aspects.
Ethical Consideration
Any research which is only duplicating existing research or which does not have
a quality to contribute new knowledge to the existing knowledge can be seen as
unethical. So being ethical is crucial in every stage of research work not only in data
collection. Macmillan and Schumacher (2001) states, "Ethical guidelines include
informed consent, deception, confidentiality, anonymity, harm, privacy and others” (p.
420). Ethical considerations were taken for this study, by ensuring, as far as possible,
that respondent’s anonymity was protected. “Ethical consideration, are inseparable from
your everyday interactions with research participants and with your data” (Glesne, 2011,
p. 11). So, I started my research journey in selected field after convincing the
participants of the study by clarifying my purpose to arrive and by ensuring them that I
would not put them at any risk.
Participants of my study were secondary level school teachers with good
understanding, so I encouraged them to answer my research questions because my
questions were related with curricular issues. They happily talked about teachers’
participation in curriculum development process which was the main concern of my
research. When a researcher starts research study, it is important to establish what can
and cannot be written, so ethical considerations are important in conducting research.
Indeed, to be ethical in my research work I tried to keep the introduction of respondent
secrete and got permission from the gatekeeper of selected respondents before involving
69
research process and then got green light from respondent for interview or discussion.
Not only that I assured them to keep their names confidential. I collected information
without any force from my side. However, Morse and Richards (2002) argue that
participants’ rights include the following;
The right to be fully informed about the study’s purpose and about the
involvement and time required for participation, the right to confidentiality and
anonymity, the right to ask any questions to the investigator, the right to refuse
to participate without any negative ramifications, the right to refuse to answer
any questions and the right to withdraw from the study at any time. Participants
also have the right to know what to expect during the research process, what
information is being obtained about them, who will access to that information,
and what it will be used for (p. 205).
Accepting above mentioned fact, I tried to follow ethical consideration during
my research with strong honesty and I tried to build rapport and trust in my site. For
this, I never forced them to answer my question according to my expectation and I also
did not try to ask any questions about their personal life. Further, I did not compel my
participants so that they were free to answer my questions. If they wanted privacy and
confidentiality, I assured them how the data was to be used and stored securely.
Participation was voluntary in this research. So it was assured that they were free to
withdraw from the research at any time if they faced any problem or discomfort.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I have presented my research philosophy, methodology and data
collection and analysis procedures. I have tried to justify why I chose qualitative
paradigm for my research. I explained my research journey, and quality rigors regarding
reflexivity of the study. My belief is that my personal feeling and my reflection made
70
this chapter more reliable and qualitative. I have tried to share my ethical consideration
honestly in this chapter.
71
CHAPTER 4
UNDERSTANDING CURRICULUM FROM TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES
Chapter Overview
This chapter begins with teachers' expression and my personal reflection, based
on experiences during the field visit. In this chapter, I have tried to explore the various
concepts of curriculum from the teachers’ perspective and tried to discuss the various
definitions and the understanding of curriculum. In this chapter, I have tried to address
my research question; how do teachers understand and develop the concept of
curriculum? For this I have tried to present the information collected from the field with
my reflection and teachers' expression on it. I have also tried to analyze and interpret
primary information relating with the secondary source of information collected by
observing different literatures like as policy and practice, empirical and theoretical etc.
To give the meaning of information collected from field I have present in different theme
and sub theme. I have tried to interlink different perspective to give the appropriate
meaning. Finally this chapter ends with the chapter summary.
Guided by the different schools of thought and the personal experiences, people
tend to understand and interpret the meaning of curriculum in their own way.
Curriculum means different things to different people. To some, curriculum is the text
books used in the course. To others it means the daily actions taken by the teachers and
the students in the classroom to achieve learning goals. To some others it is the content
of instruction. The concept of curriculum is not only limited to subject matter, it's vague.
What's subject matter for whom and why? It’s a big question of rationality. Why are we
educating children? What’s the worth of education? These are important issues for the
72
contemporary society that explain education for survival or education for transformation.
What would be a curriculum, a list of subject matter or as social and cultural
transformation?
The Concept of Curriculum
I interviewed secondary level mathematics teachers as my respondents of the
research. I asked them questions related to how they understand and interpreted the
meaning of curriculum in different times and situations when I met them. Three
individual responses seem to reiterate almost the same collective cry; curriculum is
essentially a course of study. As Print (2007) presents and discusses curriculum as a
document that guides and structure course content. Instead of that my respondents have
their unique way of understanding and interpretation of the curriculum which I have
tried to develop on different thematic headings.
Curriculum as Blueprint
By giving emphasis on a comprehensive view of all activities planned for
delivery to learners, this understanding of curriculum tries to include scope, sequence,
interpretation, balance of subject matter and teaching learning strategies that can be
preplanned. Written document are like as daily lesson plan to the curriculum guidelines.
In this connection Sanjaya believes that curriculum denotes all the planned activities
which help to achieve the intended instructional objectives or in broad sense educational
aims and describe curriculum conceptions as;
Curriculum is a back bone of teaching learning process. Textbook is
constructed on the basis of it. Teaching can be started without textbook if the
teachers know it or understand the curriculum. Teaching without curriculum is
equivalent to travelling in ocean without compass; exactly worthless travelling.
It is a highway of teaching, which is our travelling destination. Curriculum
73
serves as a guide to teaching as traffic symbol guides us in road. So it is a clear
guideline. I also want to say that curriculum is the blue print for instruction. It
is an essential part and road map to educational endeavors. It is a detail plan
of instruction, where, when and what to teach, what’s the needed subject matter,
how to assess learning, from where, how many questions to design, how to
measure the learning achievement etc. Curriculum helps to construct the plan
about student's age and his mental capacity on the basis of learning and
affective elements. It is important side of teaching that prepares the outline and
textbook is to be written with in its periphery. It is the bottom line of subject’s
difficulties in accordance with student’s age and class. Curriculum is to be
understood as non-standard, if it crosses out the bottom line determined by the
goal. Destination is determined by how much can learning be in entire year at
particular time going up to the optimum capacity serially. So, curriculum is a
way to reach the goal in entire period of each class. (5 May 2012, 1:25 pm,
translated version)
The essence of above paragraph align with the concept that curriculum refers to
planned activities of the subject matter to be taught in classroom. It acts as a directive for
the teaching learning in educational arena. NESP (1971) explained that curriculum is an
instructional programme designed to achieve the aims of education. Sanjaya feels that
curriculum is a way of achieving education goal of entire period of each class.
According to him, curriculum helps to align and map the subject matter or course of
content in accordance with specific time schedule and the mental capability of learners.
A curriculum plan is a system for both decision making and action with respect to
curriculum functions directed at specified population, has the function of producing
curriculum for identifiable population, implement the curriculum in a specific school and
74
appraise the effectiveness of the curriculum developed (Lunenburg, 2011). Curriculum is
a detailed plan of instruction as like a blueprint, showing where, when what to teach,
what the subject matter need to be, how to conduct exam, from where, how much
questions to design, how to measure the intended learning outcome etc.
Krishna understand the curriculum in the periphery of a subject matter planned
to deliver in the classroom, which depicts it as the combining of subject matter to form a
body of content planned to be taught. Such content is the product of accumulated
wisdom, particularly acquired through the traditional academic disciplines. It has
alignment and mapping with the time table of entire year of teaching and the learner’s
mental and physical age. Curriculum is the main tool or instrument of teaching.
Curriculum is that weapon or way, whose support takes the teacher to take the students
to pre-established aim or destination of learning. Exactly curriculum should not only be
the activities doing in the classroom but it should be the directives to fulfill the pre-
established intended learning outcomes. In the other sense it gives the sense of means to
ends. But it does not talk about those outcomes which are away from the curriculum
which are unintended outcomes but students are learning from out of schools.
Narayan has no such different understanding than others. He said that
curriculum is like a Ghar Ko Naksha (Curriculum is like as a map of house), everything
is pre-planned. This type of understanding of curriculum legislate some specific
requirements that teacher must cover in a certain activities, page, chapter and part of
textbooks in pre specified times or dates. Narayan understand and express the
perception curriculum on his own way but have the sense of curriculum as like blue
print. He said;
Curriculum is a lane of teaching. It is an important part of teaching. Teaching is
done on the basis of it. It is base for teaching learning. By the help of it subject
75
matter and teaching learning activities are determined. All things of teaching
are mentioned in it. As the house map (blue print), all things are pre-planned.
So, curriculum is an important organ or matter of teaching from which all
processes are directed and automated. (17 May 2012, 8:38am, translated
version)
Focusing on Narayan’s view of curriculum all activities are planned for delivery
to students and it incorporates scope and sequence, interpretation and balance of subject
matter, motivational devices, teaching techniques, and anything else that can be planned
in advance. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
[UNESCO] (2004) tried to view that curriculum is all the experiences of the pupils
which are planned and directed by the school and the teachers to attain the objectives of
education. According to Narayan, curriculum directs all the activities of teaching
learning like what to teach, how to teach, where to teach.
In this aspect of knowing curriculum as a pre planned work is a kind of thought
of teachers which Schubert explained in his curriculum metaphor. But according to the
theoretical perspective of Stenhouse and Habermas, curriculum is that process which
would provide opportunities to develop human abilities, capacities and skills. Also CDC
(2007) viewed our curriculum practice as a process rather than pre specified work for
learners. The work and participation of teacher to develop such skills is not like
instructor but as a facilitator. This type of teachers' perception on curriculum concept
wouldn't seem that they practice the curriculum in humanistic way. They understand and
practice curriculum in traditional way curriculum as blueprint. Why they perceive the
concept of curriculum in such way? It is a need to analyze from the different perspective.
I think the historical curriculum development practices, mismatch between current
policy and practices on development of curriculum, the conception which we perceive
76
through our schooling culture and our classroom strategy of curriculum implementation
etc have the great impact to understand and perceive the conception of curriculum as
blueprint.
This type of conventionalist understanding of the curriculum does not have any
worth in this age of information and communication. At this age of post modernity, can
it be possible to know, accept and practice curriculum like a blueprint? Do we see our
education and curriculum as it was in the age of 19th century and so on? If so we are
pushing our children through the 'exam factories' rather than to promote distinctive
qualities and skills. Indeed we need to change the conception of teacher, students and
related stakeholders of education sector so that new directions, conception and initiation
will be established in the understanding and practice of curriculum.
Curriculum as Content
Concept of curriculum is broader than simply understanding it as a subject
matter or content to be taught as Wiles (2009) said that curriculum as a subject matter or
a series of written documents like books and syllabi. This is the general understanding
of curriculum. Curriculum when understood as a set of school experiences, gives the
limited meaning to include formal and academic aspect of education as well as the non
academic activities like, sport, quiz, dancing, singing etc. In fact, ‘educating’connotes
more than simply the rehearsal of subject matters kept in book. Educating means the
wholesome development of child’ (Rousseau, n.d). In a personal communication
Sanjaya equated curriculum as with the subject matter to be taught and expressed his
understanding about the concept of as;
In Nepal, the understanding of curriculum is a list of subject matter to be taught
because you can see teaching learning activities in school level takes place in
accordance with the fuzzy business of practice book of every subject. Teachers
77
and related educational persons are lured by reputed publishers. (From my
field note)
Curriculum is a crucial and essential part of education. In other words, teaching
is possible without textbook if the teacher understands the essence of curriculum. It
seems that from the above understanding of Sanjay curriculum is only limited as in the
list of content to be taught what is written textbook rather than what actually goes in the
classroom. The learning experience of students is considered as entirely different
domain. When I viewed the field data again and again, I felt that Sanjaya has a different
understanding about a curriculum concept than what I thought before the study. I met
him again and asked the question. You have understood curriculum in different form
informally, how did it happen? Can you share some experiences? Then he explored
himself in this way;
The teachers who just teach don't know anything about curriculum. Trainings
and work experiences are needed to understand about it. Until teachers are told
to comment after a comparative study of textbooks and curriculum, they can't
understand it. After participating in several programs organized by curriculum
development centre, I got some information about curriculum. When I was
involved in textbook revision, curriculum improvement seminar, textbook
introductory seminar and main trainer's training and so on, I started realizing
the essence of curriculum and textbooks; it gave me clear concept about
curriculum and textbook. (From my field note)
Analyzing the respondent Sanjaya's story of experiences it helps to realize how
teachers develop understanding about curriculum and instruction, teaching pedagogies,
instructional methods and emerging trends on it, teacher training etc. Another thing we
can understand by above information is that the curriculum related workshop, seminar,
78
training are significantly held in Chitwan district. Sanjaya's participation in different
activities shows that teacher had developed the understanding of curriculum in his own
way while they were given different training, seminar and workshop related with
different aspect of curriculum practices.
I found from theoretical, empirical and related literature review that curriculum
is just the idea which will develop by the dialectical practice among teachers and
students. So no pre assigned subject matter would be appropriate curriculum for learners.
Our teachers understand curriculum as subject matter determined by some pre specified
learning objectives for the students. So they understand the curriculum in traditional way
as said by Habermas and Stenhouse in their work.
Curriculum as a subject matter, a theme that I developed related with
understanding of the curriculum clearly shows the image of how our curriculum practice
is going on and perceived by our teachers. Over the year and currently, the dominant
concept of curriculum is that of content or subject matter taught by teachers and learned
by students. Our teachers are accepting curriculum as the bundle of subject matter to be
carried in classroom. It seems teachers see learners as porters, who need to carry the load
of subject matter in their mind. I think this type of teachers' understanding of the
curriculum is seeking new directives of initiation. This situation calls for the need to
change the traditional format of curriculum that sees the rows of learners sitting
passively in front of their instructor listening to the lesson/lectures or are waiting to be
questioned.
What our learner need now is, different kind of education and curriculum which
will prepare different types of competencies. Learners need to prepare as a skilled
workers for every business and industry so that it could be survivable education for the
21st century. (Phenix 1962 as cited in Lunenburg, 2011) defined curriculum as what is
79
studied, the content or subject matter of instruction which includes the whole range of
matters in which the student is expected to gain some knowledge and competence. When
we are not trying to shift our concept of teaching subject matter to the teaching by topic
or phenomenon teaching it can't be possible to change the new understanding of the
concept of curriculum as said by Phenix. But our practice of teaching learning shows
that the deliberation of content is just a curriculum. This conception is transmitted one
generation to another. It is seen when we view our historical development of
curriculum. Different educational commission made in Nepalese history shows the core
theme of curriculum is that how much contents were loaded by learners in their minds
instead of what they are able to do in their everyday life.
