5. History can be studied for the purpose of understanding current
pedagogical practices.
6. In developing a common or core curriculum, a historical perspective is
essential.
7. With a historical perspective, curriculum specialists can better understand
the relationship between content and process in subject areas.
8. Through the use of history, especially case examples, we have more
opportunity to add a moral dimension to our academic education.
9. The history of education permits practitioners to understand relationships
between what students have learned (past) and what they are learning (in
the present).
10. The study of education history is important for its own theoretical and
research purposes.
It is up to educators to study curriculum history in order to make better judgments concerning the education of our children (Tanner, 1977).
Curriculum History of Bosnia and Herzegovina
According to the Office of the High Representative (OHR, 2001), the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina (here out known as BiH) depends on education. Schools in BiH have been used to foster ethnic prejudices/hatred, intolerance, and division. War, in this country, caused extensive damage to the quality of education including the destruction of facilities, teaching materials, and teachers (Bender, 2000). In BiH, there was a great deal of manipulation in education for political and ideological purposes. For example, students were given different interpretations of the same facts (how the textbooks/curriculum portrayed the war) (Pasalic-Kreso, 1999). Ethnicity, language, and religion were often used to separate students. At the beginning of each school term there was mass chaos concerning whether or not schools, classrooms, and curriculum would be divided or undivided according to ethnicity, language, and/or religion (Pasalic-Kreso, 1999).
Before the war, the education curriculum of BiH included history, nature and society, language and literature, art and music. These subjects continue to be taught today. Today there are 3 different curriculums implemented in BiH: Yugoslavian-uses a Yugoslav curriculum and textbooks with subjects taught only in Serbian; Croatian-uses a Croat curriculum, textbooks, and subjects are taught only in Croatian; and Bosnian. Schools that are Bosnian controlled teach in the Bosnian language and use textbooks of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bender, 2000). Students who are not part of the “dominant group” or are the minority of their school must accept the curriculum being used or moved to a school where they are the majority which is almost impossible considering that most regions are ethnically the same (Bender, 2000). In all three of these new systems “Marxism,” which was a subject taught before the war, has been removed and some classes featuring religion have been initiated (Bender, 2000).
Culture and Curriculum
“School or the structured curriculum, like culture is ever changing” (Forrest, 2000). Bantock (1980) (as cited in Forrest, 2000) states that since schools are anxious to transfer adult concepts to children then the curriculum should reflect adult culture. In other words, curriculum ought to be a reflection of the culture in which it is to function (Forrest, 2000). Most often curriculum lags behind culture and must be changed/modified frequently to be current with the culture. Hooper (1972) (as cited in Forrest, 2000) suggested that as society changes so does the educational system. “Beliefs alter how people learn, and what human beings should be like, what society is” (Hooper, 1972) (as cited in Forrest, 2000).
Change is eminent in culture. It happens constantly where as educational curriculums change/adapt step-by-step not constantly (Forrest, 2000). Hooper (1972) (as cited in Forrest, 2000) believed that curriculum was “socially and historically located, and culturally determined.” In order for our nation’s educational systems to keep up with its ever changing culture then curriculums need to be modified/adapted to transmit values, traditions, and beliefs of the society in which it is to operate (Cheng and Liao, 2001). Our nation’s curriculums vary from state to state and from district to district. Granted our schools offer an amazing variety of quality subjects but some things are excluded from our curriculums. For example, in the last ten years the state of Georgia has seen a tremendous increase in the number of non-English speaking students entering school. These students enter school with a disadvantage because they cannot speak, read, or write in English. Everything they do, from the time they enroll in a Georgia school, is done in a language they know nothing about. They are placed in English to Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classes for 45 to 50 minutes a day to learn English skills (Wikipedia, 2006). Our curriculum definitely does not match our societal change. If it did our schools would have some portion of the subjects taught bilingually which could possibly benefit native English speakers as well as the non-English speakers.
Conclusion
Both Bosnia’s and the United States’ educational systems are still basically outdated. Bosnia is controlled by decontextualized information with little attention paid to skills, values, or attitudes as desirable learning outcomes with lecture style teaching (Stabback, n.d.). The United States has seen some recent changes in its curriculums, especially since the introduction of the America’s Choice program. Lessons that were once teacher directed now are student directed placing the student in control of his or her own learning.
In the course of this research on curriculum history, this student found that many believed a nationalized curriculum should be developed for US schools. Implementing the same curriculum in all school systems nationwide does not seem feasible. It seems unfair or discriminating. Who would choose the best curriculum or how would one curriculum meet the needs of the many different groups of people living in the United States today? Curriculums need to change as the course of time changes to incorporate all the new things being introduced into our world
References
America’s Choice. (2005). Retrieved March 25, 2006 from
Bender, C. (2000). Searching for a strategy…: multiethnicity, tolerance, and national
stereotypes in the educational systems of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Retrieved
March 23, 2006 from
Cheng, W. & Liao, C. (2001). The sociological rationale of the industrial design
curriculum. Global J. Engng. Educ., 5(2). Retrieved March 23, 2006 from
Curriculum Tips 3-1. (n.d.). The need for historical perspective. Retrieved March 23,
2006 from
Forrest, S. (2000). Indigenous knowledge and its representation within Western Australia’s
new curriculum framework - theoretical approach. Australian Indigenous Education
Conference. Retrieved March 24, 2006 from
Hlebowitsh, P. (1997). The search for the curriculum field. OpEd. Retrieved March 23,
2006 from
Office of the High Representative. (2001). Education policy in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Retrieved March 23, 2006 from
Pasalic-Kreso, A. (1999). Education in Bosnia and Herzegovina: minority inclusion and
majority rules. The system of education in BiH as a paradigm of political violence
on education. Comparative Education. Teachers College, Columbia University.
Retrieved March 23, 2006 from
Riley, K. L. (2004). Curriculum matters. Society for the Study of Curriculum History.
Retrieved March 23, 2006 from
Stabback, P. (n.d.). Bosnia and Herzegovina – synopsis of the case study. Retrieved
March 23, 2006 from
Tanner, L. (1977). A call for a curriculum history organization. Teachers College, Columbia
University. Retrieved March 23, 2006 from
Wikipedia. (2006). Education in the United States – curriculum issues. Retrieved March 24,
2006 from