Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:45:34.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Historical Development of the Term, Experience Curriculum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 February 2017

Richard C. Phillips
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the most crucial needs in education in the twentieth century has been that of precision in meaning of its fundamental terminology. Many curriculum scholars have taken note of the problem and in their writings called for greater care in definition of terms. Briggs in his panoramic view of the secondary school in 1951 contended that “one of the greatest weaknesses in our professional literature … is the failure adequately to define terms.” Shane and Yauch, as well as Statemeyer, et al., referred to the current chaotic condition of curriculum terminology as a “verbal jungle.” Beauchamp noted that “a first and very important [curriculum] theory building activity is the definition and consistent use of technical terminology.”

Type
Research Article
Information
History of Education Quarterly , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 1965 , pp. 121 - 130
Copyright
Copyright © 1965, University of Pittsburgh Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Briggs, Thomas H., “The Secondary School Curriculum: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow,” Teachers College Record, LII (April, 1951), 427.Google Scholar

2. Shane, Harold G. and Yauch, Wilbur A., Creative School Administration in Elementary and Junior High Schools (New York, 1954), 251; Florence Stratemeyer, B., et al., Developing A Curriculum for Modern Living (New York, 1957), 86–87.Google Scholar

3. Beauchamp, George A., Curriculum Theory (Wilmette, Illinois, 1961), 103.Google Scholar

4. Foshay, Arthur W., “Changing Interpretations of the Curriculum,” The American Elementary School. Thirteenth Yearbook of the John Dewey Society (New York, 1953), 121.Google Scholar

5. American Education Research Association, “The Curriculum,” Review of Educational Research, I (January, 1931), 3.Google Scholar

6. Hollis L. Caswell and Campbell, Doak S., Curriculum Development (New York, 1935), 67.Google Scholar

7. Johnston, Edgar G., “The New Curriculum Challenges The Language Teacher,” The Education Digest, II (April, 1937), 29.Google Scholar

8. Rugg, Harold, American Life and the School Curriculum (Boston, 1936), 18–19.Google Scholar

9. Mackintosh, Helen K., “How Shall We Think of the Curriculum?” Curriculum Journal, VII (November, 1936), 5–6.Google Scholar

10. Caswell, Hollis L. and Rugg, Harold, “Developing the Design of the Curriculum,” Democracy and the Curriculum. Third Yearbook of the John Dewey Society (New York, 1939), 414.Google Scholar

11. Andrus, Ruth, “An Experience Curriculum for Young Children,” Curriculum Journal, XI (October, 1940), 259.Google Scholar

12. Mead, A. R., “General Concepts Basic to the Curriculum,” Curriculum Journal, XI (February, 1940), 70.Google Scholar

13. Goodrich, T. V. and Folsom, A. E., “Frame of Reference for Curriculum Planning,” Elementary School Journal, XL (January, 1944), 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. Norton, John K. and Alltucker Norton, Margaret, Foundations of Curriculum Building (Boston, 1936), 548.Google Scholar

15. Sternig, John, “Curriculum Concepts in a Community School—Glencoe, Illinois,” Curriculum Improvement in Public School Systems (New York, 1950), 173.Google Scholar

16. Ibid. Google Scholar

17. Bossing, Nelson L., Principles of Secondary Education (New York, 1949), 48.Google Scholar

18. Miel, Alice, Changing the Curriculum (New York, 1946), 9–10.Google Scholar

19. Foshay, op. cit., 121–122.Google Scholar

20. Heard Kilpatrick, William, Remaking the Curriculum (New York, 1936), 48–50.Google Scholar

21. Thomas Hopkins, L., Interaction: The Democratic Process (Boston, 1941), 21.Google Scholar

22. Foshay, op. cit., 123.Google Scholar

23. Stratemeyer, Florence B., et al., Developing a Curriculum for Modern Living (New York, 1957), 149.Google Scholar

24. Foshay, op. cit., 123–124.Google Scholar

25. Bobbitt, Franklin, “The Orientation of the Curriculum-Maker,” The Foundation of Curriculum-Making, Twenty-sixth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II (Bloomington, Illinois, 1926), 43.Google Scholar

26. Ibid., 45–46.Google Scholar

27. Ibid., 51.Google Scholar

28. Ibid. Google Scholar

29. Bobitt, Franklin, The Curriculum of Modern Education (New York, 1941), 296–297.Google Scholar

30. Ibid., 298.Google Scholar

31. Ibid., 6–9.Google Scholar

32. Harris, Pickens E., “Philosophy and Problems of Scope and Sequence,” Curriculum Journal, IX (March, 1938), 111.Google Scholar

33. Harris, Pickens E., Curriculum and Cultural Change (New York, 1937), 443.Google Scholar

34. Thomas Hopkins, L., Interaction: The Democratic Process, op. cit., 39–40.Google Scholar

35. Ibid., 12–13.Google Scholar

36. Ibid., 39–40.Google Scholar

37. Thomas Hopkins, L., “Making the Curriculum Functional,” Teachers College Record, XLIII (November, 1941), 130.Google Scholar

38. Thomas Hopkins, L., “Who Makes the Curriculum?” Teachers College Record, LII (February, 1951), 277.Google Scholar

39. Thomas Hopkins, L., Interaction: The Democratic Process, op. cit., 41.Google Scholar

40. Thomas Hopkins, L., The Emerging Self in School and Home (New York, 1954), 88.Google Scholar

41. Ibid., 90.Google Scholar

42. Ibid., 145–46.Google Scholar

43. Shane, Harold G. and McSwain, E. T., Evaluation and the Elementary Curriculum (New York, 1951), 128.Google Scholar

44. Ibid. Google Scholar

45. Ibid., 130.Google Scholar