It seems from related literature of theoretical and philosophical perspective
adopted by Nepalese education that our teachers think curriculum as contents to be
taught in classroom. Respondents said that lack of curriculum related seminar, workshop
and training we were just think curriculum as contents because every day we have the
book in our hands so what we are know about curriculum instead of contents.
Curriculum as Learning Experiences
The idea of curriculum as learning experiences emphasizes the teacher as a
facilitator of the personal growth of learners. Curriculum under this view is the process
of experiencing the meaning of and direction followed by teacher and learner's
interaction. However teachers and learners discuss the rational of useful and value laden
activities which are the activity which is not centralize activities. Learning experience
the curriculum that learners actually comes to realize or come to know the actual
knowledge, skills, attitudes and values. Hence from the view of respondents of this
study, curriculum as an experience is an effort to grasp what is learned rather than taken
80
for granted. Curriculum is the meaning of experiences experienced by students which are
not the facts to memorize or to be performed.
Krishna has similar understanding to what Wiles and Bondi (2007) had
described the curriculum as a set of desire goals or values that are activated through a
development process and culminated in successful learning experiences for students. In
this connection of curriculum as learning experiences Krishna stated that;
What the students do, how much they learn, how much they experience are all
curriculum. For effective teaching curriculum is essential. Curriculum is like
crossing the distance of racecourse in teaching. (13 May 2012, 1:15 pm,
translated version)
Krishna understands curriculum as successful learning experiences for learners.
Most of these experiences have been purposively planned by means of the written
curriculum but many more experiences are encountered by learners in educational
contexts. Taba (1962) and Lunenburg (2011), points out learning experiences as the
mental operations that student employ in learning subject matter. In actual learning one
cannot deal with content without learning experiences. By experiencing the hidden
curriculum learners also acquire many forms of learning experiences that were not
planned but are usually highly significant.
Krishna understands curriculum as a racecourse for students in teaching
learning activities as defined by Schubert (1986 as cited in Marsh, 2009). This
emphasizes the individual’s capacity to participate and re-conceptualize one’s
experience of life. Curriculum is the interpretation of lived experiences. Through the
social process of sharing, individuals come to a greater understanding of themselves as
well as others and the world. What the students do, how much they learn, how much they
experience are all curriculum. Understanding of the curriculum concept from this
81
perspective seems good. When I informally met him in the tea shop for the first time, I
slowly convinced him to my topics and his interview. He told me that he did not have
clear concept about curriculum. But after the first interview, when I tried to explore him
a bit more he said;
I used to think that curriculum is like a textbook which gives the general outline
of course to be taught. But when I was shifted to educational training centre
where I train teachers daily and interact with different people from different
perspective my concept changed. It's a main instrument/weapon used by
teacher. The main user knows how effective the instrument is. Instrument
should be of user' recommendation. Curriculum design, modification, change
etc should be based on teachers' experiences and recommendations. I mean,
curriculum is the main instrument used by teacher. It's my realization from
teaching learning experiences and involvement in different trainings. (From my
field note)
In the perspective of above data presented above it state that curriculum as a
common place of teacher, learner, subject matter and the contemporary society or the
surrounding. Narayan said on this view curriculum as pathyakram kshian ko goreto ho
(curriculum is the lane of teaching), seems very general but has an oriented meaning. It
reflects the sense of curriculum as a Currere said by Schubert, is very much critical and
praxis oriented understanding of curriculum. I tried to see his story nearly than I found
that he had experiences of participating in workshop, training and seminars related to
curriculum development work. Also he gained this insight from his past experiences of
school education and his teaching career and said that; curriculum reflects what student
is and should be in future. Function of societal change linked with the broader outline
of education which is specified in curriculum.
82
The process approach of curriculum development is more open-ended that the
product approach (Stenhouse 1975; James, 2013). In this sense, curriculum theory and
practices is seen as a continuous development through the interaction of teachers,
students and knowledge. Indeed we can say that teachers have the understanding of
curriculum as process rather than product. Respondents said that; we are teaching and
knowing the curriculum in old fashioned way which was of benefit in the age of 1900s or
so on but the needs are not the same fit in the 21st century. This is the situation of
understanding the curriculum from more sociological, humanistic and realistic way. We
can analyze and predict from above situation that we really need a rethinking of
education and redesigning of our education system, and curriculum, so it prepares our
children for the future with skills that are needed for today and tomorrow. Really we
need to revise our concept of curriculum from the traditionalist and conventionalist
thinking. Analyzing all my participants' views of curriculum understanding, generally it
seemed that curriculum is a preplanned thing to deliver to the students in the classroom
teaching so that intended educational outcomes can be achieved. They try to explain
curriculum metaphorically as 'pathyakram ghar ko naksa'(curriculum as planned
activities),'shikshan ko goreto'(curriculum as learning experiences), and 'ghansi ko
hansia' (curriculum as instructional instrument for teacher). It gives the scenario of
different perspective of understanding of curriculum concept. The personal
communication with respondent Krishna reflects his understanding of curriculum in
broad perspective as;
There are two types of curriculum that exist simultaneously in real life. Formal
curriculum is prepared government agency to fulfill intended learning outcomes
declared by educational aims and goals. Through the hidden curriculum
students are learning those things which are not in formal curriculum. Students
83
Understanding the Curriculum
• Shifting away from a behavioral
objective to the more student choice.
• Looks at curriculum not as physical
things but as the interaction of
teachers, students and knowledge.
• Content and means are developed as
teachers and students work together.
• Curriculum is what takes place in the
classroom.
• There is a clear focus on learning,
teachers and students as partners in
meaning making.
• Curriculum as an active rather than a
technical exercise.
Stenhouse (1975)
learn from the behavior and attitude of role models, school environment and the
existing society and their culture. So we can also understand the curriculum as
a social process. (From my field note)
The general exploration of the concepts of curriculum from a primary field data
acquired from interview basically relies on the traditionalist view of curriculum as;
curriculum is subject centered and
common for all students, there is
hierarchical relationship in subject
matter to be taught or it is a top-down
approach. The traditionalist view of
curriculum is grounded in the belief
that reality can be known and
transmitted to students by
thoughtfully planning their learning
experiences before they enter into the
classroom. Almost all of the
respondents have the understanding
that if the teachers understand the
crux of curriculum they can teach easily, curriculum was planned and developed by
curriculum development centre and our responsibility is to transmit the contents among
the students in classroom. Every respondent practices and understands curriculum in
traditionalist way formally in current instructional practices.
But also they believe curriculum as a process of social activities progressively
based on pragmatism. Curriculum is based on child’s experiences and interest and would
stress self expressive activities. Curriculum may bring some changes in society and
84
societal needs. Respondents not only practice, believe and understand curriculum in
traditionalist way, they also demanded sustainable education for situation and context of
country. They wish a vocational educational curriculum for teenagers like "restaurant
managers" which would include elements of mathematics, language, accounting, writing
and communication skills.
In this 21st century, the post modern era of civilization; understanding and
perceiving the curriculum in a narrow sense may not be appropriate (Slattery, 2012).
Educating the child not only denotes to 3Rs concept of traditional thought. Crriculum is
an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of an educational
proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable of effective
translation into practice. A curriculum is a particular form of specification about the
practice of teaching. It is not a package of materials or a syllabus of ground to be
covered. It needs to be emphasized that "Curriculum as Process" is not a physical thing,
but rather the interaction of teachers, students, and knowledge. In other words,
curriculum is what actually happens in the classroom and what people do to prepare and
evaluate (Stenhouse, 1975 as cited in Srivastava & Kumari, 2005). Teacher is the only
that person who understands the children and their needs very closely. The interaction
between students, educator, parents and the contemporary society reflects their collective
voices simultaneously. Habermas in his practical interest of curriculum development
said that curriculum is not viewed as a linear equation but is rather seen as an ongoing
activity shaped by the interaction between the educator, learner, classroom teacher and
broader context (Zajda, 2010).
Exactly, the curriculum should not be a linear concept having mechanistic form
of top down approach. It needs to be broader so that it helps in the wholesome
development of child. So, participants have varied understanding, ideas and definitions
85
about the conception of curriculum. They have perceived their own conception and
understanding of education, curriculum, instruction and classroom teaching. In my
understanding, curriculum may reflect societal and people’s needs via those contents and
learning experiences which are planned or not. Based on my experiences and thoughts,
respondents’ experiences and thought, I have tried to make some discussions about the
concepts of curriculum. I have discussed this from the perspective of my research
participants’ and different literatures because participants’ perspective gives the
empirical and literature based perspective give the theoretical understanding or meaning
of the curriculum.
Combining the Different Perspectives of Curriculum
Here I am trying to make commonalities among the multi perspective of
findings the conception of curriculum. First, I have divided it into two different aspects
of findings and present in table: what I found after literature review (empirical, thematic
and theoretical) and the information found from the field. Then, I have tried to interpret
it with my experiences and feelings. This type of triangulation of data helps to maintain
the trustworthiness of research work. Also it will gives new directives for further
research works too.
Found From Conception of Curriculum
Literature
• Content of instruction and textbook used in the course.
• Daily actions performed by teachers and students to achieve intended
learning outcomes.
• Learning experiences that learner can encounter in educational
practices. (Kelly, 2004)
• Bundle of subject matter to be studied by learners.
86
• List of targeted skill need to be performed by student via pre-planned
educational objectives. (Null, 2011)
• Curriculum is an interpretation of lived experiences.
(Anderson, 2004)
Theory
• Curriculum as subject matter.
• Curriculum as experience.
• Curriculum as intended learning outcome.
• Curriculum as discrete tasks and concepts.
• Curriculum as Currere.
• Curriculum as agenda for social reconstruction.
• Curriculum as a program of planned activities. (Schubert,1986)
• Curriculum as what takes place in classroom.
• Curriculum not as a physical thing but as the interaction of teachers,
students and knowledge. (Stenhouse, 1975)
• Practical activity between teachers and students. (Habermas, 1972)
Field Data
Curriculum as Blueprint
• A clear guideline for teaching.
• Way of achieving entire educational outcomes.
• Details plan of instruction.
• Lane of teaching.
• Pre planned activities of entire period of each class.
Curriculum as Content
87
• List of subject matter to be taught.
• Textbook or syllabus.
Curriculum as Learning Experiences
• Planned learning experiences by means of written curricula.
• Encountered by learners in educational context.
• Curriculum as a social process.
After analyzing this different perspective of conception of curriculum we can
conclude that respondents have different type of conception of curriculum and their
practice also. Some of them have humanistic and modern conception but they are
compelled to practice curriculum in traditional approach because of diverse obstacles
and barriers. They think that the main cause behind this is the nation's policy and
practice of education. Whatever is written in policy isn't in practice. They charge that it's
negligence for education sector. It pushes the education sector backward instead of
giving new direction to new age.
What do we think when hear and see the word curriculum? External
expectations, documented curriculum, planned curriculum, hidden curriculum,
everything happens in schools and the lives of people. There is no shortage of words
about the conception of curriculum. I found various conceptions, meanings and
definitions of curriculum in different perspectives. Understanding and conceptualization
of respondents on it are both inside and aside of these views of thought. Does it meet the
needs of world that is rapidly changing, socially, economically and culturally? Does it
address recent discoveries about learning? Does the curriculum provide the skills that the
students really need? Does it address the knowledge that the students must acquire as a
88
result of schooling? The answer to these questions must justify the worth of education
and its curriculum for today and for the future. So we need to seek commonalities among
the diversities on the conception of curriculum of teachers, so an effective curriculum
could provide guidelines on pedagogical approaches in the classroom, and it teaches a
learner to live intellectually as well as to become a free and happy being.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I explored the comments, feelings, experiences and perceptions
of my participants about curriculum. Mainly, I have discussed the participant's
understandings of curriculum. After analyzing participants’ voice, I have tried to share
my own reflection about the understanding of curriculum. Speaking about the teaching
learning activities, I noticed that teachers are the key actors of this process. Having said
this, students’ roles and responsibilities cannot be neglected. Teachers have more
prominent role for development, implementation and management of curriculum.
After analyzing my participants’ perceptions about the curriculum, I realized
that teachers have developed their own understanding of curriculum and believe that
curriculum may reflect the need of society. They have sufficient knowledge to view and
understand the curriculum in precise form. Curriculum was taken for granted and pre-
determined in practice. Teacher becomes intermediary to translate the curriculum into
the instructional strategies that influence student learning. Teachers' personalities and
abilities influence their capacity to transpose curricular content into student learning.
Students' interests and abilities, in turn, influence their input into the instructional
system.
89
CHAPTER 5
TEACHERS' PERCEPTION AND EXPERIENCES IN THE CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Chapter Overview
The main purpose of this chapter is to bring out the perception of curriculum
development process and experience of participation of teacher in this process. So in
this chapter, I have tried to explore the various concepts of curriculum development
process from the teachers’ perspective. Not only that I have also tried to discuss the
practices of curriculum development process and experiences of teacher’s participation
on it. In this chapter, I have tried to address my two research questions. How do
teachers perceive the practices of curriculum development process in Nepal? How do
teachers express their experience of participation in curriculum development process?
To address this question, I have not only brought my participants’ perceptions but also
connected relevant literatures and my reflection as well.
In responding to these questions, I have divided this chapter into two
subsections. In the first section I have tried to discuss practices of curriculum
development process and in the second section; teachers' participation in the curriculum
development. Finally, this unit ends with the chapter summary.
Practices of Curriculum Development Process in Nepal
Different concepts of curriculum have emerged from both theoretical and
practical perspectives in the previous chapter of this dissertation. A common feature is
that curriculum is central to the education process and includes the sum of teaching and
learning activities provided by schools. How we see the curriculum and curriculum
90
development process directly shapes and influences our practices. So we need to think
regularly about what underline our ideas, our reasoning and practice are never value free
or neutral.
The development of curriculum, Stenhouse (1975 as cited in Kelly, 2004)
regards as vital and states that individual teacher accepts a role in respect to the
curriculum by modifying, adapting and developing it to suit the needs of individual
pupils and a particular environment. Thus it appears that the participation of teachers in
the curriculum development process is important.
