making sense of diversity: the current state of curriculum research

journal ol Cu.iclm and Sunrlo340 Summre 199. Vol; 4, No 4,340361

MAKING SENSE OF DIVERSITY:THE CURRENT STATE

OF CURRICULUM RESEARCH

GEORGEJ. POSNER, Cornell University

All through this field, as in other places where exciting work is going on,views which may well be compatible nevertheless struggle with one another

This is because they strugglefor attention, the research programs may becompatible in content, but the tho ,ght that goes with each of them,

"this is the way to go on," excludes the others-BERNARD WIILIAMS'

Some would describe the literature on curriculum research as markedby confusion. Other perhaps more generous observers prefer diversified orcompeitiive to confused. However, few dispute the claim that curriculumresearch has meant different things to different researchers and theorists Thisdiversity stems primarily from diverse concepts of what curriculum researchis and what (if anything) makes it distinct from educational research in general

This article examines the range of ongoing or proposed approaches tocurriculum research. I contrast different (often competing) approaches byidentifying and then comparing the telling or key questions that guide theresearch.2 The key question points to the phenomena of interest and thuscaptures the essence of the research-. Once we have analyzed a wide rangeof research approaches in terms of their key questions, we can use thisperspective to view the field of curriculum research as a whole. Thus, thisarticle concludes with a discussion of two implications of the review. First,the review is the basis for analyzing current concepts of curriculum andresearch as they are manifested in examples of curriculum research. Second,by capsulizing each of the varied curriculum-research approaches, the articleattempts to illuminate how to integrate diverse approaches into research

'Bernard Williams, New York Review, 11 November 1976fJosephJ. Schwab, "The Concept of the Structure of a Discipline," The Educational Record

43 (uly 1962>. 197, D. Bob Gowin, "The Structure of Knowledge," Educational Theory 20 (Fall1970): 319-328.

ID Bob Gowin, 'The Structure of Knowledge," Educational Theory 20 (Fall 1970) 319-328

George J. Posner 341

programs with increased comprehensiveness. That is, I show how to capitalizeon diversity by searching for complementarity among approaches.

Rather than provide a review of individual curriculum-research studies,this article examines approaches to curriculum research. A curriculum-researchapproach here is a coherent program of research guided by one (or possiblytwo) key questions that direct all research studies in that approach.4 Thesekey questions are so fundamental to the research program that typically theresearcher never states them explicitly. Careful examination of the researchliterature usually uncovers these questions, however, thus revealing the basisfor the approaches.

Table 1 lists a set of key questions implicit in currently proposed orongoing approaches to curriculum research. s A casual examination of Table 1suggests the current range of approaches to curriculum research. Someresearchers focus on the outcomes of education (e.g., questions 1, 2, 3, and4), whether short-term or long-term, whether unitary or multiple. Someresearchers analyze concepts and aims of education. Some study the materialsor subject matter of education (e.g., questions 7, 8,12, and 13). Other research-ers study the students themselves (e.g., questions 14, 15, and 16). Others areconcerned with the processes of carrying out educational planning (e.g.,questions 9 and 17). Still others study schooling or whole schools and class-rooms (e.g., questions 19, 20, and 21).

Table I introduces the current state of curriculum research. For thepurpose of explicatng each approach, however, I present addiuonal featuresof each. Besides a key question, each of the many approaches to curriculumresearch also (1) has a purpose that stems from the researcher's motive forasking the research question in the first place, (2) focuses specifically onparticular educational phenomena as the object of study (e.g, achievementdata and educational programs), (3) relies on particular research methods(e.g., self-report), and (4) results in particular types of products and claims(e.g., clear concepts, a determination of curriculum validity, a rationale for asubject matter, an analysis of experience).6 A key question, together with thesefour additional characteristics of a research approach, here capsuhze eachapproach.

Besides explicating the characteristics of each curriculum-researchapproach, this review also identifies variants of each approach, possible lim-

These ideas have been borrowed from Imre Lakatos, 'Falsification and the Methodology ofScientific Research Programmes," in 'Octicsm and the Growth of Knowledge, ed lmre Laatosand Alan Musgrave (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1970); D Bob Gowin, TheStructure of Knowledge," Educational Theory 20 (Fall 1970): 319-328.

IThe approaches are not intended to be iutually exclusive, there is a great deal of overlapSome approaches could be subdivided or combined

6D. Bob Gowin introduced me to these characteristics of research, particularly the notion ofa "telling question." See D Bob Gowin, "The Structure of Knowledge," Educational /7beoy 20(Fall 1970): 319-328.

Georgel Posner 341

342 Making Sense of Dirsly

lable 1. Curriculum. Research Questions

Studies of Educationat Outcomes1. What are the outcomes of the educational system?2. Which curriculum results in higher achievement?3 What are the effects of implementing curriculum X compared with those of implementing

curriculum Y'4. What are the enduring effects of educauon in general or of curriculum X in particular? To

what extent and In what ways are the learnings that result from curriculum X useful to theindividual in out-of-school contexts?

S What are the relative costs compared to the relative effectiveness of curriculum X'6. What are the differential effects of different instructional treatments on different types of

learners?

Studies of the Curriculum-Development Process7. What knowledge clams, key concepts, telling questions, value claims, and methods of work

are embodied by subject matter X?8 What competencies does a student need to master to perform job X successfully'

Analses ofEducattona tConcepts and Ais9 How do people make decisions and conduct deliberations?

10 What does educational concept X mean?11 Why study subject matter X?

Studies of Educational Materials12 What do the instructional materials themselves Imply about the author or the appropriate

audience?

Studies of Students13. How appropriate are the textbooks used by schools?14. What knowledge and concepts do the students bring to the classroom'15 What are the conditions for conceptual change, and how can it be facilitated and guided716. How does each individual experience the curriculum?

Studies of Schools and Classrooms17 How do the pracucal aspects of teaching In classrooms shape the operational curriculum?18 What ideologies do schools really teach, and how are they taught?19 How do the various factors within a school determine that school's character and the

quality of the educational experience?20. What was schooling like in the past, and what caused it to be that way'21. What content is being explicitly taught, and how much emphasis is each item being given'

Itauons, and references that represent proposals, reviews, or actual researchstudies embodying each approach.' The individual research approaches aregrouped according to six general foci that characterize the literature.(1) studies of educational outcomes, (2) studies of the curriculumdevelopment process, (3) analyses of educational concepts and aims, (4)analyses of educational materials, (5) studies of student characteristics, and(6) studies of schools and classrooms.

STUDIES OF EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES

These approaches focus on the outcomes of the educational process,both short- and long-term. Some approaches are concerned with only the

'B Inrritation, I do not mean to Imply that any research approach should be expected to doeverything. Instead, the term is meant to connote the boundaries of each approach.

342 Making Sense of Diversity

GeorgeJ. Posner 343

outcomes; others relate outcomes to inputs and processes of education. Mostapproaches use statistical comparisons to analyze outcome.

