Toward a renaissance in curriculum theory and development in the USA

The curriculum field in the USA has existed in a chronic state of disarray, even crisis, for many years. This study considers whether the field's 'reconceptualization' has alleviated the signs of crisis articulated some 30 years ago by Joseph Schwab. It concludes by suggesting that four issues should be examined in order to establish a vital sense of community among curriculum scholars and to create favourable conditions for a renaissance in the US scholarly field of curriculum theory and development.     

A historical reconsideration of the work of the National Society for the Study of Education’s Committee on Curriculum-Making

Historical representations of the National Society for the Study of Education’s Committee on Curriculum-Making typically recount that the purpose of the committee was to assemble representatives from competing curriculum camps to achieve consensus on curriculum principles, depict the committee’s work as important, cast doubt on the consensus the committee achieved, overlook the principles proposed by the committee and ignore its call for deliberation. A historical reconstruction of the committee’s work in the USA during the 1920s reveals that the purpose of the committee changed from reviewing research to prescribing techniques and finally to proposing general curriculum principles, with the aim of fostering deliberation among curriculum workers. A review of the US curriculum literature reveals that, after some initial attention, the Twenty-Sixth Yearbook fell into relative obscurity, but was rediscovered in the 1960s. A new analysis of the committee members’ supplementary statements argues that the committee indeed achieved consensus on foundational curriculum principles. As a historical document, the yearbook represents the coalescence of curriculum development as a professional field in the USA during in the 1920s. As a repository of professional knowledge, the General Statement remains pertinent to curriculum reform in the twenty-first century.     

Condescension and critical sympathy: Historians of education on progressive education in the United States and England

Although progressive education was an international phenomenon, historical interpretations of it may be affected on the national level by academic and institutional contingencies. An analysis of how US and English historians of education interpret progressive education reforms in their respective countries identified a strain of condescension toward progressive education in history of education scholarship in the US, which often resulted in misrepresentations of the historical record. English historians of education tend to regard progressive education with critical sympathy. These findings are possibly explained by different institutional and academic circumstances of historians of education in England and the US.