NCF (2007) has defined curriculum development as the process of planning learning
opportunities intended to bring about certain desired changes in pupils, and the
assessment of the extent to which these changes have taken place. NCF emphasizes the
importance of professional development of teachers with a focus on curriculum
development and implementation in order to ensure that teachers understand the
curriculum content and the process involved in supporting curriculum to make sound
decisions about what is important for students to learn. I have made separate sub themes
on the perception of teacher' of practices of curriculum development process in Nepal.
Gap in Written and Implemented Process
In this part of analysis, I have tried to present the story of my respondent as a
snipped conversation. This section is very helpful for me to present how the participants
of this study understand and perceive the curriculum development practices in the
Nepalese context.
Researcher [R]: How do you take your teaching experiences? What do your
experiences say?
Respondent first [R1]: Now, the teaching learning practice of school education
is based on interest of private textbook and practice book writers which is
91
totally out of curriculum prescribed by the government. The objectives and
subject matters determined by curriculum are in one side and textbook is in
different edge. Teaching process has been directionless crossing the curriculum
outline by including unnecessary questions in the name of different pretest and
test question.
......................
Respondent second [R2]: The courses to be taught are determined by
curriculum development centre. Foreign resource materials are taken as
sources by curriculum development centre. This is a cause of gap in written and
implementation of curriculum development practices in Nepal.
………………
Respondent third [R3]: Theoretically the course seems very good but the time
has changed with changes in technology. So our course doesn’t succeed to meet
the learning objectives practically. We deliberate subject matter from the top. I
mean students acquire very little at the end of every academic year. Nothing
remains in student’s hand as well as in mind.
………………..
R: How do you take the objective mentioned in curriculum? What do your
experiences say?
R1: I am assured that the objectives in curriculum are good. They are based on
students' age and psychology but the subject matter is vague due to private
textbook writers.
………………
R2: Objectives mentioned in curriculum are not attained in the context of Nepal,
although it thoroughly sounds relevant. Subjective achievement is only up to
92
50%, it won't cross 60% in S.L.C if we assume those students who score 32%
mark out of 100% teaching as passed. Curriculum has been proved a failure
everywhere. Today, students are unsuccessful and of teachers, teaching institute
and nation are unsuccessful as well. The main reason of this is either the failure
of curriculum or curriculum objective. It is a matter of research.
……………
R3: As I told earlier it is good but behavioral part is problematic. In my
teaching experiences, I succeed to make many students pass out from the school
but I haven’t seen any student self dependent in their career.
…………….
R: How far are the subject matters mentioned in curriculum relevant?
R1: The teaching learning activities for student would be convenient if we can
construct suitable textbook based on curriculum outline by curriculum
development centre. For this, government sensation is needed for private
writer.
……………..
R2: Subject matter of curriculum is determined based on objective. Subject
matters may not be relevant in spite of being relevant to objective.
……………..
R3: Of course the subject matter included in curriculum is relevant for each
level but is not practical. My long experiences of teaching learning ensured this
and I personally experienced this situation.
…………….
R: How do you use curriculum textbook? Do you adjust some or use exactly as
it comes from centre? How do you decide?
93
R1: Textbook is not constructed/designed according to broader form of
curriculum. Broader forms of curriculum are not obeyed while designing
curriculum according to unit wise subject matter of textbook and while
designing university lecture. Haphazard questions of upper level are included in
particular grade level. Once the textbook is designed it is disseminated after its
evaluation by experienced and interested teachers. As a result teaching learning
activities would be fruitful.
……………
R2: The curriculum that comes from centre is implemented making some
adjustments. Some of the subject matters are put up-down during
implementation. The implementation rests generally on the individual teacher
though sometimes brief discussion sessions are organized at the resource centre
level.
……………
R3: I used as it according that’s from centre but sometimes presentation of
subject matter is reviewed at the end of intake.
……………
R: Do you know, which objective or subject matter functions or not at the local
level?
R1: Designing the local curriculum is based on the objective of skilled
manpower. But in our context it is not fulfilled due to the lack of proper support
of resources from the government side. We have trained teachers but do not
have the economic sustainability to design and prescribe local curriculum.
Talking about the national objective, whether they are functioning or not at the
94
local level is very much doubtful question for me because we are producing
many failure students incapable of competing in job market.
……………..
R2: Sometimes teaching was carried out in some context according to our
circumstances even though the particular subject matters are directed from
centre. Specially, we used the skill oriented subject like pre-vocational
education based on localism at that time. We equally studied the same regional
subject matter which was used in local level.
…………..
R3: Of course -not, because our students don’t have the ability to perform in
daily life. For example in the case of mathematics we teach home arithmetic
every year but the students could not check electricity bill or water bill.
…………..
R: Do you have any experiences in relation to curriculum implementation and
evaluation at local level? How are the other teachers constructing local
curriculum?
R1: I haven't got any opportunity to participate in local curriculum design,
development and implementation till now. Talking about national perspective, I
have very less experiences of textbook writing and curriculum analyzing and
rest of it. I am not able to say much more about this process.
…………..
R2: I haven't participated directly in the works to design local or national
curriculum. Many friends have tried to work there while working under this
training centre but failed to get complete achievement. Friends in some districts
talk to design local curriculum but government hasn't helped with means or
95
resource or there isn't such management to make curriculum for local level.
For this, required resources and material are not provided.
..................
R3: I don't have such experiences of participating in curriculum
conceptualization, design, development locally or nationally. I just have
experienced its implementation and evaluation. I have not got any chance to
discuss with my friend about this matter and I haven’t participated locally or
nationally. So I am not able to say anything about this.
……………
When analyzing above snipped story of participants regarding the understanding
and perception about curriculum development, it seems that they understood curriculum
development to be having a broad area. They tried to link it to the work of text
formation of educational goals and objectives, textbook writing, achievement of
intended objectives, student evaluation etc. Obviously it is related to curriculum
development. At first we conceptualize a curriculum then we design, develop and
manage it properly with the inclusion of need and interest of learner. Then we can see it
through other perspective like global perspective. Whatever is the theoretical aspect, it
seems that my respondents have conceptualized and understood that the curriculum
development practice and process of Nepal, there is a gap between written and
implementation process. They argue that most of the works in curriculum process need
to be performed by local teachers who are directly involved in its implementation. They
believed and said that mismatch occurs in process of curriculum development.
Whatever we know and identify through our everyday experiences is not
incorporated by the person who has participated in the work of curriculum design. And
whatever they think and design, we can't achieve perfectly. It is because of the diverse
96
culture and capability of learners in the field of implementation of written curricula. As
Grundy (1987 as cited in Orestein & Hunkins, 2013) explains the concept of Habermas,
the role of teacher is to facilitate students to make their own meanings and to have their
own learning experiences and a teacher is the developer and initiator of curriculum
change/development. Nepalese curriculum development practice seems to be gapping
in written and implementation when we see the perspectives of NCF. It has explained
the decentralization of curriculum development and my respondents have said that there
is mismatch between policy and practice.
This gapping may be due to the effect of bureaucratization because from
literature related to curriculum development shows that authority is provided to CDC
for the process of curriculum development and monitoring by ministry of education.
Even the teacher role is not completely neglected but this process is in the handful
member of the sector of if we see the process development of curriculum in Nepal
provision made by ministry of education. NCF (2007) explained are adopting the
process model of curriculum development but the local level teacher explored it isn't in
practice. They said central level of textbook and curriculum development committee
borrowed different members from other field rather than maximization of classroom
teacher.
Centrally Dominated Curriculum Development Practice
With teaching experience of more than thirty years, and other professional
experiences including writing of textbooks, respondent Sanjaya describes the
curriculum development process and practice of Nepal as;
Curriculum development policy of our country is somehow good because it is
revised in every five years. Curriculum is developed in various steps from lower
to upper level based on time, innovation of knowledge and influences of
97
information technology in knowledge development. On the basis of learners'
identification of problem, need, relevancy, utility, and importance and so on
curriculum is developed. For that different task like curriculum pattern
construction (design), writing, implementation, evaluation and revision are
applied. Theoretically speaking, curriculum is constructed with the consent of
school resource centre to district, zone, and development region to the national
level with the participation of teachers. Curriculum is designed and written
with the broad discussion, conducting national seminar but it isn’t practical. (5
May 2012, 1:30 pm)
From the above story we can say that Sanjaya has knowledge about curriculum
development concept and process. He has clearly described the process of curriculum
development in Nepal. He has clear concept about this; it’s a thing that need to be
explored and I have tried to explore this concept from his perspective. He said that he
had a chance to participate in textbook writing and revision as he received the major
work of curriculum development and deliberation in school level. His understanding is;
Teacher bears the problem in teaching profession. Any Ph. D. holder expert
can’t understand the level wise problem and tendency if he /she do not teach in
the level wise grade. For that more experienced teachers are needed because
only qualified ones can’t design the curriculum and teach. This is not adopted
in our country. Only the teachers who have knowledge about the child’s mental
capacity, subject matter relevancy, scope etc can design and teach the
curriculum accordingly. Curriculum and textbook are not same and are
incomplete in the lack of teachers' participation. Teachers' participation in
curriculum development is very important because they experience how to
simplify the curriculum, how to divide and how to teach. No one has understood
98
about society, social needs, students and their needs, capacity, interest etc as a
teacher. So first observe potentiality and capability of the child while
developing curriculum not the reverse of it. (5 May 2012, 1:35 pm)
After analyzing above information, there is a mismatch between policy of
curriculum development and its actual practices. My respondent has knowledge of
curriculum development process; theoretically and practically in the context of Nepal.
He had the experiences of curriculum implementation, textbook writing and revision.
He said that he bears several problems in the field of teaching learning from several
years of experiences. He is willing to participate in other processes of curriculum
development to share the problem of education and everyday curriculum practices in
classroom, subject matter relevancy and needs of Nepali students. NCF (2007) has
mentioned that;
Curriculum development process is required to be highly participatory such that
curriculum experts are teamed up with parents, teachers, gender experts, experts
of child-centered teaching and learning, and representative ethnic minorities,
dalits and people with disabilities so that curriculum becomes non-
discriminatory and based upon principles of social inclusion and equity (p. 25).
The process of curriculum development in Nepal seems participatory, inclusive
and equitable in policy. Regarding the scenario of practices in real manner, my
respondent remembered that he had not got such opportunity to participate in central
level of curriculum and textbook writing committee. However he said that he got
chance of textbook writing and revising from Chitwan district for some chapters. In the
personal communication of our regular meeting he said;
People say curriculum development process is inclusive, participatory; I don’t
care about it because in more than thirty years period of my teaching life no one
99
called me to participate in the process of curriculum design and development. I
got few opportunities to participate in textbook writing and revision workshop
after putting several strong demands. In Chitwan, several experienced and
trained teachers are teaching different subjects for long time. If you can ask
them, whether they had got any chances to participate in any processes other
than implementation of curriculum, no one answers positively. It’s a language
game or a written document prepared sitting in air conditioned room of any
hotel in Kathmandu. (From my field note)
When I discussed about the teachers' participation in curriculum development
process one of the member of CDC had said that teachers were participate in design,
development, implementation and revision of the curriculum from each district, zone and
regional level. They have given different responsibilities from different stage of
curriculum development. We don’t think that they have only the responsibility of
implementation and evaluation of curriculum in the process of curriculum development.
Our policy has declared that "we have to adopt the process model of curriculum
development" (NCF, 2007, p.5).
After listening to the respondent’s feeling I have come to know that he is willing
to participate in national curriculum committee and textbook writing but he has not got
any opportunity. I don’t think that did not get chance to participate in curriculum
development, design and so on. He told me that he had got many chances to participate
in different meetings, seminars and workshop related to curriculum development,
implementation, revision, textbook writing at district and regional level. He is trying to
say that we are moving towards the centrally dominated curriculum development process
rather than adopting curriculum as process following the Stenhouse's model of
curriculum development as declared by our curriculum policy. The evidences that I
100
found from my respondents gives the glimpse of centralized culture of curriculum
practices. In most of the countries, curriculum development is generally centralized, but
at the implementation level there is varying degree of autonomy of local authorities,
schools and teachers (NIER, 1999). So after reviewing the above information we can say
that our curriculum development practices are in traditional mode till now. It indicates
that our policy tries to direct us towards progressive curriculum and practices and they
lead us towards technical rationality.
When we view curriculum as practice then each school would be responsible
and accountable for the development and evaluation of their own educational policies
and practices. There would be neither a centralized curriculum nor the centralized
examination system because power resides with school and not the policymakers and
other (Habermas, 1972 as cited in Kelly, 2004). So we can predict that centralized
educational practice could not be able to include the teachers from diverse groups and
cultures from the local communities. By viewing respondents' opinions we can say that
our system of curriculum practices is not able to incorporate the local teachers in overall
process of curriculum development.
Teachers felt that our curriculum development practice becomes centrally
dominated because in review of literature related with others country they were provided
more authority and responsibility to the local level but in our situation it is seen just
opposite of others. Also teachers said instead of knowing local resources, needs and
aspiration foreign experts or Nepalese experts from the different university was used to
planning and designing curriculum centrally. Local teachers have more responsibility
with in implementation and evaluation of centrally prescribed curriculum all over the
country because of centrally governance system and its impact on education.
101
Decentralization of Curriculum Development Practice: Inclusive and
Participatory
Some participants believe that decentralization of curriculum making is more
inclusive and participatory, so that it would be able to reflect the local knowledge and
needs of learners. Knowledge economy is the priority of 21st century; therefore
exploration of local knowledge can contribute global knowledge and thereby help in
making connection of local knowledge with global knowledge. Some participants also
believe that curriculum become fruitful if it made skill based so that our students can
have a place in international job market. In this connection Narayan said;
Teachers are said to participate only in policy not in practice. Curriculum
development has been centralized only in capital city or in main city centre. We
stayed in old system; curriculum development process hasn’t been keeping pace
with the world in this 21st century. Now our students are spreading all over the
world to study where they are getting problem of marks equivalence and we
could develop in such a way that it is accepted internationally. I have not
experienced any functions, discussions or seminars related to curriculum
development till now in Chitwan district. I would have participated if that had
been done. Teacher is said to play with the curriculum as s/he uses the
curriculum daily. Teachers keep all the information about student’s interests,
wants, needs, national condition etc. because they stay in local environment,
culture and society. So teacher’s participation to curriculum development
should be enlarged. (17 May 2012, 9:00 am)
Narayan perceived that in the process of curriculum development, teachers are
considered as knowledge representatives of learners and school milieu. Teachers are
assisted by representatives of all bodies of knowledge, especially representatives of
102
subject matter and the curriculum process. In the process of curriculum development,
teachers’ role may be compared to the role of musicians who perform the creation of
composers. A musician may make his own interpretations of a composition (Ben-
Peretz, 1980; Srivastava & Kumari, 2005). Likewise, in the curricular approach,
teachers were perceived as originator of the curriculum, composer of their own music.