1. Survey-ofahievement approach. This approach is the most commonto the study of educational outcomes. No attempt is made to analyze inputsto or aspects of educational processes. The only question here is, What arethe outcomes of the educational system? The focus is student achievementmeasured by statistically comparing test scores with those of students in othereducational systems or from previous years. The product of the research is adetermination of the relative success of an educational system in achieving aset of educational outcomes at a particular time. Limitations of these studiesinclude their inability to infer reasons for any differences found and theirreliance on a unitary concept of educational achievement. Two of the mostnotable examples of this approach are the International Studies of Achieve-ment and the National Assessment of Educational Progress.8

2. Curriculum-borse-race approach. This approach stems from decisionmakers' need to choose between competing curriculums. It addresses thequestion, Which curriculum results in higher achievement? The focus is uni-tary measures of subject-matter achievement assessed through post-treatmentachievement comparisons of intact groups. The product of this research Is adetermination of the "best" curriculum. Variants include studies measuringrelative gains from pre-treatment scores to post-treatment scores and studiesin which groups are randomly assigned. This approach is limited becausecurriculums differ in the content included and emphasized.4 Therefore, find-ingslare usually attributable to differences in test-content bias for a particularcurriculum. Also, intervening variables remain unaccounted for (e.g., theteacher), and a single measure provides only a limited concept of "best."

3. Profile-of-effects approach. This approach also stems from a need toprovide decision makers with an empirical basis for choosing between competing curriculums. In contrast to the curriculum-horse-race approach, thequestion here is, What are the effects of carrying out curriculum X comparedwith those of carrying out curriculum Y? The major difference between the

'See, for example, James S Coleman, "Methods and Results in the IEA Studies of Elfecs onSchool on Learning," Review of Educational Rewardh 45 (Summer 1975) 382; InternationalAssociation for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Saence Adievaemnt in SeventeenCounties A Preliminary Repon (Oxford, England. Pergamon Press, 1988). See also NationalAssessment of Educational Progress, Writing Achievement, 1969-1979. Results Prom the TirdNational Writing Assesment, Volume 1: 17-Year-Olds (Denver National Assessment of Educa-tional Progress, 1980). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 196 042.)

'Decker F. Walker and John Schaffarztck, Comparing Cumcula,' Remieu of EducatonalResearc 44 (Winter 1974). 83-111.

Geos-geJ Posner 343_ ._

344 MakEing S-ns ofDitersity

two approaches centers on the choice of criterion for comparing curriculumsThis approach focuses on a battery of outcome measures rather than a unitaryachievement-measure, although both approaches compare post-treatmenteffects. The product of this research is a determination of the differentialeffects of different curriculums The possible variants of the profile-of-effectsapproach are similar to those of the curriculum-horse-race approach, although,in addition, noncomparative studies are sometimes employed The majorlimitation of the profile-of-effects approach stems from its failure to addressthe question of which outcomes are the most valid Walker and Schaffarzickadvocate this approach and review studies that represent it; they give anexcellent review of the research. '0 Welch and Walberg and the Eight-YearStudy represent outstanding examples."

4. Enduring-effects-of-education approach This approach stems from adesire to provide curriculums that will be useful to the student outside of theschool's walls and beyond the school years. The questions are, What are theenduring effects of education in general or of curriculum X in particular, towhat extent and in what ways are the learnings that result from curriculum Xuseful to the individual in out-of-school contexts? The approach has no par-ticular methodological commitment, although measuring out-of-school behav-iors and relating them to previous school learnings is the general method ofwork. The product of this work is a determination of the validity of particularobjectives, concepts of subject-matter areas, and forms of schooling as a meansto achieving more ultimate educational goals. Major variants have to do withthe kinds of input and output variables employed. Limitations stem from thedifficulty in determining nontrivial out-of-school and particularly long-termbehaviors. Broudy and Harnqvist present extensive discussions of and pro-posals for this approach."2 Hyman, Wright, and Reed address the question ofenduring effects of education directly, though they are concerned more withquantity of schooling than with kinds of curriculum as the independent vari-able."3 The works of Dahllof and Husen and Boalt in mathematics, Bromsjo incivics, andJohansson in physics and chemistry relate instructional content to

'Ibid."Wayne W. Welch and HerbertJ Walberg, "A National Experiment mn Curriculum Evaluation,"

American Educational ResearcJournal 9 (Summer 19'2) 373-383., Wilford Alikin, The Story ofthe Eight-Year Study (New York. Harper & Brothers, 1942)

"Harry S. Broudy, 7be Real World of the Public Scbools (New York. Harcourt Brace Jova-novich, 1972), Harry S Broudy, "Components and Constraints of Curriculum Research," Curricuttum 7beory Network 5 (Spring 1970) 16-31, Kjell Harnqvist, "Enduring Effects of Schooling-A Neglected Area in Educational Research" (invited address to the annual meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Assoclationr, New York, April 1977)

"Herben H Hyman, Charles R Wright, andJohn S Reed, TheEnduring EffectsofEducation(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975)

344 Making Sense of Divem(y

GeotgeJ Posner 345

later vocational life, further study, and leisure time 10 years after schooling;they all present exemplars of the approach."

5. Cost-effectiveness approach. This approach is somewhat similar inpurpose to approaches 2, 3, and 4, it stems from a need to inform admuustra-tive decisions on resource allocation. The key question is, What are the relauvecosts compared to the relative effectiveness of curriculum X? The phenomenaof interest (and the central concepts of this approach) are, of course, costsand effectiveness. The product of the research-a determmation of costs,benefits, or both-results from an economic approach to cost-effectivenessanalysis to which the approach is highly committed methodologically. Thedifficulty interpreting a comprehensive assessment of costs and effectivenessin educational programs limits this approach and leads to a reliance on onlyfinancial costs and benefits. As Fisher notes, '"IThe really interesting problemsare just too difficult and there are too many intangibles (e.g., political, psy-chological, and soctological) that cannot be taken into account mn the analyticalprocess, especially in a quantitative sense. "' Knezevich argues that the cost-effectiveness analysis is at the heart of a whole planning, programming, bud-geting system (PPBS):

Such analyses are concerned with generating an index that reveals in a meaningfuland systematic way the advantages (effectiveness) as compared with disadvantages(costs) of an alternative to one or more destred outcomes. It begins with clarifyingpurposes and continues by organizing cost data related to outcomes Analysts is theculminating step that applies such data in the appraisal of options.' 6

Fisher, Klees, Pachico, and Tobin provide an example of a study employing acost analysis.'7

6. Aptitude-treatment-interaction approach. Although the previouslymentioned approaches are concerned with determining curriculum effects,most assume that effects can be determined independently of learners' char-acteristics. The aptitude-treatment-interaction approach, on the other hand,stems from a concern for establishing an empirical basis for tailoring instruc-

"Urban Dahllof, Kuplaneunderskningar I matematik ood mdrsmalet (Resedarb on tbeCurriculaforMathoematcs andSwedtsb), in Swedish (Stockholm. Statens Offentliga Utredningar,SOU. 1960); Torsten Husen and B Boalt, EducationalResear, andEducational Gbange (Stock-holm Almqvist & Wiksell, 1968), B. Bromslo, 'Kursplaneundersokning 1 samhallskunskap ( ACurriculum Study in Civics"), in Swedish (Stockholm. Ars Skolberedning, 1957), muneo;E Johansson, Krlaneundeokningar ifysik oc kemi(EBnmp W Currulum Studies n Pbyscand Cbemshry), in Swedish (Stockholm. Almqvist & Wiskell, 1961).

