A REPORT ON

PHILOSOPICAL &
THEOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS
IN CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT

Norman V. Alfonso
 INTRODUCTION:
What you learn with just the mind is quickly
forgotten;
what you learn when you are also emotionally
involved remains imprinted in the nervous
system;
what you put into your heart will be treasured till
a lifetime.
With this the task of education is to change lives
not merely a transfer of one’s knowledge.
PHILOSOPHIC- THEOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS IN
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
The aspirations and ideals of people in any
society serve as determinants of the educational
system.
Education serves as the most essential
instruments in nation building.
It distills the goals, direction and future of society.
Herein lies the importance of showing the
philosophic and theological foundation in
curriculum development.
It provides educators, with a frame work for
organizing the totality of its curriculum.
It helps them answer what are the school’s
purpose, what subjects are of value, how
students learn, and what methods and materials
to use.
Philosophy of education influences and to a
large extent determines or gives meaning to our
educational decisions, choices, and alternatives.
It is an all-encompassing aspect of the
educational process- as necessary for forming
fundamental dispositions, intellectual and
emotional, toward nature and fellow man.
In the study of philosophy man is its focal
point.
Philosophy studies man not only in himself
but also in his relations with reality and in
his relations with God.
In the study of man in himself, philosophy
is concerned with the following:
– man’s body and mind
– passions and emotions
– Intellect
– will and freedom
– Immortality
– values and behavior patterns
– culture, history, and science.
With regard to man’s relation to reality,
philosophy is concerned with what man
can know.
With regard to man’s relation with God,
philosophy is concerned with God’s
existence, plan and providence.
 Two Main Approaches in
Curriculum Development

1.Essentialist Approach
2.Progressivist Approach
 Essentialist Approach
Also known as the Traditional Approach
It is subject centered.
This considers the curriculum as
something to be learned in dualistic point
of view.
It takes the mind and the matter as
between the child and curriculum,
particular and general, individual and
society.
 Essentialist Approach
However, when there is conflict between
the two, the curriculum is favored over the
learner because the learner is considered
as ordinary self-centered and impulsive.
Thus the learner is fitted into the
curriculum.
It is also known as a subject matter
curriculum.
 Progressivist Approach
Also known as the Modern Approach
The learner is viewed as the starting point
and the curriculum as terminal aspect of
one reality in the educative process of a
living being.
Although dualistic in approach when there
is conflict, the child’s experience is favored
over the curriculum.
 Traditional Dimension
of the Curriculum
(Essentialist School)
Curriculum is a group of
subjects arranged in a
certain sequence peculiar
to the subject field itself for
the purpose of instruction.
Curriculum is a body of
subjects or subject matter
prepared by the teachers
for the students to learn.
(course of study or the
syllabus)
Modern Dimension of
the Curriculum
(Progressive School)
Curriculum consists of all
experiences for learning
which are planned and
organized by the school.
Curriculum encompasses
all learning opportunities
provided by the school.
The total learning
experiences of an
individual.
 Traditional Dimension
of the Curriculum
(Essentialist School)
Robert M. Hutchins
Basic Education: “Permanent studies” that
gives emphasis on the rules of grammar,
reading, rhetoric and logic and mathematics
(should emphasize the 3Rs)
College Education: Grounded on liberal
education
Arthur Bestor
The mission of the school should be
intellectual training
Curriculum should focus on the
fundamental intellectual disciplines of
grammar, literature, and writing and should
also include mathematics, science, history,
and foreign language.
Modern Dimension of
the Curriculum
(Progressive School)
Caswell and Campbell
All experiences children have under the
guidance of the teachers.
Smith, Stanley, and Shores
A sequence of potential experiences set up
in the schools for the purpose of disciplining
children and youth in group ways of thinking
and acting.
Marsh and Willis
The experiences in the classroom which
are planned and enacted by the teachers and
also learned by the students.
 Traditional Dimension Modern Dimension of
of the Curriculum the Curriculum
(Essentialist School) (Progressive School)