Their knowledge, attitude, concerns, and needs were the starting point of the curricular
process. Teacher’s expertise about classroom reality was considered to be crucial for
discerning practical problem while constructing curriculum.
Teachers have intimate knowledge of learners, classrooms and school milieu.
This knowledge allows teachers to point out weaknesses, shortcomings and conditions
which should and can be placed. The perceptions of teachers are significant and crucial
for curriculum development in practical manner. So it is considered that teachers are
being assigned a primary role in curriculum development process. When I interviewed
my respondent Krishna and asked have you got any chance to participate in curriculum
development and design, he answered;
I haven’t got any opportunity in curriculum design (arrangement of curriculum
elements) and development. It is start from setting educational goal or policy
design and end up in evaluation and revision. If the responsibilities of policy
making and curriculum designing are provided to teacher then curriculum
becomes practicable. Students' school dropout is the result of teachers’ non
participation. Teacher need to familiar with the things he uses. Teacher’s
experiences, expertise need to be brought in curriculum so that it would be
practical and behavioral to students. Curriculum need to be based on nation’s
reality and should be relevant with change of time and applicable for student’s
adult behavior. Now the curriculum matter has come mechanically but it should
103
go behaviorally. It has only been theoretical concept but is not effective from the
perspective of student’s skill development. (13 May 2012, 1:30 pm)
Krishna understands that curriculum development process proceeds from the
formation of educational goal and ends at revision of curricular material or the design to
revision of curriculum. He believes that curriculum is implemented effectively only if
teacher participation is ensured from the design to revision of the curriculum. Teacher is
the only person who directly intimately knows learners, classroom and school milieu.
To make the child’s friendly curriculum direct participation of teacher in curricular
process is crucial. Teachers read every page of student and understand what subject
matter is best suited, in which level and in which social milieu. It is known to those
teachers who are directly involved in teaching learning process. He also understands
that if the teacher participation in the curriculum development process becomes
unsatisfactory then the problem of teacher’s dropout from job and student drop out from
classroom arises.
Krishna emphasized that teacher’s experiences and expertise are crucial for the
development of curriculum as stated in Stenhouse’s process inquiry model of
curriculum development. Process inquiry model allows teachers to become artists
rather than technician giving emphasis to a curriculum decision making and the
curriculum development is the province of the local school (Mckernan, 2013). Also,
Habermas claimed in his practical interest that curriculum design is regarded as a
process through which student and teacher interact in order to construct new
knowledge. So there is an alignment between Habermas’ Practical interests of
curriculum development and Stenhouse’s process inquiry model of curriculum
development. Both have a common ground that curriculum is not a means-ends by
which educational outcomes will be produced through the action of a teacher upon a
104
group of objectified pupils developed centrally as banking concepts as said by Frere
(1970). Analyzing the perspective of respondents and from the review of related
literature it is noticed that decentralization is one of the ways to incorporate the
maximum teachers in the process of curriculum practices.
Hence by observing my respondents’ understanding about the practices of
curriculum development process, it is seen that they all are aware theoretically and
practically on the process and practices of curriculum development in Nepal. They
develop their own personal perception on the practices of curriculum development and
design. They have a common view that the education system of any country in the
world becomes worthless without teachers’ participation in the whole curricular
practices. Curriculum is developed for learners and teacher is that person who
intimately peruses the child’s each and every behavioral activities. Teachers told that
decentralization in curriculum development becomes more inclusive and participatory
because they felt problem and barriers to implement and evaluation. Literature that I
reviewed also shows the centralized system of curriculum development process. Our
history of curriculum starts from spiritual scriptures to the current written document
which was controlled in this or that way from the power coercive approach. The
pipeline approach of our education system influenced our education system even if
formal education starts form our modern age starts from the rise of democracy in Nepal.
Different educational commission recommended different structure of curriculum and
its development process but one thing remain unchanged that is the cultural hegemony
to see local teacher as mere implementers rather than partner of development of central
committee. Indeed teachers are demanded decentralization in curriculum development
process now for inclusive and participatory.
105
Teachers’ Participation in Curriculum Development
Talking in a broad sense, the curriculum development process includes the
design, development, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and revision of
curriculum. However, while examining the curriculum development process more
precisely it becomes clear that each phase may itself comprise several varied but
interrelated activities. In the design phase, curriculum is conceptualized and attention is
paid to the arrangement of the varied components, focusing on philosophical
underpinnings, goals, objectives, subject matter, learning experiences and evaluation;
all established in consultation with stakeholders. Then the curriculum is developed
through planning, construction and logical step-by-step procedures are used to produce
written document which include vision statements, goals, standards, performance
benchmarks, learning activities and instructional activities, interdisciplinary connections
and other integration activities that guide the curriculum implementation.
In the implementation phase, all the stakeholders become part of the process by
making their contribution to operationalize the curriculum as designed and developed.
Especially, classroom teachers have a crucial role in this phase of curriculum
development process. Monitoring, as a part of the implementation process, verify the
classroom practices consistent with the established goals and objectives of the
curriculum. Evaluation process determines the effectiveness of curriculum design and
its implementation as they relate to the child. Finally, curriculum review guides
appropriate adjustment to the curriculum documents. In the section of literature review
of this research, different literatures have shown that the teachers’ participation in each
and every phase of curriculum development process is crucial and has a significant role
on it.
106
Inclusion on Teacher Participation
Here I have tried to present the teachers' understanding and dimension of their
participation in curriculum development via the snipped story picking up their lived
experiences.
R: You have said that you couldn't participate in curriculum construction. Why
did it happen? Can you share some story?
R1: I don't have any comment on participation in curriculum construction but
less time may be available for textbook reformation. At that time we can give the
suggestion for future outline of textbook and some exchange in curriculum. For
that the assurance of enough time is necessary for coming textbook reformation
but as I know curriculum development centre's subject related personnel
modified and replaced the experience teachers in later reformation, which was
not suitable.
…………
R2: Ironsmiths make sickle using their experience and skill by asking the user
about the type while designing it. In spite of the difficulties or hardships during
the process then design keeping users' psychology in mind as much as possible.
Curriculum should be used by the teacher. They know how much effective has it
been. What to do for betterment? The matters can be suitable if the teachers
participate while designing, changing and modifying the curriculum. Most of
the fellow teachers comment on curriculum while working as trainers in training
centers. It would be better through teacher participation. It is due to the lack of
effective mechanism for teacher participation.
………….
107
R3: In one hand our mechanism is not as good as it is written in policy document
and so it couldn’t ensure maximum teacher participation. I have not paid
attention to the formal process of curriculum construction but focused on
curriculum implementation.
………….
R: You have said that the teachers from out of valley have not participated. Why
it would be you share your experiences?
R1: It was the first time, during the curriculum reformation of grade 9 and 10
compulsory math in 2060 B. S. when the experienced teachers were brought
from out of valley for the first time. Before this, we reformed the curriculum
three four times calling famous, experienced teachers inside the Kathmandu
valley but the problem remained where it was. Next time selection was done in
seminar based report but curriculum development centre provided the
opportunity to the inexperienced persons from the valley again.
…………..
R2: The question you put woke me up. The teacher from out of the valley like
Chitwan, Makawanpur, and Dhading were not to be actively participating.
…………
R3: I never participate in any programme held in curriculum development
centre and that’s why I don't have any experiences about the central level
activities. As to say about my participation in local level, I haven’t experiences
that type of curricular activities instead of teaching.
…………
After analyzing above conversation of expression of teacher' participation in
curriculum development process in Nepalese context, I reached to the conclusion that it
108
is necessary to include teachers from varied geography, cultural group and curriculum
should provide information about varied people, learners and school contexts
(Stenhouse 1975, as cited Kelly, 2004). Respondents told that teachers from outside the
capital city have not got any chance to participate in curriculum development though
they are experienced and qualified to develop and implement the curriculum. Above
data also shows that local curriculum development practices are not practicable despite
what policy document said about the provision of local curriculum development. I
reviewed different scenarios of international curriculum development practices and they
give the clear picture of maximum participation of teachers in initiation of curriculum
development. It shows not only the higher teacher participation in curriculum practices
but also the higher educational achievement in these nations.
National Institute of Educational Research [NIER] (1999) said that where
diversities exist in community or society there it is necessary to involve local
community in the curriculum development to promote unity of diversities. So in our
context also diversity exists in various dimensions like ethnicity, cultural, linguistic and
geographical. This indicates that we are also need to promote and involve the local
teachers in the initiation of curriculum development. Respondents that they have need
inclusive curriculum development practices and here is no systematic input of teachers
on policy development, training and curriculum review. Involvement of wide range of
agencies and stakeholders is regarded as important factor to develop effective
curriculum. NIER (1999) said that although final decisions are generally made at
government level in most of the countries but stakeholders are consulted before and
during the development process, mostly the classroom teachers. Indeed this information
directs us to the future scene by showing the picture of past.
109
Teacher as a Mere Implementer Rather than Developer of Curriculum
Teachers’ experiences and expertise are beneficial to each and every phases of
curriculum development process; so is their participation in this process. About the
participation in this process respondent Sanjaya said;
Teachers’ participation in curriculum development process is essential in each
step; not only in policy paper. Practically, it is limited only in the paper. The
teachers from outside of Kathmandu valley have little or no opportunity in
policy design, goal determination, draft construction, curriculum writing etc.
Teacher’s role is limited only in the text book writing, revising, curriculum
implementation, evaluation etc. though they are also the part of different form of
curriculum development process. Now, the government should bring the new
policy as to address the time’s need which will ensure the teacher involvement
in every phase of curriculum development process among the various
community and places so that curriculum will be behavioral, internationally
accepted based on nation’s reality. Teacher’s participation in every step of
curriculum development process should be fixed which isn’t done up to now in
the nation. (5 May 2012, 1:45 pm)
Sanjaya discussed about the trends of curriculum development process on the
basis of his lived experience. He said that very teachers were participated only in
implementation and evaluation process from outside of valley. Teachers were involved
in the phase of development from capital city. Sanjaya didn’t know up to now that
teachers are involved in design, revision and monitoring phase. He has to say that
government should bring such a policy for curriculum development process so that
teacher’s participation in every phase will be ensured. He said;
110
It’s all valley centered. I think the teachers from out of valley don’t have any
such type of opportunity in realistic manner. You have to follow baggy
curriculum framework out of valley. I have doubt about the teachers who
participate in design, constructions of the curriculum are really a teacher or
not. Teacher from out of valley have not participated, they have not been asked
and discussed while developing curriculum. (5 May 2012, 1:45 pm)
Teachers' participation in curriculum design and development activity is
assumed crucial by many authors. Carl (2009) noted that the teacher must not be mere
implementers but development agent who is able to develop, apply, and evaluate the
relevant curriculum dynamically and creatively. Theoretically it is proved that teacher
has such capability and expertise for the design and development of curriculum rather
than as mere implementers. They have the ability required for development,
implementation, evaluation and revision of dynamic and creative curriculum relevant to
the learner’s needs and aspirations. In the regular meeting and discussion with Sanjaya
he told me;
I have not got any experiences of participation on overall process of curriculum
development. I had experience of writing textbook and its revising it once.
Being a classroom teacher responsibility of curriculum implementation and
evaluation is obvious and I collected several experiences but I have not had any
opportunity to explore these experiences of my teaching life in the task of
designing the curriculum framework. I bear several problems in my teaching
life related with learning experiences and so on. Teachers’ participation is
crucial and essential because teachers can and only understand the learners’
needs, aspiration, capacity and interest. Teacher and student are living in the
111
same society and culture so that teachers are able to diagnose ever aspects of
learners. (From my personal field note)
From the Sanjaya’s thought and belief, I have come to know that he had lot of
experiences in teaching learning activities and work of textbook writing. Curriculum
needs to be constructed after analyzing the child’s capacity, needs and interest and
should not be vice-versa. So teachers’ participation in curriculum development process
seems to be crucial and another respondent Krishna has the similar types of
understanding, perception and sorrow. He said;
I haven’t got any opportunity to take part in policy making, curriculum design
and writing although being a teacher I got the opportunity to participate
variously in curriculum implementation, evaluation and revision. Truly, in
every steps of curriculum development, if the curriculum development centre
took idea, advice, suggestion of teachers than this would be better. Curriculum
does not have any meaning and worth in real sense if it is developed without
incorporating their experiences. Teacher study every aspects of student and co-
ordinate with them. Teacher is a researcher of students and their society. I got
a chance to participate in discussion of national curriculum framework and
revision of curriculum once held in Kathmandu. (13 May 2012, 1: 50 pm)
Krishan has perceived that teacher’s idea, advice, and suggestion are beneficial
to every steps of curriculum development. For that teachers' participation in every step
would be better. He did not have any chance to participate in the phases of curriculum
design, development except for being involved in some discussion program. Like other
teachers, he had chance to involve in implementation and evaluation phase only. Wiles
and Bondi (2002) said that an emphasis should be given to the persons who should
involve in curriculum designing and planning in general and the teachers in particular.
112
But according to Krishna, in Nepalese context of curriculum development the teachers’
participation in designing and planning phase was lacking. Emphasizing the importance
of the participation of stakeholders in policy formulation Marsh (2009) said that
proposals for curriculum reform can come from various sources; teachers, teacher
unions, policy makers, academicians, politicians, media and pressure groups.
But Narayan understands that the politically oriented works could hamper
teachers' participation in the curriculum development process and he couldn’t have any
chances to take part in curriculum design and development though he participated in
implementation and evaluation process being a classroom teacher. He said in his
interview;
I haven’t got any opportunity to participate in curriculum development up to
now. Opportunities may come only to those special teachers, who are in district
centre, close teacher and relatives. I don’t know the reality, but it seems that
curriculum development process and its participation is centralized in reality.