'Gene H Fisher, The Role of Cost Utility Analysts m Program Budgetng," in ProgramBudgeting, ed David Novick (Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press, 1975), p. 67

6StephenJ. Knezevnch, Program Budgeting (PPBS) (Berkeley, CA. McCutchan, 1973), p 185"Dennits Fisher, Steven Klees, Douglas Pachico, and Daniel Tobin, ThbeEconomicReturns to

BOCES Secondary School Occupaonal Educanton Investment, Research Publication No 70-2,rev. (Ithaca, NY. Cornell Institute for Occupational Education, 1976)

.. oge Xatier .35..

346 Making Sense of Diersity

tion to the individual. The key question is, What are the differential effects ofdifferent instructional treatments on different types of learners? The focus islearner characteristics (aptitudes or traits) as they interact with instructionaltreatments. The approach is methodologically committed to studying theseeffects using the statistical concept of interaction. The product of the approachis a determination of how instruction can be tailored to fit best with individuallearner characteristics. A limitation arises because the research, so far, seemsto reveal only marginal gains. Another limitation stems from the approach'sassumption that instruction should be tailored to students' strengths ratherthan to build up weaknesses. Kallos has explicated many other limitations ofthis model as it applies to the practice of teaching and to the development ofa theory of teaching."8 Rothkopf, Spielberger, Novick, and Resnick have allalso attacked the model on theoretical and methodological grounds '9 In fact,Cronbach, the model's originator, has been one of its sharpest critics :0 Excellent reviews of research can be found in Cronbach and Snow, Bracht, andSalomon.2'

STUDIES OF THE CURRICULUM-DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Two types of research approaches focus on curriculum developmentstudies that are conceived as part of the curriculum-development processitself and studies that seek to understand the process

7. Structure-of-knowledge approach Unlike the approaches that attemptto validate or test curriculums, this approach "unpacks" knowledge as it comes

"'Danmel Kallos, Comments on the Importance of Apttude-Treaument Interaction Researchfor Pedagogies and for the Theory and Pracuce of Teaching," Report From the Instirure ofEducation, No. 50, University of Lund, October 1974, mimeo.

"Ernst Z Rothkopf, "Individual Differences in Processing Information" (paper presented atthe annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 1977),Charles D. Spielberger, "Individual Differences in Personality" (paper presented at the annualmeeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 19'7'), Melvin RNovick, "Methodological Considerations in the Study of Aptitude-Treatment Interactions" (paperpresented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York,April 1977); Lauren B. Resnick, "Social and Scientific Conceptions of Aptitudes" (paper presentedat the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 19"")

"tee J. Cronbach and Richard E Snow, Aptitudes and Instruaional Merbods A HandbookforResearch Interactions (NewYork. Irvington Press, 19"6), LeeJ Cronbach and Richard E Snow,Indkiidual Dfferences in LearningAbility as aFunction of Instructional Variables (Stanford, CAStanford University Press, 1969); LeeJ. Cronbach, "The Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology,"7heAmer/can Psycbologist 12 (November 195") 61 -684 See also LeeJ Cronbach, "A Discussionof Presentations" (paper presented at the Aptitudes and Instructional Methods Symposium, annualmeeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 1977).

"Lee J. Cronbach and Richard E Snow, Individual Differences in Learning Ability as aFunction of Instructional Variables (Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press, 1969), Glenn HBracht, "Experimental Factors Related to Aptitude Treatment Interactions," RevieuofEducationaIResearch 40 (Winter 1970) 627-646, Gavriel Salomon, "Heuristic Models for the Generation ofAptitude-Treatment Interaction Hypotheses," Ret*eu, of Educational Research 42 (Spring 19"2)327-344.

346 Making Sense of Diveraitj'

GeorgeJ. Po-ner 347

from knowledge producers to discover potential cumcular content The paperswritten during the 1960s curriculum-reform movement are examples of theapproach because they attempt to answer its key question, What knowledgeclaims, key concepts, telling questions, value claims, and methods of work areembodied by subject matter X?22 As Gowin describes, the phenomena ofinterest are primary sources of knowledge in a discipline, such as researchreports and critiques."2 Researchers analyze these documents by Idenutfyngeach of the five aspects of the subject matter listed in the key question. Theproduct of this inquiry is potential curricular content in a discipline. Besidesdiscovering potential content, the approach may also include (as a variant)pilot-testing the content to determine its teachability. The major limltation ofthis approach results when the researchers fail to mvesugate the effects oflearning the content, or the phenomenological response of the learner to theteaching-learning situation. Gowin and Novak and Gowin present proposalsfor the approach.2 4 Millman and Gowin represent an example of the approachin educational research."

8. Task-analysis approach. Whereas the previous approach focuses onanalyzing disciplines to generate curricular content, this approach focuses onanalyzing tasks to develop curriculums. The key question is, What knowledgeand skills does a student need to master to perform task X successfully? Theapproach uses observational, survey, and interview methods (primarily inoccupational education); the product is a set of performance objectives foroccupational education in a particular area. Limitations are similar to those ofthe structure-of-knowledge approach. The task-analysts approach can be tracedto Bobbitt's activity-analysis techniques and to Charters's job-analysis tech-niques 26 Berkey, Drake, and Legacy apply the approach to occupational education.' Gagne and Gagne and Briggs apply it to curriculum development inall major school subjects.2

'iSee, for example, Stanley Elam, ed., Education and the Structure of Knowledge (Chicago.Rand McNally, 1964), G. W Ford and Lawrence Pugno, 7be Structure of Knowledge and theCurriculum (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964).

I'D. Bob Gowmn, The Structure of Knowledge," Educanonal Theory 20 (Fall 1970).319-328

I'D Bob Gowin, The Structure of Knowledge," Educational 7Theory 20 (Fall 1970).319-328, D Bob Gowin, Educrang (Ithaca, NY. Cornell University Press, 1981);Joseph D. Novakand D Bob Gowin, Learning How to Lea7 (New York. Cambribndge University Press, 1984).

SJason Millrman and D Bob Gowin,AppraisngEducanonalReseatg R A CaseStudyAppromab(Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall, 1974).

'Frankiln Bobbin, How to Make a Curriculum (Boston. Houghton Milin, 1924), FranklinBobbin, 7he Cumacuum (Boston. Houghton Mlffhn, 1918), \Y W. Charters, Cuarculum Consruc-t/on (New York: Macmillan, 1923).

"Arthur L Berkey, William E. Drake, and James W. Legacy, A AModelfor Task Analyis mAgrfbusrness (Ithaca, NY. Cornell University Press, 1972).

'ZRobert M. Gagne, Condiions f Learnmg. 3rd ed (New York. Holt, Rinehart & Winston,1978), Robert M. Gagne, Condtons ofLearrng, 2nd ed. (New York. Holt, Rtnehart & Winston.1970), R M Gagne and L J. Bnggs, Princples of InstruonalDesign tNew York. Holt, Rinehart& Winston, 1979).

George] Pastier 347

348 Making Sense of Diersity

9. Planning approach. The curriculum-planning process can also be thesubject of mvestugation. The purpose of the investigation may be to understandthe process and to make it more effective. The question here is, How dopeople make decisions and conduct deliberations about the curriculum? Witha focus on the curriculum-planning process itself rather than on its products,this approach describes how decisions are actually made and how adequatelycurriculum theory accounts for the process. The approach has no method-ological commitment; however, the usual procedure is to conduct a sort ofcontent analysis of deliberation transcripts, to administer questionnaires toparucipants, and in some cases, to ask the planners to think aloud whileplanning. One possible limitaton of the approach is that it fails to ascribecharacteristucs of planning products to characteristics of the planning process,it tells us not how to improve the process but only how it occurred. Schwab'sessays on the "practical" as a "language for curriculum" serve as one conceptual framework for this approach." Eisner, Schaffarzick and Hampson, Ship-man, and Walker provide examples of the approach focused on curriculumprojects." Clark and Peterson, Clark and Yinger, and Smith and Sendlebeckapply the approach to teacher planning.31

ANALYSES OF EDUCATIONAL CONCEPTS AND AIMS

Rather than empirically determining the effectiveness of the curriculum,philosophical studies analyze the concepts and aims that form the foundationfor education.