Joseph Schwab
Discipline is the sole source of the
curriculum
Curriculum is divided into chunks of
knowledge we call subject areas.
Phenix
Curriculum consists entirely of knowledge
which comes from various disciplines.
 Traditional Dimension Modern Dimension of
of the Curriculum the Curriculum
(Essentialist School) (Progressive School)

Curriculum is rigid. Curriculum is flexible and based on areas of

All learners are the same, the learner must
fit into the existing social order
Major motivation is discipline
Freedom is an outcome and not a means of
education
Authoritative approach
Book-centered
Methods are memory work, mastery of facts
and skills, and development of abstract
intelligence.
No relationship to society and community
and life activities.
interests.
Each learner is unique and has different
needs from other learners.
Motivation is individual achievement.
Facilitative Approach
Methods emphasize individual spontaneity,
problem solving, and development of
creative responsibility.
Uses life-experience approach.
Education is a reconstructor of society.
Its measurement of outcome and
achievements are now devices taking into
consideration subject matter and personality
tests.
 Traditional Dimension Modern Dimension of
of the Curriculum the Curriculum
(Essentialist School) (Progressive School)

Measurement outcomes and achievements Curriculum is flexible and based on areas of

and standard tests are based on subject –
matter mastery.
Learning is a realization, not a creation.
Education is a creature, not creator of
society.
Curriculum is to train the learner to adapt to
society.
interests.
Each learner is unique and has different
needs from other learners.
Motivation is individual achievement.
Facilitative Approach
Methods emphasize individual spontaneity,
problem solving, and development of
creative responsibility.
Uses life-experience approach.
Education is a reconstructor of society.
Its measurement of outcome and
achievements are now devices taking into
consideration subject matter and personality
tests.
Overview of Educational
Philosophies:
A. Perennialism
Philosopical base:
– Realism
Aim of Education:
– To educate the rational person;
– To cultivate the intellect.
Role of Education:
– Teachers help students think with reason.
– Based on the Socratic methods of oral exposition or
recitation.
– Explicit or deliberate teaching of traditional values.
A. Perennialism
Focus in the Curriculum:
– Classical subjects, literary analysis.
– Curriculum is constant.
Curriculum Trends:
– Use of great books and return to liberal arts.
B. Essentialism
Philosopical base:
– Idealism
– Realism
Aim of Education:
– To promote the intellectual growth of the
individual and educate a competent person.
Role of Education:
– The teacher is the sole authority in his or her subject
area or field of specialization.
– Explicit teaching of traditional values.
B. Essentialism
Focus in the Curriculum:
– Essential skill of the 3Rs and essential
subjects of English, Science, History, math,
and Foreign Language.
Curriculum Trends:
– Excellence in education, back to basics, and
cultural literacy.
C. Progressivism
Philosopical base:
– Pragmatism (a philosophical system stressing
practical consequences as constituting the essential
criterion in determining truth or value.)
Aim of Education:
– To promote democratic and social living.
Role of Education:
– Knowledge leads to growth and development of
lifelong learners who actively learn by doing.
– Teacher is a guide for problem solving and scientific
inquiry.
C. Progressivism
Focus in the Curriculum:
– Subjects are interdisciplinary, integrative, and
interactive.
– Curriculum is focused on student’s interest,
human problems, and affairs.
Curriculum Trends:
– School reforms, relevant and contextualized
curriculum, humanistic education alternative
and free schooling
D. Reconstructionism
Philosopical base:
– Pragmatism
Aim of Education:
– To improve and reconstruct society.
– Education for a change and social reform.
Role of Education:
– Teachers act as agents of change and reform in
various educational projects including research.
– Helps students become aware of problems
confronting humankind.
C. Progressivism
Focus in the Curriculum:
– Focus on present and future trends and
issues of national and international interests.
Curriculum Trends:
– Equality of educational opportunities in
education, access to global international
education.
– Futurism
Theological Foundations of
Curriculum
 GOD-
CENTEREDNESS