(17 May 2012, 9:15 am)
Narayan perceived that teachers’ participation in the curriculum development
process of Nepal remains only in policy and document. He thinks that these activities
only remain in centre. He did not have any such opportunities though he passed several
years of his teaching life in Chitwan. When I went through observing several
documents of district education office of Chitwan and discussed with the staff members,
I couldn’t find any official records and evidences that were related to teachers’
participation in curriculum design, development and revision. In Chitwan no such
formal program, seminar and workshops were conducted. NIER (1999) explains that in
some countries like Australia there are varying possibilities for local authorities, schools
and teachers to influence curriculum development at the implementation level and such
113
countries teachers develop their own content within centrally developed curriculum
frameworks.
Regarding people's participation Carl (2009) wrote that, relevant curricula is,
however, not only assured on the broad front but also through curriculum actions of
those who are involved at other levels and in other fields (school, classroom). All
persons involved in these processes from the classroom up to the national level should
have a responsibility for relevant curriculum development. A curriculum should be
grounded in practice. It is an attempt to describe the work observed in classrooms that
it is adequately communicated to teachers and others (Stenhouse, 1975 as cited in Kelly,
2004). He conceptualizes the relationship between the learners, the teacher and the
subject matter, placing the teachers right at the heart of the curriculum development
process.
Reviewing the responses from all the respondents it is understood that their
engagement is mainly limited to implementing, monitoring and evaluating curriculum;
they do not have more role in the development process. Stenhouses’s placed the teacher
right in the centre of curriculum development process. Also Glanz and Horenstein
(2000) stated that teacher explores student reactions and interactions with learning
experiences and uses this information to design the curriculum in a way that is
responsive to their needs. The development of curriculum must be responsive to
cultural pluralism and individual uniqueness. Indeed teachers’ participation is crucial to
bring the culture and uniqueness of child at the process of curriculum development.
I reviewed different books, article, and research reports. Not only that I went
through the education act of Nepal; all documents stated that teachers’ participation in
the process of curriculum development process is essential but when seen in reality it
was not practiced by Nepalese curriculum development process. I selected my
114
respondents very carefully so that I could succeed to select the participants having a lot
of experiences in the field of education especially in teaching. But when I studied them
very intimately then I realized that they had very limited opportunity to get involved in
curriculum design, development and revision. However they had the opportunity to
implement the intended curriculum and evaluate students’ targeted performance.
In India, implementing curriculum is prescribed some degree of local
interpretation. The general trends are toward the setting of national guideline with a
certain degree of flexibility for interpretation at the local level (NCERT, 2006). A
curriculum, no matter how good, will simply remain a curriculum on paper if it is not
implemented properly. Teachers in schools are the key to implement of that curriculum.
Teachers play a very important role in delivering the curriculum. Resistance sometimes
exists because of the lack of their involvement in planning and designing, training and
orientation prior to implementation of the curriculum. Indeed the participation of
teacher is crucial for the initiation to the implementation of curriculum development.
But the findings of this research show that teachers are the mere implementers of
curriculum rather than developers.
This type of situation gives the picture of content-based model or objective
model of curriculum development as we analyze above data in theoretical perspective.
It means that we are following traditional approach of curriculum development. It's a
ruled based technical rationality of curriculum development not a practical and
humanistic approach of curriculum as said by Habermas' practical interest and
Stenhouse' process inquiry model of curriculum development.
Combining Different Perspectives of Curriculum Development Process
Here in this section I have tried to triangulate different views about teachers'
perception about curriculum development and their experiences of participation with
115
different types of information found from literature and the field of study. Then I have
tried to interpret it from the different perspective to make the appropriate meaning
which makes this study more valid and trustable. No one can neglect the role of teacher
in the curriculum development work but the dimension of participation is problematic
for this work. Orestein and Hunkins (2013) said that teacher's ability to predict what is
to be taught, in what order, in what way and by whom and their own instructional
experiences of content is sufficient to engage in curriculum development work.
Different philosophies and schools of thought of curriculum and its development have
varied ideas and assigned varied role for teachers. Each and every theory and model has
placed the central role for teacher in either ways. The key unit for the initiation of
educational innovation, change in the individual school, and the chief decision makers
in effectuating a curriculum plan are the school principal, teachers, students, parents and
local community. Thus the primary ingredient of teaching and learning is the local site
(Goodlad, 1998 as cited in Lunenburg, 2011).
Found From Curriculum Development Process
Literature
• I found from empirical review is that ignoring teacher's voice in the
curriculum development; the outcomes of curriculum may in fact be
limited. So their participation is needed from inception to the
production of actual materials.
• I found greater participation of teachers in curriculum development
locally or nationally from the international perspectives. Teacher is the
responsible person of curriculum development because teacher knows
every student's pace of learning. Teachers are expected to determine
content details and pace of instruction because teacher's idea and role
have greater position than those of others for curriculum development.
116
• I found from literature review that teacher's role in curriculum
development process is in policy formulation, design, development,
implementation, evaluation, review and improvement.
• Teacher's participation in policy formulation contributes to add to
teacher's knowledge, skills and experiences and to enrich the policy.
• Teacher's participation in curriculum design contributes to
articulation, continuity, balance, situation analysis, formulation of
goals, and selection of content or learning experiences.
• Teacher's participation in curriculum development, implementation,
evaluation, review and improvement gives the clear picture of
curriculum, quality of curricular materials and the quality of education
as well.
• Historically Nepal follows the top-down approach of curriculum.
Curriculum is viewed as taken for granted.
• In current Nepalese curriculum development practice, curriculum is
viewed as a process; emphasis is given to classroom teachers but the
mechanism tries to control the whole process in practice.
Theory
• Process model views teachers as artists rather than technicians in
curriculum development process. Curriculum should be grounded in
practice which should provide the information of variability of context
and learner. First observe the learner in classroom, and then develop
their curriculum.
• Practical interest also views curriculum as a process. Teachers are not
mere implementers of a planned learning activity; they are the decision
117
makers themselves in their classroom and for the learners.
• Both of the models give emphasis on active participation of teacher in
curriculum development. Curriculum is not successful without
incorporating teacher's knowledge, skills and experiences and also
without learner's needs and aspiration.
Field Data
Teacher's Perception on Practices of Curriculum Development
Gap in Written and Implemented Process
• Role of teacher as instructor of teaching textbook.
• CDC doesn't follow the curriculum development policy; curriculum is
prepared by collecting foreign curriculum practices.
• Curriculum is not skill oriented it's just a collection of subject matter.
• Local curriculum development is just for formality, not found in real
practice.
• Teachers from locality don't have any opportunities to participate in
curriculum development process. They are only involved in teaching
prescribed curriculum.
Centrally Dominated Curriculum Development Practice
• According to policy provision curriculum is a process but it is not
practiced. It seems that curriculum is predetermined subject matter to
be delivered to students. All the works of curriculum are held at the
central level. Teachers do not experience any works together with
CDC.
118
• It looks as if we are seeking just quantitative achievement of targeted
instructional objectives. Objectives are not determined by seeing
learner's capacity, need, interest and aspiration.
Decentralized Curriculum Development Practice: Inclusive and
Participatory
• Need of decentralized curriculum development practice so that it
becomes inclusive and participatory. Policy encourages the right of
every teacher has to participate in curriculum development process in
policy.
Teachers' Participation in Curriculum Development
Inclusion on Teacher Participation
• The main user of curriculum is teacher so it is needed to enlarge the
scope of teacher's participation in the curriculum development
practice.
• Few teachers are incorporated in curriculum related work but not from
local place.
Teacher as a Mere Implementer Rather than Developer of Curriculum
• Teacher's role in curriculum development process is limited only to
implement the written curricula.
• Teacher has a lot of experiences of classroom teaching and knowledge
119
of daily lives of people. Teachers face several challenges and barriers
of instructional practices everyday so incorporation of teacher's
experiences, knowledge and skills makes the curriculum valuable and
applicable to learners and their lives.
Indeed we can say that teacher is the core person for curriculum development
process. So respondents as core persons for this process have understood that in Nepal it
is centralized in spite of the legal provision and policy of decentralization. NCF has
stated curriculum as a process following the concept of decentralization to make it
inclusive, participatory and practicable. Different literature, theory and study seek
greater teacher participation in the curriculum development practices but as to say from
the findings of this study it is impractical and almost centralized process. This study
found that for inclusive and participatory curriculum development process greater role
of local teachers is needed. Stenhouse (1975 as cited in Kelly, 2004) said that
curriculum is a practical form of specification about the practice of teaching. It is not
the package or syllabus of ground to be covered. From this assumption of curriculum
we can see the central role of teacher in each and every phase of curricular process.
But this research indicates the role of teacher as mere implementer of
curriculum. This indicates the hegemony of objective model of curriculum instead of
process model of curriculum. This result indicates that there is clear demarcation
between policy and practice in teacher participation in curriculum development process
of Nepal.
120
Chapter Summery
In this chapter, I have tried to address my two research question. How do
teachers perceive the practice of curriculum development process in Nepal? How do
teachers express their experience of participation in curriculum development process? I
have discussed participants’ perceptions from their own perspective and my perspective
as well. I have interpreted the data that I got from my participants justifying with
literatures found from different sources. For me, curriculum development process and
its ownership are highly debatable issues in the academic field.
On the one hand, proponents of progressive education claim that curriculum is
the total learning experiences of individuals. This is presented on John Dewey's
definition of experience and education. He believed that reflective thinking is a means
that unifies curricular elements. Thought is not derived from action but tested by
application. The ownership of curriculum development process needs to be in real
practitioner's hand. On the other hand traditionalists view curriculum as a body of
subjects or subject matter prepared for the students to learn, "course of study" and
"syllabus." It is a field of study. It is made up of its foundations (philosophical,
historical, psychological and social foundations), domains of knowledge as well as its
researches and principles. It is viewed that curriculum is developed centrally with a
team of experts and teachers are the implementers of curriculum.
121
CHAPTER 6
BARRIERS THAT LIMIT TEACHERS’ PARTICIPATION IN CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Chapter Overview
In this chapter, I have tried to discuss about the barriers that limits the teachers’
participation in curriculum development process. Also I have tried to address my last
research question of this study; how do teachers describe the barriers that limit their
participation in curriculum development process? Most of the things covered in this
chapter were based on teachers’ experiences, understanding and perception. My
understanding, reflection is also incorporated; which is built after the review of various
literatures and article on curriculum development process. In this chapter I have
organized different sections to address the barriers that limit the teachers’ participation
in curriculum development process. This unit ends up with chapter summary.
The curriculum development process is seen as a series of steps. Teachers’
participation on each step is limited by various factors. I have tried to explore these
factors via the experiences of teachers. How did my respondents face these limiting
factors? What types of problems and challenges arise in the process of curriculum
development? What did they feel and experience in their long teaching career? Based
on the data collected from the field, I distinguish such barriers in separate subheadings.
Academic Qualification
Sanjaya experienced different obstacles to participate in different phases of
curriculum development process. Among them academic qualification of the teacher is
one that has to limited the teacher's participation in it. He said;
122
In my understanding and lived experiences of teachers and their participation in
curriculum development process influence teachers’ personal or internal
elements. I felt problem in my qualification because I have didn't such
knowledge of curriculum as I was not a student from education field.
Academic qualification is the variable in determining the extent of teachers'
participation in curriculum development practices. Concerning the association between
participation and academic qualification, Malik (1969 as cited in Endeshaw, 2003)
remarked that there is positive relationship between qualification and teachers'
participation in curriculum development process. Highly qualified teachers seek more
participation due to a desire to use their expertise. The above literature said that the
qualification which belongs to the personal factor of teacher causes the barriers in
curriculum development process. Respondent of this study also felt that academic status
of teacher not only limits him to participate in making curriculum but also to implement
it in the classroom teaching. Researchers have revealed that qualified teachers have
greater desire to use their expertise not only to implement the curriculum but also to
design and develop it. Respondents said that they don't have opportunities to participate
in curriculum design and development from the local context. Maphosa and Mutopa
(2012) said that to enhance teacher's expertise it is necessary to give role in planning
curriculum simultaneously with teacher training course. It does not mean that they are
not qualified. It's seems a centre periphery context of curriculum development process.
It shows that decentralization is needed for more teachers' participation from local level.
Not only that we also have to provide opportunity and sufficient training
program related to curriculum from different aspect, not only implementation. The
analysis of the respondent's views showed that we provide training and opportunity
simultaneously for classroom teacher for designing, development and management of
123
curriculum which is lacking. In other words Habermas and Stenhouse said that
"curriculum is what actually happens in classroom and what people do to prepare and
evaluate "(Srivastava, 2005, p. 9). Here it seems that teacher qualification is not only the
barrier for participating teachers' in curriculum development process. NCF (2007)
recommend adopting the process model of curriculum but problem seems in
implementation of policy because respondents views shows that centre peripheral
practice of curriculum development instead of the local context.
But the respondent Sanjaya feel that his academic qualification becomes the
barriers for him to participate in the process of curriculum design and development
because he has not the knowledge of curriculum studies. His qualification on science
some extend makes the barrier instead of having several training on curriculum related
work.
Language
Language is one of the tools of communication. Language makes exchange of
ideas, knowledge, belief and attitude from person to person. Obviously such practices
are needed while the curriculum is developed. So language is most common medium to
share knowledge and ideas in the process of curriculum development. So language
becomes another constraint in curriculum development practices and teacher
participation. In this connection respondent Narayan expressed his believe that;
The national language adopted for curriculum development influences the
teachers’ participation in curriculum development process. If teachers do not
have fluency in speaking the national language then communication skills limit
their participation in the curriculum development process.
Brown (1982 as cited in Endeshaw, 2003) has identified the needs of effective
communication in practice of curriculum development. So language plays prominent
124
roles for effective communication. After analyzing the above information we can say
that Narayan has perceive if the teachers do not have the fluency in national language it
becomes an barriers for them to participate in curriculum development process.
Sanjaya has also experienced that language hinders teacher's participation in curriculum
development work and said;
Sometimes I have to cope with languages spoken by Madheshi people Maithili
and Hindi tones. When people listen to them communicating in Maithali
language they have different perception than that of the people of Madesh.
While writing mathematics text book at the national level I write my words in
English language to communicate easily with the people of different languages.