2JosephJ. Schwab, "The Practical 3: Translation Into Curriculum," Sc5ool Revew 81 (August

1973). 501-522,JosephJ Schwab, The Practical. Arts of the Eclectic," Scbool Review 79 (August1971). 493-542. See alsoJosephJ Schwab, "The Practical A Language for the Curriculum," ShoolRevnew 78 (November 1969) 1-23; Seymour Fox, "A Practical Image of 'The Practical,' " Curric-ulum MTeoryNetwork 10 (Fall 1972). 45-47, Ian Westbury, "The Characier of a Curriculum for a'Practcal Curriculum, Curculum TheoryNetwork 10 (Fall 1972), 25-36,WarnerWick, "Knowledge and Action. The Theory and Practice of 'he Practical,'" Curriculum Theory Network 10(Fall 1972): 37-44.

°Elliot W. Eisner. "Curriculum Development in Stanford's Kettering Project: Recollectionsand Ruminations, in Strategies for Currculum Detelopment, ed Jon Schaffarzick and David HHampson (Berkeley, CA. McCutchan, 1975), pp. 147-168;Jon Schaffarzick and David H Hampson,Strategies for Curriculum Development (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1975); Marten D Shipman,Inside a Curriculum Project (London: Methuen, 1974); Decker F. Walker, "Curriculum Devel-opment in an Art Project, in Case Studies in Curnculum Change Great Britain and the L'nitedStates, ed William Reid and Decker F Walker (London. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975), pp 91-135; Decker F Walker, A Study of Deliberation in Three Curriculum Projects," CurriculumTheory Netuork 7 (1971): 118-134.

"'Christopher M. Clark and Penelope L Peterson, "Teachers' Thought Processes," in Hand-book of Researmch on Teaching 3rd ed, ed. Merlin C Wlttrock (New York Macmillan, 1986), pp255-296; Christopher M Clark and RobenJ Yinger, "Research on Teacher Planning A ProgressReport,'Journalof Curriculum Studies 11 (April-June 1979). 175-178, Edward L Smith and NeilB Sendlebeck, "The Programme, the Plans, and the Activities of the Classroom: The Demands ofActivity-Based Science," n Innovation in the Science Curriculum, ed John Olson (New YorkNichols Publishing, 1982), pp. 72-106


George j. Posner ,49

10 Conceptual-anaysis approach. In contrast to the structure-of.knowledge approach, which analyzes primary sources of knowledge as ameans for generating curricular content, this approach uses analysis tech-niques to increase the clarity of the central concepts that educationalists usein doing research and formulating policy decisions (e.g., psychological versuslogical organization, needs, teaching, performance, and competencies). Thequestion is, What does educational concept X mean? The focus, then, iseducational concepts and the method of work drawn from the work of analyticphilosophers, termed conceptual analysts 52 The product is a set of clear,useful concepts for guiding curricular thought, with particular attention to thecurricular implications of the analyses. The major limitation stems from thenotion that conceptual clarity takes us only so far. Clear thinking may benecessary but is certainly not sufficient for making wise policy decisions orfor generating fruitful research questions. Also, because much of this workentails constructing conceptual frameworks, the approach is limited to theextent that the world resists pigeonholing. Komisar's analysis of the conceptof need, and his arguments on the implications of this analysis for curriculumdevelopment based on needs, is an excellent example of this approach.33

Smith and Ennis provide numerous other examples. 4

11. Curnrculum-justification approach. In contrast to approaches 2, 3,and 4, which attempt to validate curricular content in terms of empiricaldetermination of utility, this approach argues the case on a priori grounds forincluding a content area in the curriculum. The question posed is, .Why studysubject matter X? The phenomenon of interest is the subject matter itself.Although philosophers usually carry out the research, it has no particularmethodological commitment The product is a rationale for a particular subjectmatter The major limitation stems from the approach's failure to examineempirically the actual consequence of teaching a particular subject matter,thinking about potential outcomes or meanings may suggest things to mea-sure, but the existence of potential benefits does not ensure that those benefitswill, in fact, be achieved. Broudy's justification of art education is an exampleof this approach.3s Phenix's ambitious analysis of the meanings inherentin disciplines represents a more comprehensive attempt at curriculumjustification.'

UB Othanel Smith and Robert H Ennis, eds,LanguageandConcepts inEduaOn (ChicagoRand McNally, 1961)

"B Paul Komisar. "'Need' and the Needs-Curriculum," in Language and Concepts inEducation, ed B Othanel Smith and Robert H. Ennis (Chicago- Rand McNally. 1961), pp.24-42.

'B Othanel Smith and Robert H Ennis, eds .LanguageandConceptsinducat on (Chicago.Rand McNally, 1961)

"Harry S Broudy. 'The Other Excuses for Beauty." in Paradox and Promise (EnglewoodCliffs, NJ Prentice-Hall, 1961), pp 155-165

'Philip H PhenixRealmsofMeaning APhbdosopbyoftheCurriarlumforGeneralEducauon(New York. McGraw-Hill. 1964)

GeorgeJ Posner .349

350 Making Sense qfDiv-sity

STUDIES OF EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS

In contrast to the first two sets of studies that focus on educationalproducts and development processes, this next set focuses on one importantinput to education: the materials used by students.

12. Content-analysis approach. This approach seeks to uncover implicitconstraints in educauonal materials to assess their utility with particular audi-ences. It differs from approaches 6 and 7 m its focus on analyzing the materialsthemselves rather than their empirically determined effects or the disciplineof knowledge from which the materials derive their content validity. Thequestion of concern is, What do the instructional materials themselves implyabout the author (e.g., his biases) or the appropriate audience (e.g., readinglevel)? This approach does not seem to have any methodological commitment,although the usual procedure is to count instances of significant words orphrases, to place them in predetermined categories (e.g, by grade level ifreading difficulty is being assessed, in categories indicating connotative mean-ings if biases are being assessed), and then to compute some index using aformula. The procedure determines the biases, reading level, or some othercharacteristic of the materials. Berelson provides a comprehensive review andthe methodology for the approach from the perspective of communicationsresearch.3 ' Saario, Jacklin, and Tittle's exemplary research examines sex-rolestereotyping in elementary school basal readers and educational achievementtests, they also discuss the presence and ramifications of different curriculumpatterns for males and females.3'

13. Textbook-criticism approach Like the content-analysis approach, thisone focuses on written instructional material-textbooks The question is,How appropriate are the textbooks used by schools? Textbooks are analyzedfor various reasons, some methodologically motivated and others politicallymotivated. Methodological efforts attempt to develop new qualitative methodsof evaluation based on methods borrowed from literary criticism 3 9 Politicalefforts are less methodologically committed; they use text analysis to maketheir predetermined purpose of reversing trends in textbook publishing thatdisturb academicians. 4

0 In either case, the product of this approach is a detailedunderstanding of the text material children are exposed to, particularly its

rBernard Berelson, Content Analysis in Communtcatron Research (New York. Hafner Pub-lishing, 1971).

