Philosophical and Psychological Foundations of Curriculum: A Reflective Analysis

Indra Mani Shrestha

M. Phil. in Mathematics Education

Second Semester

Kathmandu University School of Education

Hattiban, Lalitpur

2015

Introduction

The curriculum is concerned with what is planned, implemented, taught, learned,

evaluated and researched in schools at all levels of education. Therefore, the curriculum has

some foundations, namely historical, philosophical, psychological, and sociological, which

influence directly or indirectly the curriculum from its making process to its implementation. In

this journal, I focus on only two – philosophical and psychological foundations of curriculum

incorporating their major characteristics and significances in curriculum, in general and in

mathematics education, in particular. The journal also seeks how these foundations are

interrelated to each other and, finally my attempt goes to find out how critical these foundations

are in understanding a curriculum. For this, I use reflective and reflexive modes of writing by

incorporating my retrospective and introspective understanding and experiences about

curriculum foundations.

Philosophy and Curriculum

As a living creature of society I have been interested in search of knowledge for better
living throughout my journey as a student and a teacher. My philosophy has been dealing with

various aspects of my life, the problems and visions of my living, and the organization of my

thoughts. In this course, I have found that philosophy becomes vital criteria for determining the

aims, selection, organization and implementation of the curriculum in the school. Being a

mathematics teacher, “mathematics education curricula also have been considerably influenced

by the philosophical perspectives and beliefs of teacher” (Belbase, 2011). Moreover, philosophy

becomes the criterion for determining the aims (values), means (methods) and ends (knowledge

learned) of curriculum (Ornstein & Hunkins, 1998).

Ornstein & Hunkins (1998) state that four major educational philosophies have great

influence on school curriculum in the United Sates: idealism, realism, pragmatism, and

existentialism. They introduce these philosophies in relation to curriculum as traditional

philosophy (idealism and realism) and contemporary philosophy (pragmatism and

existentialism). Retrospectively, I have experienced the Nepali curricula consisting of organized,

separate subject matter, content, and knowledge that classify objects, mostly influenced by

traditional philosophies of idealism and realism. However, with progress of time, some reforms

could be seen in Nepali curriculum influenced by pragmatism that promotes testing and verifying

ideas by scientific experiments and to some extent by existentialism that believes that knowledge

is about the human condition and the choices that each person has to make. However,

mathematics education is still in dualism of traditional and contemporary philosophies, thereby

giving more emphasis to the principle of idealism that teacher’s task is to bring the latent

knowledge present in the minds of students to consciousness by recalling and working with

ideas. Being a mathematics teacher, I have tried to practice pragmatist’s teaching method of
more exploratory than explanatory, but the philosophy advocated by the school has limited me to

quantify the students’ performance in percentage rather than holistic development.

Psychology and Curriculum

When one talks about curriculum, human and social issues stand at the front and the

curriculum involves psychology that helps to learn how humans and other organisms think,

understand, learn, perceive, feel, act, and interact with others. In this regard, psychological

foundation of curriculum is a basis for the questions like: How should curriculum be organized

to enhance learning? What impact does the school culture have on students’ learning? Why do

students respond to the teacher in the teaching and learning processes? According to Ornstein &

Hunkins (1998), teaching the curriculum and learning the curriculum are interrelated, and

psychology cements the relationship. Moreover, psychology furnishes theories and principles of

learning that influences teacher-student behavior within the context of the curriculum. According

to Ornstein & Hunkins (1998), there are three prevailing learning theories: behavioral learning

theory, cognitive-developmental learning theory and humanistic learning theory.

My retrospective teaching and learning were mostly influenced by the behavioral

learning principle of reward and punishment. Being guided by the philosophy of idealism and

realism, I used to apply the psychology of behaviorism by reinforcing students for regular

practice of mathematics so as to improve learning and retention capacities of my students.

Reinforcement for regular practice of mathematics problems was my key principle to improve

learning and retention capacity of my students. However, after I completed my master degree in

mathematics education, I started practicing according to Piaget’s four cognitive-developmental

learning stages from birth to maturity: sensory-motor stage (birth to age 2), preoperational (age

2-7), concrete operational (age 7-11) and formal operational (age 7- onward) keeping in focus
that learning involves the assimilation of new experiences with prior experiences with the active

participation of students in classroom activities. However, again the philosophy advocated by the

school limited me to exercise my practice of teaching within the boundary of practice method.

In the context of Nepal, it is rarely found to have been practicing humanistic approach of

learning, so far, though teachers are, to some extent, sensitive towards the students’ world. I have

also tried my best to treat students as individual learners with diverse needs, abilities, and

aptitudes. I have also tried to apply the humanistic learning approach of Habermas’ emancipatory

cognitive interest of freeing students for autonomy and responsibility (Grundy, 1987). Above all,

I came to realize that one of the lapses in implementing both philosophical and psychological

principles in the classroom situation is due to the Nepali curriculum influenced by culturally

decontextualised mathematics education (Luitel, 2012), because such curriculum is encouraging

students to follow “practice” method as if mathematics is absolute and universal as idealists and

realists deal with, rather than treating mathematical knowledge is constantly changing as

pragmatists advocate from humanistic approach.

Conclusions

Both philosophical and psychological foundations of curriculum are basis for curriculum

making and its implementation, because human philosophy and psychology are interrelated to

each other every now and then as philosophy looks for knowledge through psychology as to how

to perceive it. In my opinion, for example, cognitive psychology complements and extends

traditional philosophical inquiry such as idealism by providing abstract methodology for

investigating structures in mind. According to Mason, Sripada, & Stich (n. d.), psychological

theories explain outward behavior by positing internal psychological states and structures such as

beliefs, desires, perceptions, memories, and various and sundry other kinds of mental states. On
the other hand, according to John Dewey, human psychology is the basis for understanding how

the individual learner interacts with objects and persons in the environment (Ornstein &

Hunkins, 1998). This process goes on for life, and quality of interaction determines the amount

and type of learning. In this context, human philosophy deals with individual learner’s beliefs,

perceptions, and values. Thus, human philosophy and psychology always interact to each other,

so far and obviously both foundations have influence in curriculum process.

 REFERENCES

Belbase, S. (2011). Philosophical foundations for curriculum decision: A reflective analysis.

Retrieved on Jan 10, 2015 from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED524740

Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or Praxis. London: The Falmer

Luitel, B.C. (2012). Mathematics as an im/pure knowledge system: Symbiosis (w)holism and

synergy in mathematics education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics

Education 10 (6). Taiwan: Springer ISSN 1571-0068. doi:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9366-8

Mason, K., Sripada, C. S., & Stich, S. (n. d.). The philosophy of psychology. In Dermot Moral,

(Ed.), Routledge Companion to Ttwentieth-Century Philosophy. London: Routledge.

Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues, (3rd

ed.). MA: Allyn & Bacon.