From the above data we can say that language is the influencing factor for
limiting the teachers' participation in curriculum development practices of Nepal
because Nepal is the multi lingual country and most of teachers in local level speak in
their native languages. So it’s a big challenge to implement the national curriculum in
some areas of Nepal where majority of people are from ethnic communities. Obviously
it's not a problem for only teacher to participate in curriculum development but is also a
problem for students.
Above data and literature both state that for the good curricular practice
effective communication is needed and show that language becomes a barrier for
teachers of local level to participate in developing and implementing the curriculum
effectively. Process model of curriculum development and Habermas' practical interest
both said that conversations between, and with people in the classroom situation
continually gives the outcomes what we can see of our learners (Srivastava, 2005).
Hence language as one of the communication medium may become the barrier for
teacher to participate in the process of curriculum development in this and that way as
125
felt by respondents of research. Not only in planning level but it also becomes barrier to
implementation and evaluation of curriculum development process as the multilingual
and multicultural society, where varied ethnic groups are participated whose mother
tong is different from national language.
Political and Power Coercive Approach
Since a long time period in Nepalese history, the effects of political and
bureaucratic activities went in wrong way in every sector. Same is the case of
education. When we talk about the work of curriculum development and teachers'
participation in it, we see that it has the political interference and domination. Sanjaya
opined in the same spirit,
In the context of our country, political involvement of teachers and power
coercive approach of bureaucrats limits the teachers’ participation in
curriculum development process. (5 May 2012, 1:55 pm)
Analyzing above text I come to know that political and bureaucratic works
obstruct the process of curriculum development. "Politics occupy a central place in the
daily affairs of the nation. The political class seeks to control and manipulate the polity
either overtly or covertly, education is normally a covert tool in the stratagem of the
political class" (Freire, 1972 as cited in Otunga & Nyandusi, p. 5, 2001). Indeed
curriculum development process is also limited by political activity itself and teachers'
participation in the process of curriculum design and development also. Now a day the
process of implementation and evaluation are also limited by unwanted political
activities. Sanjaya has shared his experience of political influence on his career;
I think the curriculum development process in greatly affected by politics. I
have an experience. When, quota came for Math and English trainer in teacher
training centre of Chitwan district, I have submitted all my experience
126
certificates expecting to be district mathematics trainer but English trainer was
selected in my place because of political faith. Then a person from another
political faith was recommended as mathematics trainer who was extremely
inexperienced and untrained teacher. Indeed, in my experience due to the
political transition the country is moving through, many other factors are
compromised in the name of politics. Personal acquaintances or political
affiliation are become powerful factors in every sector. (From my personal field
note)
Presently bureaucracy is a major field to play political game in Nepal, so its
influence on curriculum development process seems obviously high. Due to the
centralized, all powerful nature of the politics in Nepal, most decisions on education are
top down. Such a power coercive approach does not facilitate for curriculum
development which should ideally be a deliberative, consultative, and participatory
exercise (Mutch, 2001). It looks likes the matter pertaining to curriculum development
is centrally controlled by ministry of education and its agencies.
Obviously, in such a scenario, teachers feel left out. Their voice is seldom heard
since their participation in the whole process is superficial. The teachers’ role is seems
narrowed to implementation of curriculum. However, as Fullan (2007) notes, the
implementation of curriculum innovations is bound to be unsuccessful if teachers are
not involved in the entire process of curriculum development. Process model offer
ground reality for the selection of content what is to be learned and taught, development
of teaching strategy how it is to be learned and taught (Kelly, 2004). Socio-political
structure of local context may become the barriers where the school situated and hence
for overall process of curriculum development.
127
Proximity to Power
Sanjaya told me at the time of informal discussion that proximity to power has
an effect on curriculum development process to participate teachers in different phases.
Geographical location is the factor that enlarges proximity to power between centre and
local level in every field including curriculum development work. He said;
I felt problem many times in teaching learning activities because of being a
‘Madhesi’. It is not only in teaching learning activities but also in several
opportunities to be involved in other process of curriculum development. I feel
remoteness from capital city. It becomes problem for me to get involved in the
curriculum design and development activities. It affects my bond of relationship
with the members at the center. So proximity to power becomes barrier to the
teacher's participation in curriculum design and development works. (From my
personal field note)
This situation shows that teacher is not only coping with the problems of
participating in curriculum design and development but also in the process of
implementation as well. Krishna believes that various factors are responsible to make
barriers for the teachers' participation in curriculum development process he said;
I think teacher's participation in curriculum development process is affected by
the factors of political instability, teachers’ language, and the place he lives,
gender, qualification, expertise, instability in curriculum policy, teacher's
consciousness and bureaucratic thought. Falsity in curriculum policy,
vulnerable status and traditional thought of teacher, socio-cultural
discrimination on teacher, control of central body on education sector and
interest of teacher also becomes the barriers for curriculum development
process and teacher's participation in its every phase. (13 May 2012, 2: 00 pm)
128
Krishna thinks that teacher’s consciousness about curriculum concept, its’
development and their ownership and role on this process also limits their participation.
The geographical location where teachers' live also becomes one of the constraints to
this process. The climate and geography related a factor determines the proximity of
teacher to the power which has a significant role to limit their participation in the
curriculum development process (Endeshaw, 2003). Here Krishna raise up the issue of
socio-cultural discrimination, falsity in curriculum policy, government control and
teachers status, thought and interest as restricting factors for teacher's participation in
the process of curriculum development. Stenhouse (1975) said that curriculum should
provide the information about different context and learners that facilitate to understand
cause of variability of knowledge that need to varied context. Hence after analyzing
respondents view and literature it is found that proximity to the power becomes barriers
to the teacher's role and responsibility in curriculum development process.
Access
Krishna has experienced different barriers in the curriculum process through
personal access. He does not want to reveal this situation but wants to give emphasis on
personal access as a factor limiting their participation in curriculum development
process. He gave emphasis to access of teacher in politics or in administrative
mechanism and said in informal discussion;
One of the barriers for the teacher to participate in curriculum development
process is access. I talked about the mechanism, that isn't effective. But
teachers should also be active to acquire the access. The centre hasn't taken
concern about how much access is needed. Most of the works are only formal in
Nepal. Curriculum development centre has only made formal provision for
129
teachers' participation in the work of designing the curriculum. (From my
personal field note)
He thinks that personal access of the members of central office or
bureaucratization may limit the teachers' participation in curriculum development
process in this way or that. "Curriculum of schools is also a product of politics and
interest groups (Giroux, 1994 as cited in Mckernan, 2008, p. 6). Bureaucratization,
politics and personal access of person are interrelated. As Habermas (1972) said that
knowledge is inter subjective relations as to community and person. Indeed the personal
access of teacher's to the bureaucratization creates the barrier for them to participate in
any form of curriculum development process whether it is planning or implementation.
If the teachers don't have regret for not having access to central level mechanism or
government agency then it not only limits his role in curriculum process its impact
remains in the whole field of education. If the teacher becomes inactive then his
exploration of knowledge and enhancement of expertise becomes incomplete.
Theories and literatures have stated differently about the participation of teacher
in curriculum development and its actual practice in classroom situation but the
tendency is different. So this study helps us in understanding that personal access is that
barrier which helps to limit teachers' participation in the curriculum development
process.
Job Satisfaction
People need to have satisfaction in every work they do. Job satisfaction is one of
the most necessary things to do good job. Research works have shown positive
relationship between job satisfaction and quality of education. Narayan has different
experiences and understanding about participation of teachers in curriculum
development process and barriers that limit teacher's participation. He said;
130
Factors that Limit the Teachers’ Participation
• Qualification, experiences and expertise
related factors.
• Time, finance, climate related factors.
• Sex and gender related factors.
• Motivation, communication and attitude
related factors.
(Endshow, 2003)
Teacher’s quality, curiosity, capacity, efficiency, culture, language as well as
political, geographical factors are matters that make barrier to limit the
teacher’s participation in the process of curriculum development. We think that
our responsibility is to implement the intended curriculum, we don’t think and
care who developed and wrote curriculum and textbook. This mentality or
thought is limiting us to participate in the process of curriculum development
and design. We don’t update our knowledge level and expertise because of our
passiveness. It implies that in realistic sense we don’t have satisfaction with this
job because of the low income and prestige in society. (17 May 2012, 9:25 am)
Narayan understands and beliefs that teachers' job satisfaction also has direct
influences in the curriculum practices. Economic factor decreases teacher's job
satisfaction and resulting to moral harassment. So the teachers were not interested in
improving and updating themselves. They were not seeking their ownership of
curriculum and role to participate in another process instead of implementation and
evaluation of curriculum because of their harassment in interest, thought and mentality.
Research have shown that salary of workers directly affect in their performance.
Same thing is in the case of education sector; after analyzing the views of respondents
of this study it has been found
that they are not satisfied from
their job due to economic factor
and their limited roles and
responsibilities to curriculum
development process. They said
that they are mere implementers
of packaged curriculum. We felt
131
incompatible in our role so we were dissatisfied with this work and not have any
interest to do anything else instead of teaching. Carl (2009) said that greater
participation may also lead to greater job satisfaction. Both the process model and
practical interest gives the emphasis on a continuous interaction between student,
teacher and milieu for the creation of new knowledge which is subjective (Kelly, 2004).
For the continuity of any work there is need of satisfaction so as in curriculum
development process. After combining different situation in different context I found
that our education system and its curricular practices have become gapping in policy
and practices now a day.
After analyzing the responses of respondents, reviewing different literatures, my
understanding etc., I come to understand that various barriers are relevant to limit the
teachers’ participation in curriculum development process. Contemporary existing
curriculum scholars place teachers in a central position in curriculum development,
implementation, and evaluation (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2013). Scholars across the
decades have identified limited engagement of teachers in meaningful decision making
of curriculum development through the teachers are kept in central role of curricular
design. Both Stenhouse’s Process Model and Habermas’s Practical Interest emphasized
on the interaction between teachers and students; which formed a crucial relationship
like between bone and muscle. Human beings always interact in society because they
live in the society.
Every society has its own culture and traditions that help to built the human
perception, attitude and behavior. The perception, behavior and attitude of humankind
influence the way of perceiving the objects or things. And this varying nature of
humankind influences the phenomena. In this way a teacher’s behavior, attitude and
perception also influence the process of curriculum development. Nations political
132
ideology, philosophy and view towards education directly influence every nation’s
curriculum development process, policy, provision and practices.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, I have tried to address my research question; how do teachers
describe the barriers that limit their participation in curriculum development process? I
have discussed participants’ perceptions from their own perspectives and from my own
perspective as well. I have interpreted the data that I got from my participants,
justifying with literatures found from different sources. For me, curriculum
development process is highly debatable issues in the academic field but its role is more
prominent. On the one hand, proponents of progressive education and stakeholders are
advocating advantages of these issues, but on the other hand it is challenged while being
implemented because of limited resources, lack of teachers’ expertise and awareness
and traditional thoughts of policy makers and leaders.
It is believed that a teacher who is not committed cannot teach and a passive
learner cannot learn. For effective teaching-learning activities, both teachers and
students should actively participate. If the classroom environment is more cooperative,
caring, and homely, learners can learn in natural ways that are most effective. So for
effective and efficient learning, a good curriculum is needed. Curriculum becomes
good if it incorporates the need and aspiration of both teachers and students. Indeed for
making good and child/teacher friendly curriculum, teachers’ thoughts and child’s
needs should be incorporated in curriculum and for that teachers’ participation in
curriculum development process is essential. But according to my participants’ point of
view, teachers’ participation in the curriculum development is only limited to in policy
and in the periphery of some renowned persons.
133
Curriculum development process itself and teachers’ participation in it is limited
by several barriers. Some of them are teacher related and others are external factors.
Teachers’ qualification, experiences, attitude, aptitude, motivation, enthusiasm,
language, sex, ethnicity, capability, curiosity are the factors limiting his/her
participation in the curriculum development process. Also, politics in education,
geographical location, cultural and bureaucratic thinking etc have greater role to limit
the teachers’ participation in overall process of curriculum development.
134
CHAPTER 7
REFLECTION AND CONCLUSION
Chapter Overview
In this chapter, I have concluded my study which I have drawn from chapter one
to six. I have made an amalgam of my narratives from the seedling of my education
journey to the current situation of M. Phil. scholar while narrating the story of local
level teachers. My strong belief is that my reflection on research problems has a great
importance from the view of my learning as being an insider as student and teacher and
outsider as a researcher. This chapter also tries to provide some suggestions, guidelines
to the stake holders such as educationists, policy makers, teachers, curriculum
designers, readers and planners to address teachers’ participation in curriculum
development process. It also aims to provide some important knowledge and
information regarding concepts of curriculum and its development process.
Not only that, this chapter also provides my research experiences and
exploration of how I set my research agenda, constructing research question, developing
theoretical and methodological perspective, respond of my research questions, my
learning from this research and future directions of the curriculum research.
Setting the Agenda of My Research
Teachers are the actual deliverers of curriculum across district and grade levels.
Their instructional practices and pedagogical foundations may vary, but they still
remain the implementation vehicle for the curriculum. Given the connection between
the development and implementation of curriculum; teachers are the driving force in the
curriculum development process and that their understandings of participation of this
135
process are needed to be known despite unique differences in their backgrounds and
voices. These voices of teachers need to be acknowledged, listened to and acted upon.
Keeping this concept in mind I had selected my research topic without having
any knowledge pertaining to curriculum development process in Nepal. I had selected
my research topic without developing any clear concept about research study and had
very little idea when I selected this topic for my M. Phil. dissertation. I was even
confused about my dissertation when research committee suggested that my proposal
was best suited for doing quantitative research. Because of confusion and controversial
ideas, several questions and curiosities arose in my mind. Then I engaged myself in
discussions in the matter of curriculum with my colleagues and tutors; I wanted to carry
out this research in qualitative way and decided after preliminary field visit that would
be better narrative approach. When I got cooperative and helpful dissertation
supervisor then I found a clear path of research through his suggestions.
According to my dissertation supervisor, I started writing in narrative depicting
my experiences of student life. To get appropriate answers and the solutions to my
mysterious questions, I have explored some related articles, study reports, journals,
website and dissertations which gave me some ideas that were useful for my study. I
also discussed with my classmates, seniors and respected professors and tutors who
shared their valuable experiences about research. Further, I took sufficient information
and ideas from my dissertation supervisor to complete my dissertation journey.
