Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Curricula at the boundaries

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The growing demands on higher education have placed an unprecedented external pull on universities. Bernstein (Pedagogy, symbolic control and idenity: theory, research, critique, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc., Lanham, 2000) refers to this “outward” pull of the late twentieth century as the “regionalization of knowledge”. One of the consequences of this “facing outward” is contestation over curriculum and what should be privileged. Should it privilege knowing, doing or being? Should it foreground formative training in the basic sciences or applied problem-solving? Is its priority educating the mind or preparing for a vocation? These questions can set up a series of “false choices” about the purpose of higher education, what it means to be educated and what our priorities should be in curriculum reform. The aim of this paper is to move the discourse beyond these polarities by making visible the “stakes” in the curriculum reform debate illustrated in the Muller thinkpiece (High Educ 70(3):409–416, 2015). The paper offers a conceptual framework for understanding current curriculum contestation and applies the framework in an illustrative manner to a particular higher education curriculum reform initiative in South Africa. The framework shows how “what does it mean to be educated?” will vary depending on the different types and hence purposes of curriculum.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bailey-McEwan, M. (2009). Difficulties of mechanical engineering students in developing integrated knowledge for the cross-discipline of mechatronics: A conceptual investigation (master of education). Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. (2006). Vocational knowledge and vocational pedagogy. In M. Young & J. Gamble (Eds.), Knowledge, curriculum and qualifications for South African further education (pp. 143–157). Pretoria: Human Resources Research Council Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. London: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, codes and control: Towards a theory of educational transmission (Vol. 3). London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and idenity: Theory, research, critique. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. (1998). The entrepreneurial university: Demand and response, tertiary education and management. Tertiary Education and Management, 4(1), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Higher Education (CHE). (2013). A proposal for undergraduate curriculum reform in South Africa: The case for a flexible curriculum structure. Johannesburg: Council of Higher Education.

  • Garraway, J. (2013). Introduction: Futures studies and scenarios of degrees of technology. Paradigms: Special Issue, 18, 3–6.

  • Gibbons, M. (2000). Universities and the new production of knowledge: Some policy implications for government. In A. Kraak (Ed.), Changing Modes: New knowledge production and its implications for higher education in South Africa (pp. 38–55). Pretoria: Human Sciences Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, L. (2015). An analysis of how knowledge is differentiated in a vocationally-based curriculum for a new profession. Unpublished  Thesis in fulfillment of Masters of Philosophy, University of Cape Town, South Africa.

  • Hordern, J. (2014). How is vocational knowledge recontextualized? Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 66(1), 22–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layton, D. (1993). Technology’s challenge to science education. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maqutu, T., & Kleyn-Magolie, B. (2013). Degrees and fictive scripts in science. Paradigms: Special Issue, 18, 21–25.

  • Maton, K. (2005). A question of autonomy: Bourdieu’s field approach and higher education policy. Journal of Education Policy, 20(6), 687–704. doi:10.1080/02680930500238861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maton, K. (2014a). Building powerful knowledge: The significance of semantic waves. In E. Rata & B. Barrett (Eds.), The future of knowledge and the curriculum. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maton, K. (2014b). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millar, B., & Hovgaard, E. (2013). Creating a curriculum for workplace under pressure. Paradigms: Special Issue, 18, 15–20.

  • Muller, J. (2009). Forms of knowledge and curriculum coherence. Journal of Education and Work, 22(3), 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller, J. (2015). Knowledge, skills and the future of science and technology in higher education. Higher Education, 70(3), 409–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oosthuizen, M. (2014). Challenges relating to the establishment of comprehensive universities in the South African higher education sector. In T. Gibbon (Ed.), Driving change: The story of the South Africa Norway Tertiary Education Development Programme. African Minds: Somerset West, South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A., & Garraway, J. (Eds.). (2013). University, curriculum and society through a scenario analysis lens (Vol. 18). Cape Peninsula: University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shay, S. (2013). Conceptualizing curriculum differentiation in higher education: A sociology of knowledge point of view. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(4), 563–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shay, S. (2014). Curriculum in higher education: Beyond false choices. In R. Barnett & P. Gibbs (Eds.), Thinking about higher education (pp. 139–156). London: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shay, S., & Steyn (2015) Enabling knowledge progression in vocational curricula: Design as a case study. In K. Maton, S. Hood, & S. Shay (Eds.), Knowledge-building: Educational Studies in Legitimation Code Theory. London: Routledge.

  • Shay, S., Oosthuizen, M., Paxton, P., & van der Merwe, R. (2011). Towards a principled basis for curriculum differentiation: Lessons from a comprehensive university. In E. Bitzer & M. Botha (Eds.), Curriculum inquiry in South African higher education (pp. 101–120). Stellenbosch: SunMEDIA.

    Google Scholar 

  • SUES. The study of undergraduate education at Stanford University (2012). Stanford University.

  • van Vught, F. (2013). Institutional profiles: Some strategic tools. Tuning Journal for Higher Education, 1(1), 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. (2015). Imagining STEM higher education futures: Advancing human well-being. Higher Education, 70(3), 417–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winberg, C., Engel-Hills, P., & Rip, A. (2013). Creating futures for the Cape Peninsula University of Technology Paradigms: Special Issue, 18, 7–14.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Suellen Shay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shay, S. Curricula at the boundaries. High Educ 71, 767–779 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9917-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9917-3

Keywords

Navigation