Various attempt has been made by various authors to
define the term curriculum to any
universally acceptable philosophical
definitions but because of
various orientations that influenced
the divergence opinions among the
scholars, they perceive it in different
angle. The word curriculum is derived from a Latin world ‘currus’ meaning , race course, a race,
a race ground, a race tack or a career. It then simply means a runway or a
course which one go
through it to reach a goal in order to
achieve a reward in line with
education, it stands for a course(s)
which students pursue and
complete for an aim or purpose which
has to do with academic award like,
certificate, passes, high grade etc.
curriculum stands for all the programmes
the school established for students to
cover (study) throughout their training.
In the definition of curriculum process, Identified
three categories in which the
authors trys to define the concept
The
first categories are :
Macdonald
(1965):3
Goodlod
(1963:25)
Soylor
and Alexander (1965:5)
Krug
(1956:4)
Dell
(1964:15)
These groups of authors believed that curriculum is the activities of the
leaner provided by the school.
Here the authors did not consider whether all the
activiti4es of the learners (students)
are still what the school provided for the learners,
the school must make sure that learners
are still do what are expected of them.
The second
groups of authors is by Cookeyham (1980) who believed that
curriculum is what people do or learn at school from the day they are admitted until the day
the leave school. In this definition the author is unable to separate positive
learning designed to achieve positive learning and negative learning because
curriculum is designed to achieve
positive learning. In the school system you found different people with different character ie to say that most of the social vices found
in our institutions are not part of the
curriculum
The third groups which is the last groups are
Wheeler
(1967:2)
Tanner
and tanner (1975:45)
Tyler
(1949)
Campbell
(1935:66)
These groups
considered what curriculum is all about, they considered the objective and the organization of
learning in curriculum . Curriculum
implementation must be guided by the schools or
teachers in order to achieve its
aim objective and goals.
There are other
group who did not belonged to any of the groups. They believed in
neither of the first group nor the second group in their own view, curriculum
is all about hat a child learn and know that the learner should give back to
the teacher what the teacher gave to the child.
They believed that award of certificate is the ultimate, that curriculum
comprises well defined ground to be covered by a given group of learners.
Here we will consider the based element of curriculum
definition. For any acceptable definition, it must possess these four basic
elements according to MKPA (2003).
1. Curriculum objective
2. Section of content and learning experience
3. Organization of learning experiences
4. Evolution
Emenwa 1981,
Iroaganachi (1990) also identify
the three complementary components.
v Programme of studies:
Which is the subjects mapped out
for learners to cover in schools in order to develop their potentialities
v Programme of activities: Refers to those activities provided to the learner as part of the proper of
studies . It is an opportunity given to
a learner to practice what he/she
has leant in teaching learning
situation
v programme of audience : This refers to those instructions, directives and guidance
provided to learn by the school that helps students to
develop their aspirations, skill, attitudes
and qualities
Conclusion
The
individual differences in understanding things has made the definition of
curriculum complex. Through in
comprehending the various definitions one needs critical thinking to notice the
weaknesses incurred on the process of trying to defined the concept curriculum.
As mentioned above, some authors understand what curriculum is all about while
some only understand the shadow of the concept, but the fact relies, the basic
component must always be considered as identified by Aguokoghuo (2000) and Emeruma 1981