I reviewed important policy documents related to curriculum development
practices. I studied some dissertation to acquire the essential ideas about particular
subject area. I also browsed websites of different journals, articles, and government’s
policy regarding curriculum development process and curriculum development
practices as well. As a scholar of curriculum development in research level, I had some
136
ideas about the existing scenario and practices of curriculum development and teachers'
participation in it. I visited some schools of Chitwan district and meet the teachers and
head teachers from those schools. I also discussed with district education officer, some
local educationists and teachers’ leaders about meaning and their understanding of
curriculum and curriculum development process. Observing the existing situation and
analyzing the scenario of curriculum development, I realized that there is a need to
study the curriculum development process and teachers’ participation in it.
Developing the Theoretical Perspective
I felt, experienced and practiced the centrally developed curriculum throughout
my journey of teaching learning. I internalized this process as taken for granted. As
viewing it as the philosophical perspective then it seems traditionally practiced
positivist approach which was dominated by centrally developed curriculum practice.
Indeed I open my eyes to view my research agenda via the postmodernist approach. To
cross out this mechanist approach of the curriculum conception and its development
process, I tried to see the edge of subjective, learner-centered and constructivist
approach of curriculum theory.
There are various theories, perspective related with curriculum and its
development in constructivist approach too. To facilitate my study, I have viewed it by
the lens of process model of curriculum development conceptualize by Stenhouse with
aligning the Habermas' practical interest. Both of the perspectives emphasize the
teacher's and learner's experience on making the curriculum. Not only that I also tried to
linked up my agenda of research to Schubert curriculum metaphors/images to know the
local teachers' experience, perception and understanding of curriculum and its
development process.
137
Conceiving Methodology
I have articulated my research methodology and method with my philosophical
assumption. My ontological assumption is based on multiple realities which are
contextual, social and classroom embedded. Epistemologically, knowledge is created by
the relation between me and my respondents. Axiological assumption is that
respondents' and my values are subjective, multiple meanings, understanding,
experiences and rhetorical. I have used autobiographical writing, stories, anecdotes,
scenes and dialogues to capture multiple, contextual realities and situations.
Initially, observing the classroom teaching learning scenario, trends of uses of
curriculum, practices of documented policy to participate teachers' in curriculum
development process, interviewing and informal conversations with respondents, I
collected information just as a researcher. But on the process of analyzing data, I felt
that I am also a teacher, educationist as a part of socio-cultural context. I have different
experiences, feelings and story of curriculum development and practices. By this angle I
had study myself and trying to link up my past experiences to the current practices of
teachers' participation on curriculum development.
I become more aware of multiplicities within me and my respondents. So I used
paradigm of interpretivism, criticalism and postmodernism in my research based on my
philosophical assumption. Criticalism offered me self reflexive and transformative way
and enabled me to analyze traditional curriculum development practices with respect to
learner-centered curriculum development practices. Interpretivism offered me emergent
space and narrative sensibilities and helps me to interpret the meaning of curriculum
development practices. Further, postmodernism offered me to link about
autobiographical, reflexive and concise practices of curriculum and its development
including teachers' experiences on it. Based on these multi paradigmatic assumptions, I
138
employed narrative inquiry as an analytic lens to study the lived experiences of mine
and respondents on related with understanding the curriculum, its development process
and experience of practices. Through this I am trying to studied experiences, stories
and practices of curriculum development and teachers' participation.
As an interpretivist narrative researcher, I engaged long time period in field and
trying to capture emergent information as much as possible for that I visited the
researched field three times formally and so many times informally. I observed different
document, practices of curriculum in classroom situation. I interview respondents via
interview guideline and make some conversation formally and informally. I wrote my
field notes every day, memories and reflection on it. By the help of it I formed story of
experiences of local teachers in curriculum development process as said by narrative
inquiry.
Responding to My Research Questions
According to my plan I prepared some interview guidelines and went to the
field. I took interview and participated in informal conversation with my participants
on the basis of interview guidelines. My participants asked me more questions than I
asked them although I got sufficient information from my participants. I went three
times to my field and spent two months in the field as a researcher.
Based on the four research questions, I tried to conduct my study. Through this
research study, I came to know that research methodology provides way of the research
study and research questions are the means of transportation. I was focusing my
attention on responding to those research questions during the entire time of research.
How do Teachers Understand and Develop the Concept of Curriculum?
This question was related with understanding of curriculum. It forced me to
search the meaning and definition of curriculum from various perspectives. How do the
139
teachers understand and develop the concept of curriculum? Finding the answer of this
question was crucial task for me because I have to construct the appropriate meaning
teachers’ own understanding based on theoretical and literal perspective which I found
through my study. Mainly, this question tries to cover the curriculum concepts broadly
to enhance the curriculum practices as well as the quality of education. I tried to answer
this question from the teachers’ perspective.
Studying the literature related with the definition and meaning of curriculum,
interacting with my participants and the way teachers perceive the concepts of
curriculum, I noticed that curriculum is the key whole of teaching learning activities.
From my participants' voices, I found that we fade to understand the curriculum
concepts from different perspective.
Theoretically my participants were unaware about curriculum concept. However
they tried to understand and to define it in their own way. They have developed their
understanding in metaphorical way. After analyzing my participants’ understanding
and perception about curriculum, I concluded that local teachers have lack of theoretical
knowledge about curriculum to some extent. Based on their own understanding I have
tried to conclude that they conceptualize the curriculum mainly; curriculum as
blueprint, curriculum as contents to taught and curriculum as a learning experiences.
Although they have their own understanding and expression, I just have tried to give the
meaning to their own conceptualization.
How do Teachers Perceive the Practice of Curriculum Development Process in
Nepal?
This question is related with practices of curriculum development process. To
search the perception of teachers’ about the practices of curriculum development
process from various perspectives I have reviewed different literatures, talked with
140
teachers and related stakeholders. This question tries to cover the curriculum
development concepts and its actual practices broadly. Seeking the answer to this
question will certainly contribute to enhance the practices of curriculum development
process. This research questions has been answered by analyzing teachers' perception
and understanding about the practice of curriculum development process of Nepal.
Studying the literature related to curriculum development process and its
practices, interacting with my participants, analyzing the policies and practices of
curriculum development process and the way the teachers perceive the practices of
curriculum development, I have noticed that the practice of curriculum development
seems centrally dominated. Having said this, teachers’ roles and responsibilities cannot
be neglected but need to provide more prominent role for designing, developing,
implementing and evaluating the curriculum. From my participant’s voices I found that
teachers do not have so prominent roles in designing and developing the curriculum at
local level. Theoretically my participants were unaware about curriculum development
process and its practices. They understand and perceive the practice of curriculum
development in their own way. They understand curriculum development process as
writing the draft of curriculum. They perceive that it is the work of government. They
think that their responsibility is to teach the prescribed textbook.
After analyzing participants’ understanding and perception about curriculum
development processes and its practices, I concluded that teachers have lack of
theoretical knowledge about curriculum development, practices of curriculum
development process, and their participation. Finally to present the perception of
teachers about the practices of curriculum development process, I have tried to give the
different thematic conclusion based on field data. Teachers understand curriculum
development process is centrally dominated. There is a gap in written and
141
implementation process. Also teachers are suggested to decentralize this process which
makes it inclusive and participatory.
How do Teachers express their Experience of Participation in Curriculum
Development Process?
The literature review, existing polices and the data I have collected from the
research field shows that the ownership of curriculum development process needs to be
in real practitioners’ hand. It seems respondents have not got sufficient opportunity to
participate in curriculum development process from the local level as teachers they have
more opportunity to participate in implementation and evaluation. I reviewed books,
articles, research reports, and education acts of Nepal. All documents have stated that
teachers’ participation in the curriculum development process is essential. When see it
in reality, it seems it was not reached at local level. I selected my respondents very
carefully. I selected the participants with lots of experiences in the field of education.
But when I studied them very intimately, I found that they don’t have any opportunity
to participate in curriculum design, development and revision. They simply have the
responsibility of the implementation of readymade curriculum and evaluation of
students’ targeted performance under the prescribed learning outcomes of learners.
It is the question of whose ownership is best suited for the curriculum
development process so that the quality of education could be enhanced. Different
countries have different provision of curriculum development process and teachers’
participation in it, so does our country. We have good policy of curriculum
development practices as said by respondents, but the question is about its gap of
implementation in real manner. I reached to the decision that teachers’ participation
mainly remains in implementation and evaluation. I have tried to answer this research
question on the basis of varied literature and field based data. I have found that it is
142
necessary to include teachers in curriculum development process at local levels too.
Also teachers are mere implementers of curriculum rather than its developers as the
context of Chitwan district.
How do Teachers Describe the Barriers that limit their Participation in
Curriculum Development Process?
After analyzing the data collected from primary and secondary sources, I found
that various barriers that limit the participation of teacher in the curriculum
development process. Some are related with teacher related factors and some with
other factors. In policy there are provision that participation of all teachers who are in
teaching profession without any discrimination. In practice, numerous barriers are faced
by teachers to participate in the curriculum development process.
Participants of this study experienced that, without developing teachers’ self-
esteem and self confidence, teachers’ participation can’t be ensured. It is necessary to
ensure teachers’ active participation in the practices of curriculum development process
to enhance the quality of education and to bring students in the classroom. Based on
field data, literatures and my experiences, I have concluded that teacher's academic
qualification, language, proximity to power, access to bureaucracy and political power
coercive approach in education field and teacher's satisfaction in job have great impact
to limits the teacher's participation in curriculum development process.
My Learning
First of all I raised question to myself, who am I? I considered it carefully
throughout my research study. I raised this question in different time period of my
research study. I am still haunted by this question. I am an M. Phil candidate as a
researcher in my university. I am a student of curriculum development and instruction.
I am an educator and teacher in the same district where I select my research field. I am
143
all of these in isolation and in combination. I am challenging my thoughts during my
research journey.
Round one interview dates was set. I was ready with my questions, recorder,
pens and notepad. Each of the respondents was ready to begin and expressed their
willingness to answer honestly and openly. As the first few questions were asked, most
of the responses were same and I asked myself; whether these questions and answers
had connection to my study. They are very relevant and pertinent to the curriculum
development process. During the first round of interviews, I struggled by my dual role
as a researcher and student of curriculum studies. It is this conflict that forces one to
examine phenomenon more objectively. This internal conflict caused me to reflect and
question continually and remain as objective as possible. My way remains clear to
continue to ask and answer the questions to bring their voices to light.
Participants spoke frankly and honestly, whether the recorder was on or off.
Discussion was made individually with all the respondents formally and informally
about the nature of curriculum, practices of curriculum development process and
teachers’ participation in it. Finally the interview was ended with a “Wow”. Final
interview had the same sense of accomplishment and completion. There was, however,
almost a sense of sorrow. Our interview sessions were more than just questions and
answers. There were additional steps of relationship building around almost three
months duration of field study from preliminary visit to the end. Participants stated,
“Feel free to call if you need anything else. I am so excited. I can’t wait to hear about
the final product”. They were excited to know that their voices would be heard. I was
excited to a truly narrative story of teachers’ perceptions that I could share with others
and even more excited to bring to light the voices of teachers so devoted to ensuring the
success of their students.
144
Again I can’t clearly define my role as researcher. I adhered to the ethics of the
qualitative research paradigm and parameters. I conducted members checks, did my
best to stay true to the data collection, and develop the story of narration based upon the
respondents interview. I found myself making the connection to constructivism and
socio-cultural paradigmatic assumption while conducting interviews as a researcher. It
was the level of understanding that becomes internalized and become a part of who you
are, more than words spoken or written in paper. I was a researcher. As a researcher, I
know I did things aligned with Lincoln and Guba (2000) positionalities. Qualitative
research was now more than a mere set of assumption.
As a teacher, telling the story seems natural to me. The teachers were like me.
They discussed the same joys and frustrations I have lived. The teachers are the ones
who interact with students daily. They are the deliverers of the curriculum. As a
student of curriculum studies now, I know from the teachers themselves how these
intermediate teachers felt. They shared their perceptions of the participation in the
curriculum development process. I believed that they spoke honestly, frankly. I felt a
special connection with them. This connection will remain long after this dissertation
will be completed. They heightened the level of respect and admiration I have for them
and it will not diminish or end with the completion of this study.
Not only that, I also have learned after completion of this study that teachers are
only the persons who are helping hands to the successful development and
implementation of curriculum. Curriculum becomes good, successful and usable if we
provide the appropriate provision to participate numerous teachers from the local level
too. Another thing that I have learned is that whatever I thought before entering the field
that if teachers do not have the degree of education they don't have the knowledge and
understanding of curriculum. But after the completion of this study I fill that my
145
thought was wrong. Teachers have the knowledge and conception of curriculum but the
way they have perceived it is different. They have their own understanding and
perception of concept of curriculum and its development process in metaphorical way
even they have not sufficient theoretical knowledge.
Finally, I have also enrich my knowledge, concept and perception about the
concept of curriculum, its development and implementation process which will be
certainly beneficial and contribute to the field of Nepalese educational arena to meet the
standard of internal education at this age of twenty first century.
Implication of this Study
From this research study, I have found that teachers understand and perceive the
concept of curriculum on their own way metaphorically. There is a gap between policies
and practices of teachers' participation in curriculum development process. Several
barriers are found that limits the teachers' participation in curriculum development
process. My claim is that I have brought ground reality through this study about
practices of curriculum development process. On the one hand polices are not sufficient
for addressing the teachers’ participation in curriculum development process and on the
other hand existing policies are not implemented well.
Generally, it is assumed that curriculum is the main guidelines of teaching-
learning activities and the base of whole instruction within the classroom. It is found
that teacher is the key element of designing, developing, implementing, evaluating and
managing the curriculum. So, professional development programs, refreshment training
and motivational programs are very much essential for the teachers. But I am strongly
convinced that what I have gathered through my participants’ real experiences about
practices of curriculum development process carry a significant merit and will greatly
contribute to the works of planners, educationists, curriculum designers and other
146
stakeholders. Indeed, this study may be useful for teachers, parents, educationists,
curriculum makers and educational planners as well.