"'Terry N. Saario, Carol NagyJacklin, and Carol Kehr Tittle, "Sex Role Stereotyping in'thePublic Schools," Harvard Educational Review 43 (August 1973) 386-415

zSee, for example, George Willis, ed., Qualitative Evaluation Concepts and Cases in Currinlum Crucism (Berkeley, CA. McCutchan, 1978)

"See, for example, Paul A Gagnon, Demooracys Untold Story (Washington, DC AmericanFederation of Teachers, 1987), Frances FltzGerald,Amerca Retised(Boston Atlanticnttle, Brown,1979).


GeorgeJ. Posner 351

blind spots, overemphases, and influences. Limitations include a preoccupa-tion with material that many students do not even read; this preoccupationdiverts our attention from the more significant aspects of schooling.

STUDIES OF STUDENTS

Since students are the recipients of the curriculum, understanding theircharacteristics and their responses to education allows curriculum developersto provide appropriate curriculums Antecedents of these studies Can be foundin the progressive movement, which promoted the analysis of student interestsand needs as a basis for curriculum development and resulted in mo- surveyresearch in the first half of this century.

14. Misconceptions approach. One interpretation of "beginning wherethe students are" is to ask the question, What knowledge and concepts do thestudents bring to the classroom? The purpose of asking the question is toprovide information that enables the teacher to adjust the curriculum to thestudents' prior knowledge. Underlying this purpose Is the realizauon thatmost students, although they may do well on achievement tests, fail to under-stand the basic concepts of a discipline. Instead, they leave courses with thesame misconceptions they came with. By focusing research on these miscon-ceptions, researchers hope to solve the fundamental problem. The clmicalinterview, a method adapted from Posner and Gertzog, dominates this research,although paper-and-pencil tests of content knowledge are also used." Theproduct of the research is a description of student misconceptions to keep inmind when planning curriculum. Virtually all the research has been in scienceand mathematics. The earliest work was by Piaget and was framed by hiscognitive developmental theories.42 Not until the Soviets' pioneering researchin the 1940s and a surge of international interest in the '70s and early '80s didthis research proliferate and become less theoreucal and more descriptive.'Recently, misconceptions research has become more theoretically based, anddifferent theories have tended to differenuate research programs. Even theterm misconceptions has become controversial; researchers with a morerelativistic psychological and epistemological view prefer alternatmeframe-works, and researchers with a more anthropological view prefer cbidren's

"GeorgeJ Posner and William A Genzog, "The Clinical Interview and the Measurement ofConceptual Change," Science Educ-ation 66 (April 1982). 195-209

'Jean Piaget, 7The Chlds Conception of the World (New York. Humanities Press, 1929).'E A. Fleshner, "Psychology of the Mastery and Applihcation by School Children of Some

Concepts in Physics," in Educational Psybology in the US.SR., ed Brian Simon andJoan Simon(London. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1963). See also Joseph D Novak and Hugh Helm, eds,Proceedings of the Interztnonal Seminar, Mrsnpttons in Sienme and Mathematcs Ithaca,NY: Cornell University Press, 1983).

GeorgtiJ Posner 351

352 Making Sene of Diersiy

science." The differences among the research programs stem from differenttheoretical accounts of the sources of misconceptions. Empiricist accounts--which claim that knowledge derives inductively from sensory experience, thatknowledge is additive, and that people are born as blank slates-assume thatmisconcepuons arise from either misleading experiences or from faultyinstruction."

4Cognitive accounts-which claim that existing knowledge inter

acts with new knowledge to transform both during the process of learning-assume that misconceptions arise from cognitive limitations of development,of inadequate schemata (or mental models), of information processing, or ofsuperordinate concepts.

*' Cultural accounts-which claim that the cultural

context embedding all knowledge influences both learning and thought-assume that misconceptions arise from differences between the culture andlanguage of students and that of the teacher or academician. Reviews arepresented by Driver, Driver and Erickson, and Osborne and Wittrock.

4 '" Col

lecuons of studies are provided m Novak, Novak and Helm, and West andPines.'

15. Conceptual-change approach One natural conclusion from the mis-conceptions research is that if students come to class with well-formed ideas,the purpose of research must be to find ways to make the process of changingthose ideas easier. The question becomes, What are the conditions for con-ceptual change, and how can it be facilitated and guided7 Although the focusis the process of conceptual change, the methods vary Conducting clinicalinterviews before, during, and after instruction, having students think aloudwhile solving problems, observing students while working, administering

'Rosalind Driver, The Pupil as ScientistP (Milton Keyes, England Open University Press,1983); R J Osborne and P Freyberg, Learning in Science. 7be Implications of Children Sctence(Auckland, New Zealand. Heinemann, 1985)

"M. McClosky, "Intuitive Physics," Scentific American 248 (No 4, 1983) 122-130Jean Piaget, bThe Origins of Intelligence in Children (New York. International Universities

Press, 1952);, Richard C Anderson, "The Notion of Schemata and the Educational Enterprise-General Discussion of the Conference," in Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge ed R CAnderson, RandJ Spiro, and William E Montague (Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum, 1977). pp 415-431Deborah C. Smith, "Cognitive Processes and Children's Misconceptions in Science" (paperpresented at the annual meeting of the Northeastern Educational Research Association, Ellenville,NY, 1984), David P. Ausubel, Joseph D Novak, and Helen Hanesian, Educattonal Psychology ACognftfve View (New York. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1978), Joseph D Novak, A 7beory ofEducation (Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press, 1986)

'Rosalind Driver, 7bhe Pupil as Scientisto (Milton Keyes, England Open University Press,1983), Rosalind Driver and Gaalen Erickson, 'Theories-In-Action- Some Theoretical and EmpiricalIssues in the Study of Students' Conceptual Frameworks in Science," Studies in Science Education10 (1983). 37-60; R.J. Osborne and Merlin C Wittrock, "Learning Science- A Generative Process,"Science Education 67 (October 1983): 489-508

Joseph D. Novak, ed., Proceedings of the Second International Seminar, Misconceptionsand Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press,1987),Joseph D Novak and Hugh Helm, eds, Proceedings of the International Seminar, Miscon-ceptions in Science andMathematics (Ithaca, NY Cornell University Press, 1983), Leo West andLeon Pines, Cognittme Structure and Conceptual Change (New York Academic Press, 1985)


George J. Posner 353

surveys of attitudes, and giving problem-solving written tests that requirestudents to show their work are all used in this research. The product ofconceptual-change research is a set of strategies for overcoming masconcep-tions Variations (besides methodological differences) stem from alternativeviews of how far teachers should intervene in the students' choice of scientificor mathematical conceptions. The strong-intervention position Is representedby the research of Smith and Anderson and Roth, which determines thestudents' prior knowledge ("naive conceptions"), compares it to the correctscientific view ("goal conception"), and then works out in detail a strategy,based on a model of conceptual change, to transform naive to goal concep-tions 49 Clearly, this position would be ethically and morally, if not technically,problematic in controversial curricular topics like evolution. In these cases,conceptual-change teaching would need to be modified to respect personalbeliefs and commitments. The theory on which this approach is based ispresented by Posner and others and by Hewson and Hewson.° Collections ofstudies can be found in West and Pines.5 '

16. Analysis-of-epVerience approach. In contrast to the two previousapproaches that focus on student characteristics, this approach focuses on thestudent's educational experience. The key question is, How does each mdi-vidual experience the curriculum? Unlike all the other approaches, the focushere is how the individual experiences the disciplines of knowledge and thesocial institutions of schooling, not what the individual learns from an edu-cational experience. The distinction between learning and experience has notreceived a definitive treatment, although the issue clearly centers on a product-process distinction. The approach has developed a methodological commit-ment to curt-ere, an autobiographical method whose product is a detailedaccount and analysis of the individual's life history. Variants are possible basedon the application of curere to others (i.e., biographical rather than autobio-graphical) and on the use of empirical methods for discovering the phenom-enological response of groups in the classroom to the curriculum.5 2 The

"Edward Smith and Charles W. Anderson, "The Effects of Training and Use of SpeciallyDesigned Curriculum Materials on Conceptual Change Teaching and Learning' tpaper presentedat the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washiungton, DC, Apnl1987), Kathleen Roth, "The Effects of Science Texts on Students Misconceptions About Food forPlants" (doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 1985).

