Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2018.9.6.009

Reconstruction of Discourse on Curriculum Reconstruction  

Kim, Daeyoung (Department of Education, Jeju National University)
Woo, Okhee (Daejeong High School)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korea Convergence Society / v.9, no.6, 2018 , pp. 9-16 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to reveal the limitation of previous studies on curriculum re-construction and to suggest an alternative for curriculum re-construction. Through the literature review, this paper finds that previous studies quiet over the direction about selecting as well as organizing contents. In order to overcome the weaknesses of previous studies, this paper embraces the interest of learner for establishing the direction of curriculum reconstruction. To be more specific, this study shows that how can the ideas of growth, habit, and interest of John Dewey connect to contents-selecting and organizing in the process of instruction. As a result, this paper helps curriculum discourses to make progress for various direction and helps teachers to reconstruct the contents based on interests of their students.
Keywords
Curriculum re-construction; learner; habit; interest;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 L. Cuban. (1984). How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classroom, 1890-1980, New York: Longman.
2 J, Dewey. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3 D. Tyack, & L. Cuban.(1995). Tinkering toward utopia. MA: Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
4 M. Apple. (1986). Teachers and texts: A political economy of class and gender relations in education, New York: Routledge.
5 W. Pinar. (1999). Response: Gracious submission. Educational Researcher, 28(1), 28, 14-15.   DOI
6 B. M. Jung. (1954). Curriculum. Seoul: pungkukhakwon.
7 W. H. Schubert. (1986). Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. New York: Macmillan.
8 D. Y. Kim, & O. H. Woo. (2016). Critiques of postmodernism's epistemology in curriculum discourses, The Korea Educational Review. 22(4), 23-41.
9 http://www.nextdaily.co.kr/news/article.html?id=20171023800001 (2017,9.25)
10 H. Kliebard. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum: 1893-1958. New York: Routledge.
11 K. H. Seo. (2009). Teacher' Experience of reconstructing national curriculum, The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(3), 159-189.   DOI
12 H. K. Kim.(2015). A semantic analysis of the curriculum jaegusung, Journal of Curriculum Integration, 29(2), 54-82.
13 M. S. Seo.(2011). Critigue on the conceptual ambiguity of curriculum jaegusung, The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 29(3), 75-91.   DOI
14 N. J. Paik. (2013). Teachers' interpretations of curriculum documents and curriculum potential, The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3), 201-225.   DOI
15 S. E. Lee. (2015). Curriculum reconstruction as Hermeneutic circle, The Journal of Elementary Education, 28(4), 241-265.
16 H. C. Choi. (2015). The conceptual analysis of consilience. Material of The Korean Society of Culture and Convergence, 44-55.
17 G. H. Park. (2012). The idea of general education. The Studies of Humanities, 43, 479-481.
18 D. Y. Kim. (2016). The merits and demerits of convergence education. Higher Education, 193, 64-69.
19 J. Dewey. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan company.
20 M. F. D. Young.(2006). Education, knowledge and the role of the state, in A. Moore(ed.). Schooling, society and curriculum. London: Routledge.
21 B. Bernstein. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research and critique. London: Taylor and Francis.
22 J. Dewey. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan company.
23 E. Eisner. (1985). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. New York: Macmillan.
24 J. Bruner. (1966). Towards a theory of instruction. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
25 H. Kliebard. (1970). The Tyler rationale, The School Review, 78(2), 259-272.   DOI