PRIMARY SCHOOL CURRICULUM IN 21ST CENTURY

A WAR OF IDEOLOGIES

Introduction
As we begin the new millennium many changes in society challenge educational structure
and methods to change with them. Transformation of our educational system cannot be considered
an easy take, because education in the form of the public school system is by nature a conserving
institution in that it is designed to help replicate society and transmit societal norms.
Education is a vital investment for human and economic development and it is influenced by
the environment within which it exists. Changes in technology, labor market patterns and general
global enviornement all require policy responses. Traditions, culture and faith all reflect upon the
education system and at the same time are also affected by them. The element of continuity and
change remains perpetual and it is up to the society to determine its pace and direction.
The education system is a social institution which should be expected to change along with
other institutions (Kelly, 1999).The focus of this paper is to highlight the background of the current
English curriculum of Pakistan at primary level, problems in its implementation and suggestions to
implement it effectively.

Background of the current English curriculum

In current curriculum, English has been given the priority as a subject. It has been
mentioned that it should reached the masses, so that there is no discrimination amongst the rich and
poor in Pakistan in terms of opportunities for personal, professional and economic development.
Keeping in mind that perspective, teaching of English has been introduced as a language
from grade one and would be used as a medium of instruction across the curriculum for various
subjects. This as well as, the wide spread exposure to English language through the media, endorses
the present curriculum revision exercise, along with development of new text books and assessment
strategies to improve the quality of teaching and learning of English, nationwide.
The focus of the new curriculum is the holistic development of the child.

1
 It is mentioned in the curriculum that the content and the process of learning are structured
on such a way so as to realize the standards for key competencies through spiral progression with a
major focus on development of language skills rather than on content.
Five competencies have been defined in the national curriculum of English which are
reading and thinking skills, writing skills, oral skills, formal and lexical aspects of language and
appropriate ethical and social development. Standards are there to define the competencies and
then benchmarks are the further elaboration of the standards.
For each and every standard student leaning outcomes are also defined briefly. The
curriculum is designed, particularly, to promote the academic and employment language needs for
learners who wish to pursue their higher studies, as well as, for those who might terminate
education after grade xii (NCEL1).

Critique on current English curriculum

Problem that I see in that curriculum is the gap between two stakeholders, there is a big
difference between official and operational curriculum. And this is the dilemma of our education
system that though we have done a very good effort to write down a very good document which can
be the best curriculum if implemented in its true sense. But due to the various reasons its
implementation in true sense is a big problem.
The focus of the curriculum is only to provide access to the underprivileged class of the
society to the high status knowledge. But problem is that providing the equal success will not solve
the problems which we are facing right now. Because equal access does not mean treating all
children in the same way, Biggs and Edwards (1994) and Bhatti (1999), among others, attest to the
unintentional harmful effects of this ‘equal’ means same modes of inclusion. In language learning
terms ‘immersion’ (Cummins, 1996 p. 100-3) can soon become ‘submersion’ and possibility even
drowning.
Current curriculum is based only on that statement that quality education will be provided to
the masses; by saying that curriculum planners are confessing that there is no quality education at
all. And according to them quality education means providing high status knowledge, for Apple
cited in smith & lovat (1995), “The kind of knowledge declared as ‘high status’ is basically,
technical knowledge”. But we see in our context there is complete drought of technical knowledge

1
National curriculum for English Language Grade i-xii 2006

2
especially in our poor primary schools. At primary level in Government schools there is a big
vacuum of modern teaching methods, because in our context almost all teachers are products of the
educational system they now work in, and their values and aspirations have been shaped by the
classes they now teach in. Teacher needs to avoid reproducing the education that they received
when they were pupils in primary schools. In fact curriculum work is essentially practical activity,
which is highly creative and artistic. These elements are missing in our poor education context.
Current English curriculum is based on utilitarianism ideology, in which curriculum is to
meet society’s economic, technological and labor needs, to enable the child to adapt to changes in
these, and to preserve the existing social order.
I think egalitarian ideology is more suitable than utilitarianism ideology, because it enables
the child both to fulfill individual potential and to contribute to societal progress. It can be defined
in terms of plurality, democracy and social justice, as well as economy (Alexander, 1988)
This is our dilemma that superordinate2 group at the central level failed to address the
specific issues and concerns of the curriculum users (Memon, 1997). Parson (1987) argues that the
solution of failure lies with the teacher initiated development. Similarly Pennell and Alexander
(1990) maintain that change must be deeply rooted in the needs of teachers and pupils. Otherwise
there will be a chaos and innovation will be considered as a major inhibitor of education change.
In fact our society is not a society of equals; it is hierarchically structured. Its education
system is selective, designed to allocate individuals to their proper status within that hierarchy. And
the focus of that education system is on the needs of the state rather than on those of the individual,
where freedom is to be curtailed in quite specific way in the interests of social control and political
harmony.
That is why needs and feelings of individuals should be given priority in the
curriculum.Blenkin et.al. Cited in Memon (1997) urge that those who seek to change the school
curriculum must have working, deep insight, and the understanding of previous experiences and
present school culture, otherwise the curriculum might not be responsive to the needs of the users.