Future Direction
As I intent to spend all my life working in the field of education, both as a
student and as a teacher, I need to do most important work of my life with a hope of
addressing concerns and voices of teachers' about the practices of curriculum
development process. On the one hand I planned to find out teachers’ perceptions and
experiences about the practices of curriculum development process and on the other
hand I wanted to explore the gap between teachers’ perceptions about curriculum
development process and their participation in it. Now, as I come towards the
completion of my research journey, I can safely say that it has introduced me to a whole
new spectrum of research pursuits. This conclusion, therefore, is surely going to be a
new beginning for me. The research experience that I have gained through the course
of this study has enriched my own knowledge and perception on things of my academic
interest. My study has tried to explore the existing scenario of teachers’ participation in
curriculum development process in Chitwan.
Based on my participants’ perceptions and experiences, I have critically
analyzed this phenomenon from multiple perspectives. Curriculum development
process itself is really broad terminology covering various important areas. My study is
thus just another brick in this big wall of researches on curriculum development
process. Although my research was limited to a handful of school teachers in Chitwan
district, I would have ideally liked to cover a larger area. It is largely assumed that
curriculum development process in our schools have great potential for future
researchers. Further, thorough and deeply engaging researches are needed in order to
cover large areas of curriculum development process and other related areas. It is with
147
this study that we can expect to influence the policymakers and really takeoff towards a
proper, expansive and holistic curriculum development practices.
Our society is evolving and our country is changing. We should definitely
improve our curriculum development system to be more democratic and participatory.
Teachers’ participation in curriculum development process is really crucial issue in the
contemporary Nepalese educational arena. I conducted this research study in the
Chitwan district. In this research, I was highly oriented in the perceptions of teachers’
participation in curriculum development process. I focused on the perspective of
teachers’ participation in secondary level mathematics curriculum development process
rather than other factors. So, further research need to be conducted on the basis of
varied discipline and levels. Due to the factors like economy, time and haste I could
just cover teachers' participation in curriculum development process. Hence, further
researchers need to conduct research study from different areas from different
perspective.
148
REFERENCES
Aggarawal, J. C. (2009). Principles methods and techniques of teaching (2nd ed.).
New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
Anderson, R. D. (2004). Religion and spirituality in the public school curriculum (pp.
52-54). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Anthony, L. W.L. (2008). Teacher concern about curriculum reform: The case of
project learning. The Asia Pacific Educational Researcher, 17(1), 75-97.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2012). Curriculum
development process, version 6. Sydney: Author.
Aveyard, H. (2010). Doing a literature review in health and social care: A practical
guide (2nd ed.). England: Open University Press.
Baden, M. S. & Major, C. H. (2010). New approaches to qualitative research.
London: Routledge.
Becker, H. S. (1986). Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis,
book or article. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bennett, R. M. (2002). Teacher participation in curriculum development: A history of
the idea and practice, 1890-1940. A dissertation submitted to the graduate
faculty of the University of Georgia in partial fulfillment of the requirement
for the degree of doctor of education. University of Georgia: Athens, Georgia.
Ben-Peretz, M. (1980). Teachers’ role in curriculum development: An alternative
approach. Canadian Journal of Education, 5(2), pp 52-62.
Berry, K. S. (2006). Research as bricolage. In K. Tobin & J. Kincheloe (Eds). Doing
educational research (pp. 87- 116). Rotterdam: Sense Publication.
Bobbitt, F. (1924). The curriculum. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
149
Bondi, J. & Wiles, J. (2002). Curriculum development: A guide to practice (6th ed.).
London: Pearson Education.
Bourke, P. E. (2007). Inclusive educational research and phenomenology. In
proceeding Australian Association for Research in education. Research
impacts: Proving or improving? Australia: Fremantle.
Brophy, J.E. (1995). Contemporary educational psychology (5th ed.). New York,
NY: Longman Publishers.
Brown, K.N. (1982). Curriculum and instruction: Introduction to methods of
teaching. London: Macmillan Publishers Limited.
Brubacher, J. S. (1947). A history of the problem of Education. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Carl, A. (2005). The voice of the teacher in curriculum development: A voice crying
in the wilderness? South African Journal of the Education, 25(4), 223-228.
Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory
into practice. Cape Town, South Africa: Juta and Company Ltd.
Central Bureau of Statistics. (2012). National population and housing census 2011:
National Report. Kathmandu: Author.
Christion, M. A. & Murray, D. E. (2014). What English language teachers need to
know deigning curriculum (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Cohen, L.,Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.).
London: Rutledge Flamer, Taylor & Francis Group.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
approaches. London: Sage Publication.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design. London: Sage
Publication.
150
Crisan, A. (1993). 17 years of curriculum change in Romania: the way forward.
Romania: National Board of Curriculum.
Crumley, J. S. (2009). An introduction to epistemology (2nd ed.). Australia: New South
Book.
Curriculum Development Centre. (1998). Secondary education curriculum (in Nepal).
Bhaktapur: Author.
Curriculum Development Centre. (2002). Directives for curriculum development.
Bhaktapur: Author.
Curriculum Development Centre. (2005). National curriculum framework for school
education in Nepal. Bhaktapur: Author.
Darder, A., Baltodano, M & Torres, R. D. (2003). Critical pedagogy: An introduction.
New York: Routledge Falmer.
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Department of Education. (1995). White paper on education. Pretoria: Government
Printer.
Department of Education. (2011). Research and development division: National
assessment of grade ten students. Sanothimi: Author.
Derebssa, D. (2000). Principles of curriculum design and development: A course
material. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
Endeshaw, A. M. (2003). The state of teachers' participation in the process of primary
school curriculum development in southern nations and nationalities and
people's region (MA, Unpublished Thesis). Addis Ababa University, Addis
Ababa.
151
Finch, C. R. and Crunkilton, J. R. (1999). Curriculum Development in vocational
education: Planning, content, and implementation (5th ed.).United States of
America: Allyn and Bacon.
Fink, A. (2010). Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper
(3rd ed.). United States of America: Sage Publication.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Continuum Publishing
Company.
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of education change (4th ed.). USA: Taylor &
Francis.
G. C., Bishnu. (2007). Privatization of school education and academic performance in
Nepal. Kathmandu: Ministry of Education.
Geren, K. J. (2009). An invitation to social construction (2nd ed.). London: Sage
publication.
Giroux, H. A. (1981). Postmodernism, feminism and cultural politics. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Glanz, J. & Horenstein, L. S. B. (2000). Paradigm debates in curriculum and
supervision: Modern and Post modern perspectives. United States of America:
Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
Glasersfeld, E. V. (1995). Radical Constructivism: A way of knowing and learning.
London: The Falmer Press.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). New
York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Good, T. & Brophy, J. (1995). Contemporary educational psychology. (5th ed.) New
York: Harper Collins.
Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. London: Sage.
152
Grundy, S. (1987). Who should be involved in curriculum making? England:
University of New England.
Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interest. Germany: Beacon Press.
Hau- Fai Law, E. & Nieveen, N. (Ed.). (2010). School as curriculum agencies: Asian
and European perspectives on school- based curriculum development. Taipei:
Sense Publisher.
Hunkins, F. P & Hammill, P. A. (1994). A post-modern perspective on curriculum.
New York: Teacher Collage Press.
James, M. E. (2013). Educational assessment, evaluation and research. USA:
Routledge.
Kelley, A. V. (2004). The curriculum theory and practice (5th ed.). London: Sage
Publication.
Kincheloe, J. L., & Mclaren, P. (2005). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative
research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), The Sage handbook of
qualitative research (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publication.
Kitchen, J., Parker, D. C. & Pushor, D. (2011). Narrative Inquiries in to curriculum
making in teacher education. Howard House, UK: Emerald.
Kliebard, H. M. (1992). “Constructing a History of the American Curriculum”. In
Jackson, P. W. (Ed.), Handbook of research on Curriculum (pp. 157-184). New
York: Macmillan.
Lather, P. (2002). Validity as an incitement to discourse: Qualitative research and the
crisis of legitimization. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on
teaching (4th ed.). Washington, D.C.: AERA.
Lauridesn, D. A. (2003). What are the teachers' perceptions of the curriculum
development process (Ph. D., Unpublished thesis)? Ohio State University: Ohio.
153
Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and
emerging confluences. In N. K.Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Longstreet, W. S. & Shane, H. G. (1993). Curriculum for a new millennium. Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Theorizing about curriculum conceptions and definitions.
International Journal of Scholarly Academic Intellectual Diversity, 13(1), Sam
Houstan State University: Author.
Macmillan, J., H. and Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in education. New York:
Harper.
Malik, J.A. (1969). A study of faculty participation: Decision making in origin
community college. Eugene: School of Education.
Maphosa, C. & Mutopa, S. (2012). Teacher's awareness of their role in planning and
implementing school-based curriculum innovation. Anthropologist, 14(2), 99-
106.
Maphosa, C., & Mutopa, S. (2012). Teachers’ awareness of their role in planning and
implementing school-based curriculum innovation. The Anthropologist, 14(2),
99-106.
Marew, Z. (2000). Curriculum implementation and evaluation: A compiled set reader
for a course. Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa.
Markos, M. (1986). Teachers' participation in the administration of senior secondary
school of SNNPR (MA, Unpublished Thesis). Addis Ababa University: Addis
Ababa.
Marsh, C.J. (2009). Key concepts for understanding curriculum (4th ed.). New York:
Routledge.
154
Mauthner, M. (1996). Ethics in qualitative research. London: Sage.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Designing a qualitative study. New York: Guilford Press.
Mckernan, J. (2013). Curriculum and Imagination: Process theory, pedagogy and
action research. London: Routledge.
McNeil, J. (1996). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction, (5th ed.). Glenview:
Scott Foresman.
Ministry of Education. (2004). The development of education: National report of
Nepal. Keshar Mahal, Kathmandu: Author.
Morse, J. M., & Richards, L. (2002). Read me first for a user's guide to qualitative
methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Mosothwane, M. (2012). The role of senior secondary school mathematics teachers in
the development of mathematics curriculum in Botswana. International journal
of scientific research in education, 5(2), 117-129.
Murphy, E. & Dingwall, R. (2001). Hand book of ethnography. London: Sage.
Mutch, C. (2001). Contesting forces: The political and economic context of curriculum
development in New Zealand, Asia Pacific education review, 2(1), 74-84.
Nardos, A. (1999). Comparative education through distance education. A course
material. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University.
National Council of Educational Research and Training. (2006). Position paper
national focus group on, curriculum, syllabus and textbooks. New Delhi:
Deekay Printers.
National Institute of Educational Research. (1999). An international comparative study
of school curriculum. Tokyo : Author.
Null, W. (2011). Curriculum from theory to Practice. United Kingdom: Rowman and
Little Field Publisher, Inc.
155
Oloruntegbe, K. O. (2011). Teacher's involvement, commitment and innovativeness in
curriculum development and implementation. Journal of emerging trends in
educational research and policy studies, 2(6).
Ornsten, A. C. & Hunkins, F. P. (2013). Curriculum foundations, principles and issues
(6thed). New Yourk: Pearson.
Otunga, R. N. & Nyandusi, C. (2001). The context of curriculum development in
Kenya. Eldoret: Moi University.
Patton, Q. M. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation method (4th ed.). London:
Sage.
Piantanida, M. & N. B.,Garman (2009). The qualitative dissertation: A guide for
students and faculty. Thousand Oaks, CA: Crowin Press.
Pinar, W.F. & Grumet, M.R. (2014). Toward a poor curriculum (3rd ed.). US:
Educator's International Press.
Pinar, W.F. (2012). What is curriculum theory? Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pleto, P. J & Pleto, G. H. (1978). Anthropological research: The structure of inquiry
(2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Print, M. (2007). Curriculum development and design (3rd ed.). Australia: Springer.
Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative inquiry in TESOL, Hampshire. UK: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Schubert, W. H. (1986). Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. United
State of America: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Schwab, J. (1970). The practical: A language for curriculum. Washington, D. C:
National Education Association.
Scott, J. P. (1978). Critical Social Theory: An Introduction and Critique. British
Journal of Sociology, 29(1).
156
Sharma, A. (1997). Teacher participation in curriculum development. Pacific
curriculum network. 16 (2).
Sharma, G. N. (1993). History of Nepalese education. Kathmandu: Makalu books and
stationery.
Sharma, G. N. (2009). Commissions report collection of Nepalese education (3rd ed.).
Kathmandu: Makalu books and stationary.
Sharpes, D. K. (2013). Curriculum tradition and practices. London: Routledge.
Singh, I. (2006). Essentials of education. Kathmandu: Hisi Offset Printers Pvt. Ltd.
Slattery, P. (2012). Curriculum development in postmodern era (3rd ed.). New York:
Routledge.
Smith, M. K. (2000). ‘Curriculum theory and practice’ the encyclopedia of informal
education. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm.
Srivastava, D. S. & Kumari. S. (2005). Curriculum and instruction. New Delhi: Mehra
Offset Press.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development.
London: Heinemann.
Su, S. W. (2012). The various concepts of curriculum and the factors involved in
curriculum making. Journal of language teaching and research, 3(1), 153-158.
Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum development: Theory and practice. New York: Harcourt,
Brace and World.
Taylor, P. (1992). Discourse towards balanced rationality in the school mathematics
classroom: Ideas from Habermas' critical theory. Perth: Curtin University.
Tyler, R. W. (2000). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
157
U.S Department of Education. (2008). Education and inclusion in the United States:
An overview. Washington, D. C.: Education Publications Centre.
UNESCO. (2004). EFA Global Monitoring Report 2005. Paris. UNESCO Press.
UNESCO. (n. d). Nepal education policies, curriculum design and implementation.
Retrieved from www.ibe.unesco.org
Vitikka, E., Krokfors, L. & Hurmerinta, E. (2012). The Finnish national core
curriculum. In miracle of Education. (pp. 83-96). Finland: Sense Publisher.
Walker, D. F. (2003). Fundamentals of curriculum: Passion and professionalism (2nd
ed.). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.
Wiles, J. & Bondi, J. (2002). Curriculum development a guide to practice. (6th
edition). New York: The Lehigh Press, Inc.
Wiles, J. (2009). Leading curriculum development. USA: Sage Publication.
Willis. (2007). World views, paradigms and the practice of social research. Retrieved
from: http:// www. Sagepub.com/upm-data/1385_Chapter 1 pdf.
Wolf, H. K., & Pantha, P. R. (2005). Social science research & thesis writing.
Kathmandu: Buddha Publishers & distributes.