"George J. Posner, Kenneth A Strike, Peter W. Hewson, and William A. Gertzog, "Accom-modation of a Scientific Conception. Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change," ScienceEducanon66 (April 1982): 211-227, Peter W, Hewson and Mariana G. A. Hewson, 'The Role of ConceptualConflict in Conceptual Change and the Design of Science Instruction," Inruchdonal Sience 13(May 1984) 1-13.

"Leo West and Leon Pines, CognfteStucture andConceptual Ciange (NewYork AcademicPress, 1985)

"See Leonard Berk, "Education in Lives: Biographic Narrative in the Study of EducationalOutcomes,"founal of Cwriulun 7eornzng 2 (Summer 1980). 88-154, for the former, seeGeorge Willis and AnthonyJ. Allen, "Panerns of Phenomenologlcal Response to Curricula. mplh-cations," in Qualitatie Evaluation. Concepts and Case in Curriculum CnicsM ed GeorgeWillis (Berkeley, CA McCutchan, 1978), pp. 34-71, for an example of this latter approach.

Ceorgel Pcssner 353353-S -

354 Making Setse of D&esh

product of this approach is one student's autobiography or biography. Onelimitation stems from the approach's focus on verbal, conscious accounts ofexperience to the exclusion of preconscious, nonverbal experience andknowledge. Also, because of the uniqueness of individuals, the experiencesmay be idiosyncratic, with no meaningful pattern identifiable; the individual'sexperience may tell us less about the curriculum and more about the individual. Of course, the advocates of this approach claim that these two componentsare one and the same. Pinar presents the approach and its methodology in itsmost definitive form.5 3

STUDIES OF SCHOOLS AND CLASSROOMS

Unlike the approaches that limit the focus of study to one or two aspectsof education (e.g., its outcomes, its students, its materials, or its aims), thesestudies focus on intact classrooms, school buildings, and school systems andanalyze the complex transactions that occur there. While the previous approachfocuses on the individual and uses methods drawn from the humanities, thesenext approaches look at schools and classrooms as social systems, using socialscience methods.

17. Classroom-implementation approach Although most curriculumresearch focuses on the intended (or official) curriculum as the phenomenonof interest, a growing body of research focuses on what happens to theintended curriculum when it is carried out in actual classrooms. The focus isnot the intended curriculum but instead classroom processes that affect theintended curriculum. The purpose is to better understand the processes,ultimately leading to improved curriculum development The question is,How do the practical aspects of teaching classrooms shape the operationalcurriculum? The primary method used in this research is the case study, inwhich intact classrooms are observed intensively over a period ranging fromweeks to months. The observer's field notes are used to produce the mainproduct of the research, the detailed case study. Occasionally, teachers arealso interviewed. Limitations derive from the unaddressed problem of trans-lating the research into improved curriculum development. Also, because theresearch is concerned with classroom processes, it ignores the school andcommunity influences on the curriculum. The works of Doyle and Doyle andPonder provide examples of this approach."

"William F. Pmar, "The Method,' in Toward a Poor Curriculum, ed. William F Pinar andMadeleine FL Grumet (Dubuque, IA Kendall-Hunt, 1976), William F. Pinar, ed., CurriculumwnTheoriing (Berkeley, CA McCutchan, 1975)

"Walter Doyle, "Content Representative in Teachers' Definitions of Academic Work,"Journaof Curriculum Studies 18 (October-November 1986) 365-379, Walter Doyle and Gerald Ponder,"The Practicality Ethic in Teacher Decision-Making," Interchange 8 (No. 3, 1978): 1-12


GeorgeJ. Posnr 355

18. Hidden-curriculum approach. Whereas most of the previousapproaches study the academic curriculum, whether intended or operational,this approach seeks to understand the school's implicitly (though effectively)taught norms and values The question is, What ideologies do schools reallyteach, and how are they taught? The covert teachings of the school (e.g., anachievement and marketplace ethic or an attitude toward authority and con-flict) and how they are accomplished are the phenomena of interest Theapproach has no methodological commitment, though case studies of individ-ual classrooms or school systems seem to be a common strategy. When themethod of work entails a content analysis of text materials to uncover the"hidden curriculum," the distinction between this approach and approach 10disappears. The product of this research is a deeper understanding of bowschools (and their curriculums) function in a societal context and, in particular,the kinds of implicit messages schools and classrooms give to students. Lim-itations of this approach are primarily methodological and stem from thedanger of generalizing from a case study of one classroom or one schoolsystem to all of schooling. The case studies of Anyon, Apple and King, andJackson are examples."5

19. Portrait-of-schools approach. This emerging approach focuses onschools, looking at them comprehensively, their teachers, their students, theircommunities, their administrative leadership, their ambience, as well as theircurriculums. The purpose of the research is to provide a better understandingof schools as organic wholes. The question is, How do the various factorswithin a school determine that school's distinctive character and the qualityof the educational experience? The method used is ethnographic, and theproduct is a set of portraits of schools, showing both the unique aspects aswell as the commonalities among the schools. Some researchers focus onlyon "good" schools in an attempt to better understand what makes a school"good."' Others look at typical schools as a basis for making recommenda-tions for school improvements One limitation stems from the focus on theschool, which ignores the broader social, economic, and political influenceson the school as one of many societal institutions.s Other limitations stem

"Jean Anyon, "Social Class and School Knowledge,': Curadwnum Inquy 11 (Spring 1981)3-42, Michael W Apple and Nancy R King, "What Do Schools Teach?" Cumc wn Inquoy ( tNo.4, 1977): 341-57; Philip W. Jackson, life In Clamrooms (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,1968)

T'Sara Lawrence Lghtffoot, The GoodHfigb School (New York Basic Books, 1983)."Arthur G. Powell, Eleanor Farrar, and David KI Cohen, The Sbopping MaU Higb Sdool

(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1985); Michael W Sedlak, Christopher W. Wheeler, Diana C Pullin,and Philip A, Cusick Selling Snudents Sbort (New York Teachers College Press, 1986), TheodoreR Sizer, Horace's COmpomise Tbe Dlemnma of the American Higb Schbool (Boston. HoughtonMifflin, 1984).

"See Michael W Apple, Tead ers and Te=s (London Routdedge & Kegan Paul, 1987), LindaM McNeil, Conradticons of Contol Scbool Stuoaae and Sdiool Knowledge (New YorkRoutledge & Kegan Paul, 1986).