2
It is the group within society which holds power, the dominant ideology, which controls the distribution of knowledge
within a society and determines what kinds of knowledge will be made available. And the most effective mechanism for
affecting this is the education system. (Bernstein, 1971:47)

3
21st century and our curriculum
Behind the social and economic benefits lies a moral purpose; education should reaffirm our
commitment to the virtues of truth, justice, honesty, trust and senses of duty (QCA3, 1999:11). That
should be the aim of education. At primary level pupils come to school with the instinctive desire to
learn and explore all the big questions of life, all centered on the questions of who we are and why.
Their early curiosity is not just about the physical world but about people. The need for
categorization is the need for understanding. The curriculum, for them, would be centered on the
fundamental open questions as a starting point for unlimited and demanding explorations in which
facts would accumulate in the service of understanding rather than getting the better for it.
I believe 21st century is demanding a balanced curriculum in which education should have
both a societal purpose and purpose for the individual students. A partnership approach is required;
a ‘partnership’ approach which seeks to bind teacher and learner to a common enterprise combining
external expectations and individual needs (silcok & brundrett, 2001:35).
Curriculum which has the tendency to absorb the knowledge explosion of new millennium
is the need of our society. We can contrast two major conceptions of learning in curriculum each
with its own metaphor (Saloman and Perkins, 1998). One conception sees leaning, as an individual
activity in which the acquisition of knowledge and cognitive skills are transferable commodities
(e.g. Anderson, 2000) the other views learning as a sociocultural activity, a collective participation
in the construction of knowledge. Both these traditions should be taken in consideration in making
the curriculum.
English as a subject may have a structure and internal coherence in its own right; it needs to
be distilled into the form of a curriculum in order for it to be effectively taught in any systematic
way (Burton & Brundrett, 2005).
English is the language of 21st century in order to equip our students with this modern
language we should provide them an environment where they can learn effectively. In the case of
reading, children need an experienced and sympathetic adult to help them, along with a supportive
text, a climate in which they may feel free to make mistakes without fear of being punished and a
noncompetitive culture which emphasize teaching and learning rather than testing and assessment.

3
QCA (qualifications and curriculum authority) (1996) the national curriculum handbook for primary teachers in
England. London: QCA

4
 In 21st century educational thinking requires children to be more objective readers and in
this media dominated world it is no bad thing to ensure that they are aware of how language shapes
and influence us. Thus children must understand not only themes messages and other relatively
explicit ‘meaning’ which standard book talk questions elicit but also something about how text,
both as a linguistic and a graphic sign system, construct those meanings.
For learning language it is very important that we should provide the contextual language
symbols to the child, because when decontextualized tasks are imposed this is a rejection of the
knowledge and skill children already have (Hall, 1987).
Last but not the least ‘technology’, 21st century is the century of technological revolution
and the language of the technology is the English, as I mentioned earlier that high status knowledge
in this century is the “technology” and “English”. So providing the opportunity to experience and
learn this high status knowledge at early age is very crucial in this century. And now a days’ use of
computers at home is a common practice with children from rich and low-income families because
the computers can easily locally assembled or can be bought on easy installments (Rizvi, 1999).

Conclusion
In 21st century a curriculum which fulfills the demands of not only individuals, but also pays
proper attention towards the societal demands is the best model to follow. Using innovative
teaching methods during teaching is now very important for the pedagogues of 21st century. Learner
of 21st century is very demanding due to the high expectations from him in this highly competitive
world. To fulfill his demands the use of technology is inevitable now.

5
REFERENCES

Alexander, R. (1988). ‘Garden or Jungle’ teacher development and informed primary education in
A.Blyth (Ed). Informed primary education today: essay and studies. London: Falmer press.
Anderson, J.R. (2000).cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: worth
Bernstein, B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge, in young,
M.F.D (ed.) (1971). knowledge and control and identity: theory, research, critique
London: Taylor and Francis.
Bhatti, G. (1999). Asian children at home and at school: An Ethnographic study. London:
Rutledge
Biggs, A.P. & Edwards, V. (1994). I treat them all the same: Teacher-pupil talk in multi-ethnic
classrooms, in D.Graddol, J.Maybin and literacy in school context. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Burton, N. & Brundrett, M. (2005). Leading the curriculum in the primary school London: Paul
champan publishing ltd
Cummins, J. (1996). negotiating identities: education for empowerment in a diverse society.
Ontario CA: California Association for bilingual Education
Hall, N. (1987). The Emergence of literacy London: Hodder & Stoughton
Kelly, A.V. (1999). The curriculum theory and practice London: Paul champan publishing ltd
Memon, M. (1997). Curriculum change in paksiatn: an alternative model of change. Curriculum
and teaching, 12(1), James Nicholas publisher
Parson, L. M. (1987). Perceived spatial organization of cutaneous patterns on surfaces of the human
body in various positions. Journal of experimental psychology human perception and
performance, 13(3), 488-504. Retrieved Jan. 15, 2011, from
http://http://wexler.free.fr/library/files/parsons%20...
Rizvi, M. (2004). The relationship between school reform and teacher professionalism government
primary schools in Karachi, Pakistan in. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queensland
University of technology Brisbane, Australia.
Salomon, G. & Perkins, D.N. (1998). individual and social aspects of learning. In P.D Pearson
and A. Iran- Nejad (eds), review of research in education, vol.23 (Washington DC:
American educational research association) 1-24

6
Silcock, P. and Brundrett, M. (2001). ‘the management consequences of different models of
teaching and learning’, in D.Middlewood and N.Burton (Eds) managing the curriculum.
London: Paul champan publishing
Smith, D.L. & Lovat, T.J. (1995).curriculum action on reflection revised Australia: social
science press