Curriculum Frameworks. Analyse and discuss why it has been said that ‘curriculum should not be left hands of politicians and policy makers’
Analyse and discuss why it has been said that ‘curriculum should not be left hands of politicians and policy makers’.
The curriculum, many academics have stated has been under scrutiny over the influence of policy makers and politicians. The question of what is important knowledge for students to learn at school can be argued between academics and politicians. Young (2013) mentions that this question has unfortunately lacking a definitive answer, it is unclear who can and who cannot answer it, but it is more likely that the answer will be left to the pragmatic and ideological decisions of administrators and politicians. Young (2011) cited in Young (2013) supports this notion and states that this is certainly true for the United Kingdom, where these current debates about knowledge and the curriculum are led almost entirely by government politicians. Wood (2011) also states that the national governments in the UK reflect current issues in the country at the time and their own political agenda through the curriculum as they have a strong effect on education.
The government can argue that they have a right to an input into the national curriculum to invest in human capital, to in turn increase the growth of the economy. As each government is elected into power, they therefore take on the responsibility to recognise the country’s needs and the present government has undertaken a larger involvement in human capital. Policy makers are needed to promote wide access to skills and the capability to learn. This contribution to upgrading human capital includes providing broad-based formal education, creating incentives for firms and individuals to participate in lifelong learning, and improve the matching of labour supply and demand in terms of skill requirements OECD (1996). Also in the government’s interest; is reducing social inequalities in the education system but it is primarily a political task of creating a more equal society, not an educational task. It is argued
The curriculum, many academics have stated has been under scrutiny over the influence of policy makers and politicians. The question of what is important knowledge for students to learn at school can be argued between academics and politicians. Young (2013) mentions that this question has unfortunately lacking a definitive answer, it is unclear who can and who cannot answer it, but it is more likely that the answer will be left to the pragmatic and ideological decisions of administrators and politicians. Young (2011) cited in Young (2013) supports this notion and states that this is certainly true for the United Kingdom, where these current debates about knowledge and the curriculum are led almost entirely by government politicians. Wood (2011) also states that the national governments in the UK reflect current issues in the country at the time and their own political agenda through the curriculum as they have a strong effect on education.
The government can argue that they have a right to an input into the national curriculum to invest in human capital, to in turn increase the growth of the economy. As each government is elected into power, they therefore take on the responsibility to recognise the country’s needs and the present government has undertaken a larger involvement in human capital. Policy makers are needed to promote wide access to skills and the capability to learn. This contribution to upgrading human capital includes providing broad-based formal education, creating incentives for firms and individuals to participate in lifelong learning, and improve the matching of labour supply and demand in terms of skill requirements OECD (1996). Also in the government’s interest; is reducing social inequalities in the education system but it is primarily a political task of creating a more equal society, not an educational task. It is argued