GeorgeJ Posner 355

356 Making Sense of Diersly

more from the studies' recommendations for school improvement than fromthe research itself. The difficulty with studies of schools is that the moresystemic the study finds the problems and solutions to be, the less reformerscan do to ameliorate the situation.

20. Htstortcal-studles-of-schooling approach. Rather than study schoolingas it exists today, we can learn from the past. Historical studies address thequestion, What was schooling like in the past, and what caused it to be thatway? The focus in this research is not only the school, as in the previousapproach, but the cultural, political, economic, and social forces that shapesociety and its institutions. The product of historical studies is a rich accountof schooling in the past and how societal forces affected it. Differences amongstudies derive mainly from the ideological position of the researcher. Forexample, Ravitch tends to be more conservative, whereas historians like Frank-lin tend to represent a middle ground between conservative and criticalperspectives.w The inherent limitation of any historical study begins when weattempt to use the past to predict the future. However, this limitation doesnot prevent us from developing a fuller understanding of the present byunderstanding past events. Major historical studies concerned at least in partwith the curriculum include Cremin, Franklin, Katz, Kliebard, Krug, andRavitch.60

21. Large-scale-demographic or descriptive approach. Walker claims wemust establish baseline information on what happens in schools.6' The keyquestion, then, is, What content is being explicitly taught, how is it beingtaught, and how much emphasis is each topic being given? The phenomenaof interest are the events and materials of instruction in representative class-rooms that are obtained through questionnaire, observation, or interviewmethods. The product is baseline-descriptive information, which is supposedto serve a purpose in education similar to that served by data on temperatureand humidity in meteorology or census data in demographic analysis. Limi-tations of this approach include the failure to determine cause and effect or

-WDiane Ravitch, The Troubled Crusade (New York. Basic Books, 1983). Barry Franklin,Butldmg the Amencan Community. The School Curriculum and the Search for Social Control(Philadelphia: Falmer Press, 1986).

"Lawrence A Cremm, The Transformation of the School Progrerssivsm in Amercan Educarton, 1876-1957 (New York. Knopf, 1961), Barry Franklm,Building tbeAmerican CommunityTbe School Currwculum and the Searchbfor Social Control (Philadelphia PFalmer Press, 1986).Michael B. Katz, Class, Bureaucracy, and the Schools. The Illusion of Educational Cbange inAmen'ca (New York: Praeger, 1971), Herbert M. Kllebard, The Struggle for the American Curriculum, 1893-1958 (New York. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1987), Edward A Krug, The Shaping ofthe American Hgb School (New York: Harper, 1964), Diane Ravitch, Thbe Troubled Crusade (NewYork: Basic Books, 1983).

6'Decker F. Walker, rools for Studying Education Scientifically" (Palo Alto, CA. Stanford

University, School of Educauon, undated manuscript), Decker F. Walker, "What CurriculumResearch?"Journal of Curriculum Studies 5 (May 1973): 58-72


GeorgeJ. Posner 357

even effects, for that matter. Also, selective reporting may invalidate findings,or an observation itself may change what is taught. Walker presents proposalsfor the approach, Harnischfeger and Wiley present a model of the teaching-learning process, which relies heavily on this approach; Holmes, Mann, andmore recently, Monk represent examples of this approach.6 Goodlad's studyof schooling is the most ambitious and comprehensive research of this sortto date.6

THE CONCEPTS OF RESEARCH AND CURRICULUMAND THE DIVERSITY OF APPROACHES

Curriculum research encompasses many possible activities. If we assumethat each approach can be considered curriculum research for conceptuallyvalid reasons, let us consider the implicit concept of research and of cur/c-ulum.6? In a sense, the fundamental question at the heart of each approachreflects a concept of both research and curriculum. When stated generally,

*we can analyze the question in two components: its form and its object. Thequestion's form implies the approach's concept of research;'the question'sobject reveals the approach's concept of curriculum.

The range of concepts of research and of curriculum is broad. Questionsrange from strictly evaluative (e.g., WIit,. one is better?) to descriptive (e.g.,How is it experienced?), from which anG what questions to how and whyquestions. They range from investigations of processes to investigations ofconsequences to analyses of explicating meanings. They range from questionswith primarily methodological commitments to questions with substantivecommitments. Obviously, we have a mixture of research concepts.

Similarly, when we turn to concepts of curricular phenomena, we find adiversity of components of the educative process. Referents range from wholesubject-matter areas and broad categories of content to educational ideologiesto educational planning to educational aims and goals to instructional mate-rials to schools and classrooms to the contents of students' minds to theteaching-learning process itself.

"Decker F Walker, "What Curriculum Research?" Journal of Curmadum S/udies 5 (May1973). 58-"2. Annegret Harnischfeger and David E Wiley, "The Teaching-Learning Process inElementar~ Schools," Currcdulum Inquby 6 (Fall 1976). 5-44. Henry W. Holmes, "Time Distributions by Subjects and Grades in Representative Cities," in Minimum Essentals in Elemenary.Sciool Subjects -Standards and Curent Practces, 14th Yearbook of the National Society for theStudy of Education, 1919, Pan I (Bloomington, IL. Public School Publishing, 1919), Carleton HMann, How SchooLs Use Their Time. Time Allorment Practice in 444 Cties, Inchrding a Study of71ends From 1826-1926 (New York. Teachers College Press, 1928), David H Monk, "SchoolDistrict Enrollment and Inequality in the Supply of Classes," Economics of Education Revteu 6(No. 4, 1987). 365-377, David H. Monk, "Secondary School Size and Curriculum Comprehensiveness," Economics of Educaion Review 6 (No. 2, 1987). 137-150.

6BJohn I. Goodlad, A Place Called School (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1983).lI do not claim that each approach is, or that its proponents claim it to be, a curriculum

research approach The exercise that follows investigates the implications of regarding eachapproach as a curriculum-research approach.

Georgel P057W?' 357

358 Making Sense of Dfversiry

Diversity is again evident if we try to identify the kind of audience theresearch is intended for. Appropriate audiences range from educationaladministrators and program evaluators to classroom teachers to curriculumtheorists to curriculum developers to school reformers to other curriculumresearchers. Obviously, these audiences overlap, and any particular approachis appropriate for more than one audience. But for whom is the product ofthis research primarily intended?

COMPATIBILITY OF APPROACHES

After having analyzed (or even overanalyzed) the approaches, we mightask synthetic questions: To what extent are different approaches compatible?What is the potential for combining approaches to capitalize on strengths andminimize limitations and weaknesses?

First, the division of the field into coherent research approaches is some-what arbitrary. What for me is variation in one approach might be threedifferent approaches for someone more familiar with the particular area.Similarly, what for me might represent a hybrid of two or more approachesmight represent a single, coherent appro- :h for someone else.