PHILOSOPHICAL
DIMENSIONS

CHRIST- COMMUNITY-
CENTEREDNESS CENTEREDNESS
Every curriculum contains the meaning of life
resulting from the theological dimension.
Every curricula developed are for man’s
perfection and the attainment of his ultimate end.
It can be said that education of the total man
implies a concern with his whole person.
This concern should become both a deepening
and broadening of his entire personality.
That must extend over his whole life.
It must be life-long, permanent, continuing and
encompassing his life’s experiences.
 In education and curriculum development man
is the main subject.
Therefore we cannot be oblivious of the
theological considerations during the process
of developing a curriculum.
There are three theological foundations of
curriculum development according to Tomas
Quintin D. Andres:
1. God-centeredness
2. Christ-centeredness
3. Community-centeredness
1. God- centeredness.
In man, body and soul are substantially
united. Body and soul interact and are
interdependent.
The soul which is a spirit is immortal and
continues to live. It is destined for an eternal
life.
A curriculum developed for the perfection of
the whole man lacks a strong foundation if it
puts aside this theological consideration.
1. God- centeredness.
As it is written ,“The fear of the Lord is the
beginning of knowledge, but fools despise
wisdom and instruction.”Proverbs 1:7
Knowledge about God should be at the center
of every curriculum if we want to be
successful in this endeavor.
2. Christ-centeredness
In understanding God’s plan and
providence it can be understood only in
context of time and space.
For God live in time and as Spirit God is
present everywhere.
For this reason, He revealed Himself in the
person of Christ, His model incarnated in a
tangible Personality.
2. Christ-centeredness
As it was written in the gospel according to
Saint John; “In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things were made through Him, and
without Him nothing was made that was
made.
2. Christ-centeredness
In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
And the word became flesh and dwelt among us,
and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only
begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth”.
Christ Himself said: “I am the Way, the Truth,
and the Life.”
This Bible verses proves time and time and
again that curriculum should be geared towards
Christ centeredness.
3. Community-centeredness
The community or the people of God is the
extension of God and Christ through space and
time.
God continues to be present in the community,
which is the connecting link between Him and
man.
The experience of the community leads naturally
to service. God gives His people different gifts
not only for themselves but for others.
3. Community-centeredness
Each must serve the other for the good of all.
The curriculum must have for its aim the building
and fellowship of community, and service to
others.
As Vatican II’s Declaration of Christian
Education; puts it “a true education aims at the
formation of the human person to the good of
those societies of which as a man, he is a
member and in whose responsibilities as an
adult, he will share.
 CONCLUSION
If one’s or even our very own philosophy and
theological persuasion gives meaning to our
decisions and actions.
It becomes evident that many aspects of a
curriculum or even the educational processes in
school, are developed from a philosophy and
theological concept.
However, according to Allan C. Ornstein; “very
few schools adopt a single philosophy; in
practice, most schools combine various
philosophies.
 CONCLUSION
No single philosophy old or new, should serve
as the exclusive guide for making decisions
about school curriculum.
All philosophical groups want the same things of
education- that is to improve the educational
process, to enhance the achievement of the
learner, to produce better and more productive
citizens and to improve society.
Because of their different views of reality,
values, and knowledge, they find it difficult to
agree on how to achieve these ends.”
 CONCLUSION
Allan C. Ornstein posted his own philosophical stand of:
– What needs to done, is to search for the middle ground a highly
elusive and abstract concept where there is no extreme
emphasis on subject matter or student, cognitive development or
sociopsychological development, excellence or equality.
– What we need is a prudent school philosophy, one that is
politically and economically feasible, that serves the needs of
students and society.
I think this view of Allan C. Ornstein leads to a
consistency of what a philosophical and theological
dimensions in curriculum development is all about for the
fact that the kind of society which evolves is in part
reflected in the education system, which is on the other
hand is influenced by the philosophy that is eventually
defined and developed.