{"title":"Teachers' interpretation of curriculum as a window into ‘curriculum potential’","authors":"Emily Ross","doi":"10.1002/curj.239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ben‐Peretz's (1975) concept of intended curriculum describes a version of curriculum that ‘official’ curriculum developers create to provide a detailed guide to what teachers are required to teach in schools. While some curricula are intended to guide learning, others give a more definitive regulation of what must be taught. Either way, they are a product of curriculum developers writing government policy that defines what is considered essential for students to know. The teacher then undertakes the technical task of interpreting these policy texts to discern how they will introduce the content to their students. Once the teacher receives the curriculum text, they begin a translation process. While the curriculum developer has a vision of how teachers will interpret the curriculum, the teacher's translation of the curriculum text is filtered through the teachers' understanding of the subject matter. This notion of ‘curriculum potential’ represents the culmination of the teacher's subject matter knowledge acquired throughout their education and career which serves as the reference point for curriculum interpretation. This article describes the process of curriculum interpretation used by primary teachers during the implementation of Australian curriculum reform. The study examined the interpretation process from the intended curriculum to the planned curriculum to the enacted curriculum used by the teachers and the influences impacting upon these processes. The analysis of the teachers' interpretations was demonstrated through a process for curriculum mapping developed for this study. This work will present the teachers' pathways to curriculum enactment as a hermeneutic interpretation of curriculum, revealing the teachers' curriculum potential. While frequently descriptions of curriculum potential focuss on subject matter knowledge, analysis of primary teacher curriculum interpretation necessitates a broader definition. The paper concludes that the primary teachers' interpretation process is drawn from a wider curriculum potential that intersects their knowledge of subject matter and knowledge of their students.","PeriodicalId":93147,"journal":{"name":"The curriculum journal","volume":" 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The curriculum journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Ben‐Peretz's (1975) concept of intended curriculum describes a version of curriculum that ‘official’ curriculum developers create to provide a detailed guide to what teachers are required to teach in schools. While some curricula are intended to guide learning, others give a more definitive regulation of what must be taught. Either way, they are a product of curriculum developers writing government policy that defines what is considered essential for students to know. The teacher then undertakes the technical task of interpreting these policy texts to discern how they will introduce the content to their students. Once the teacher receives the curriculum text, they begin a translation process. While the curriculum developer has a vision of how teachers will interpret the curriculum, the teacher's translation of the curriculum text is filtered through the teachers' understanding of the subject matter. This notion of ‘curriculum potential’ represents the culmination of the teacher's subject matter knowledge acquired throughout their education and career which serves as the reference point for curriculum interpretation. This article describes the process of curriculum interpretation used by primary teachers during the implementation of Australian curriculum reform. The study examined the interpretation process from the intended curriculum to the planned curriculum to the enacted curriculum used by the teachers and the influences impacting upon these processes. The analysis of the teachers' interpretations was demonstrated through a process for curriculum mapping developed for this study. This work will present the teachers' pathways to curriculum enactment as a hermeneutic interpretation of curriculum, revealing the teachers' curriculum potential. While frequently descriptions of curriculum potential focuss on subject matter knowledge, analysis of primary teacher curriculum interpretation necessitates a broader definition. The paper concludes that the primary teachers' interpretation process is drawn from a wider curriculum potential that intersects their knowledge of subject matter and knowledge of their students.
Ben - Peretz(1975)的目标课程概念描述了“官方”课程开发者创建的一种课程版本,为教师在学校需要教什么提供详细的指导。虽然一些课程旨在指导学习,但其他课程对必须教授的内容给出了更明确的规定。不管怎样,它们都是课程开发人员撰写政府政策的产物,这些政策定义了学生应该知道的基本内容。然后,教师承担解释这些政策文本的技术性任务,以辨别他们将如何向学生介绍内容。一旦老师收到课程文本,他们就开始翻译过程。虽然课程开发人员对教师如何解释课程有一个设想,但教师对课程文本的翻译是通过教师对主题的理解来过滤的。“课程潜力”的概念代表了教师在其教育和职业生涯中获得的学科知识的顶峰,这是课程解释的参考点。本文描述了小学教师在实施澳大利亚课程改革过程中使用课程解释的过程。本研究考察了教师从预定课程到计划课程再到制定课程的解释过程,以及对这些过程产生影响的因素。通过为本研究开发的课程映射过程来证明教师解释的分析。本研究将教师的课程制定路径作为课程的解释学解释,揭示教师的课程潜能。虽然对课程潜力的描述往往侧重于学科知识,但对小学教师课程解释的分析需要一个更广泛的定义。本文的结论是,小学教师的口译过程是从一个更广泛的课程潜力中提取出来的,这个潜力交叉了他们对主题的知识和对学生的知识。