For example,let us consider one hybrid research program that has provedfruitful and could alternatively be described as another approach, theretrospective-case-study approach. This approach borrows the methods of theclassroom-implementation approach (but focuses on schools rather than class-rooms) and historical approaches (but focuses on analyzing a single curricu-lum implementation rather than general schooling practices). This approach,like the classroom-implementation approach, seeks to understand thecurriculum-implementation process to make the process more effective. Thekey question is, What happened when curriculum X was implemented insituation Y? The curriculum-implementation process itself is the phenomenonof interest, especially those past cases marked by successes or failures. Thus,the retrospective-case-study approach is similar to the study of airplane crashes,postmortems, and films of past games. The method of work is interdisciplinary(drawing on historiographic methods) and entails identifying the critical points,determining how far implementation models apply and where they apply,and determining the extent to which these models exhaust the interestingfeatures of the phenomenon. The product of the inquiry consists in explana-tions of the dynamic relations among many factors. One limitation of theapproach stems from the difficulty in attributing cause and effect because ofa lack of controls. Another limitation derives from the somewhat artificialseparation of curriculum development from curriculum implementation 65

'See William A. Reid, iThe Changing Curriculum," in Case Studies in Curriculum ChangeGreatBryamtn ad the tnitedStates, ed. Willham A Reid and Decker F Walker (London Routledge& Kegan Paul, 1975), pp. 240-259


GeorgeJ. Posner 359

Walker presents a proposal for this approach.6 Atkin and House, Grobman,Kallos and Lundgren, McKinney and Westbury, and Popkewitz, Tabachnick,and Wehlage provide examples.67

Other hybrid approaches could be described. The categories presentedhere are meant only to provide one organization for what might otherwiseseem to be an incoherent field. The categories should be used to suggest newresearch programs, not to limit research to these categories. Possibilities forsynthesizing research approaches is the major implication of my analysis.

Approaches that embody only methodological commitments are mosteasily synthesized, resulting in research that attacks a given.problem in differ-ent ways. For example, the question of the validity of studying science mightbe attacked philosophically (approach 11) by first developing justifications forit (e.g., to promote scientific literacy). Then we might use the pr¢ lucts of thisresearch to analyze what is meant by "scientific literacy" to clarify he concept(approach 10). Another step, independent of the first two, might be - developa set of tests to measure science achievement to determine whether studentsdo, in fact, learn what is taught (approach 2) and to find out what else theylearn (approach 3). Then we might develop indicators of scientific literacybased on our conceptual analysis (i.e., based on the results of approach 10).Finally, we might follow the students for a year or more to find out whether,having learned what we intended, they turn out to be more scientificallyliterate (approach 4), and what the costs are in getting them to be that way(approach 5).

Another research program might reflect a concern less for long-termeducational payoff and more for the present reality of students. We mightbegin our research study by analyzing reports of scientific findings into theirkey concepts, telling questions, knowledge and value claims, and methods ofwork to "unpack" the discipline into its potential meanings (approach 7).Then we might analyze the students' experience in this discipline as theyinteract with various kinds of instructional materials, from reports in scientificJournals to textbook accounts of scientific findings to laboratory experimentsperformed by the students themselves to autobiographical accounts of ascientific discovery (approach 16). This analysis could be performed through

'Decker F Walker, iTools for Studying Education Sclentfically' (Palo Alto, CA StanfordUniversity, School of Education, undated manuscript).

16 Myron Atkin and Ernest R House, 'The Federal Role in Curriculum Development, 1950-80," Educational Elaluation and Policy Analysi 3 (September-October 1981): 5-36, HuldaGrobman, Development Cuwrrduum Projects Decision Poins and Processes (Itasca, IL F E.Peatuck, 1970), Daniel Kallos and Ulf P. Lundgren, 'Lessons From a Comprehensive SchoolSystem for Curriculum Theory and Research,"Journal ofCurmculum Sntudies 9 (May 1977).3-20, W Lynn McKinney and lan Westbury, "Stability and Change: The Public Schools of Gary," inCase Studies in Curriculum Change: Great Britain and the United States, ed. William Reid andDecker F. Walker (London Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1975), pp 1-53, Thomas S Popkewitz, B.Robert Tabachruck, and Gary Wehlage, The Myth of Edutonal Reform .Madison. Unrvesit ofWisconsin Press, 1982).

GeorgeJ Posner 359MD PA

360 Making Se ofDivesity

interview techniques, analysts of student journals, questionnaires, and projectlve techniques, among others. The study would attempt to illuminate how astudent experiences the teaching-learning process, how the structure ofknowledge influences that experience, to what extent there are transpersonalexperiences, and how much the presentation mode and the structure ofknowledge influence experience (either idiosyncratic or transpersonal).

Although the commitments of each curriculum-research program differsubstantively, they are not incompatible. Although a program might be com-mitted to determining inputs and subsequent outputs of the educative process,the researchers could still investigate student-processing variables such as thestudent's phenomenological response to the study of science (approach 16).In fact, including these processing variables would presumably help theresearchers explain the kinds of outcome (both short- and long-term) thatoccur as a result of studying science. I

Similarly, the commitment to understanding the student's educationalexperience should not stop us from attempting to determine how the qualityof that experience contributes to various immediate learning outcomes(approach 3) or even out-of-school consequences (approach 4). A similarsynthesis of research approaches applies to the study of curriculum devel-opment and implementation processes.

NEXT STEPS

Research efforts should complement one another whenever possible Ofcourse, we feel a competitive pressure to promote a particular approach tocurriculum research and to denigrate others. We get impatient with ourcolleagues (competitors?) because they are not doing what we are doingTheir work represents other value systems, and we compete against them asif we were in a marketplace. However, it is doubtful that there is one "bestbuy" in this enterprise.s Assuming that increased cooperative efforts amongcurriculum researchers with differing substantive or methodological com-mitments is desirable, what can we do to increase our efforts? First, we canperform further analyses of curriculum-research approaches. The 21 approachesdescribed in this article are neither exhaustive nor fully explicated. Additionalresearch approaches should be analyzed in terms of their telling questions,purposes, methods of work, phenomena of interest, products, variants, andlimitations. Further, each approach described here should be further analyzedin terms of its value claims and its proven fruitfulness for furthering orimproving curriculum research, theory, or practice Finally, the potential effectof each approach (both separately and in combination with other approaches)on our understanding of the educational process and on the improvement ofeducational practice should be estimated Through concentrated effort, coher-

BI am grateful to Madeleine Grumet for this point

360 Making Sense of DIveaity

ent and cumulative curriculum theories and associated curriculum-researchprograms could evolve with the ultimate goal of improving the quality of theeducational process.9

GEORGEJ POSNER is Associate Professor of Education, Department of Education,Cornell University, Roberts Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853:5901.

Armstrong, David G. Developing and Documening the Currmclunt Boston.Allyn & Bacon, 1989. 263 pp.

This curriculum text bridges the gap between curriculum theory and practice.It focuses on both foundational issues and specific guidelines for curriculumpractitioners The ten chapters deal with foundations of curriculum, a modelfor development, design, organizing content, scope and sequence, course andgrade level plans, instructional units, curriculum change, and evaluation.

-RichardW Grove

lI would like to thank Kenneth Strike, Leqn Pines, Arthur Berkey, Bob Gowmn, MadeleineGrumet, and especially Jason Millman for their helpful comments on a preliminary draft of thispaper Their suggestions contributed substantially to the development of that draft into a paperpresented at the Milwaukee Curriculum Theory Conference in November 1976, "Approaches toCurriculum Research " Subsequently,Joel Weiss's suggestions helped me to refine and elaboratemany points in the paper Recently, several curriculum researchers expressed interest in that oldpaper, and they persuaded me to attempt a thorough revision and updating for theJoranal ofCurriculum and Spereion For all these contributions, I am grateful.

GeorgeJ. Poser 361George] Posner 361

making sense of diversity: the current state of curriculum research

Documents