Running Head: THE DOMAINS OF CURRICULUM STUDIES
Evolution of Higher Education Curriculum in the United States and Malaysia
Abstract
Curriculum development is being affected by different factors that are related in local and international environment. Thus, it can be said that the educational system and curriculum of one country is purely associated to their country, because it had been affected by foreign cultures and beliefs, which reflects the current curriculum. This paper focuses on analyzing the development of curriculum in the United States and Malaysia. It had found out that religion and government are the two most powerful figures which affected the development or changes in the curriculum, primarily due to colonialism and the crusade towards Christianity.
Introduction
Different researchers and practitioners have different definition of curriculum. On one hand, it can be defined as the set of knowledge, skills as well as activities that will be delivered towards the students (National Curriculum United Kingdom, 1988). On the other, it can be defined as a set of designed activities in order to promote the teaching process of teacher, and the learning process of students (Saylor, Alexander and Lewis (1981), Beauchamp (1981) and Posner (1998)) (Marsh, 2004 and Ying Cheong, 1994).
The said definition varied because of the different factors which can affect the curriculum including the changing needs of the students, high expectations , together with the different policies of local and national government, together with the different entities that are involved in the education field (Yio Cheong, 1994).
Higher Education Curriculum
Educational systems around the globe have the universal function that is to select and allocate function such as preparing individuals to accomplish key roles in the society. The only difference focuses on who receives the education and how they are trained. Therefore, the major reason of higher education affects the idea of teaching. Some societies focus on the rationale of universities in training the next age group of leaders who will serve the economic needs and development of the state as well as the process of conveying some technologically usable knowledge (Habermas, 1984, pp. 1 – 2 cited in Lynch, Modgil, & Modgil, 1992).
Higher Education Curriculum of America
The evolution of curriculum development in American higher education is a long and telling story. Long because, even though the American history of curriculum started with the beginning of Harvard in 1636, its foundations were directly connected to the medieval university of the European High Middle Ages and extend even furthermore, back to traditional through oratorical and philosophical traditions of the liberal education (Hofstadter & Hardy, 1952).
The early American college was established in a close connection with the church, while the modern higher education is largely secular. Particularly, most of colleges were established due to spiritual purposes including Harvard, the charter of William and Mary and Yale (Haarlow, 2003; Hofstadter & Hardy, 1952). The early curriculum of colonial colleges was methodically and systematically conventional focusing on the three Aristotelian philosophies, including, natural, moral and mental (physics, ethics and metaphysics), ancient language (Greek, Latin and Hebrew), and especially divinity. These subject, were largely taught via the seven liberal arts as codified in the early Middle Ages: the trivium (logic, grammar and rhetoric) and the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music) (Haarlow, 2003).
In 1970, Barnard, the president of Columbia, declared the disturbing fact that American colleges had been progressively losing their appeal towards the young men. The evidence was showed on the decreasing enrollment rate in all colleges. During the transition, from college to university, the years 1868 and 1869 stand out the first, for establishing the Cornell University under the leadership of Andrew D. White, the second for election of Charles William Elliot to the presidency of Harvard. The essential shift led “step by step over time towards the practice of instituting academic majors and minor study concentrations, the expansion of academic departments dedicated completely to one or another precise discipline, and a marked specialization of scholarship within the academe” (Haarlow, 2003).
In the end, general and liberal education was pushed. General education is a general body of knowledge that all people should have, which lead to uniform prerequisite curriculum by accepting the minimum knowledge that every college student should know (Hofstadter & Hardy, 1952).
Higher Education of Malaysia
Educational progress and reform in Malaysia have always been differentiated by the efforts of the government to settle in education to the development needs of the nation (Haji Ahmad, 1998). The National Education System of Malaysia was based from the colonial government of Britain. At the end of 1970s, after experiencing changes in the curriculum and the entire educational system, all school used Bahasa Malaysia as the primary medium of instruction (Haji Ahmad, 1998).
Moral and values education has always been acknowledged and approved in the Malaysian school curriculum. It can be rooted from the British colonial government, when the missionaries’ works were one of the general reasons for offering education for the people. Aside from the curriculum also include the Scripture as one of the primary subjects in the secondary level, while for non-Christian students, ethics is a must.. Mukherjee (1986, p. 151) affirms that there were “weekly slots on ‘ethics’ (given) to their non-Christian pupils…with liberal extracts from the Bible accompanied by frequent exhortations to ‘be good’”. Following the English school tradition then, the National School System included Islamic Religious Education, then known as Agama (Religion) in the curriculum for the Muslim pupils. For the non-Muslim students, some form of moral education was given in place of Agama. More fervor is given to values education in the present curriculum. The Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (KBSR), that is the New Primary School Curriculum, and the Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (KBSM), or the Integrated Secondary School Curriculum, which have completed their first cycle recently, emphasize the teaching of values in order to enhance quality individual development, as well as creating Malaysian citizens of the future, through education (Haji Ahmad, 1998).
Value education in one form or another has been part of the Malaysian educational curriculum at least some schools since the British colonial schools. In the government Malay schools, there were also doses of values education in the teaching of hygiene and “ethics” similar to those of the English schools. In Arabic or Koranic schools, Islamic ethics were the core, taught in the context of teaching Islam as a way of life. It can be assumed that some form of values education, no matter how informal, was given in the other schools, since all education is in fact moral education, as “…all the experiences that pupils have in schools have a morally educative effect” (Downey and Kelly, 1986, p. 168).
Conclusion
It can be observed that colonialism and religion has a great impact on the development and evolution of curriculum. Both of the country showed that the church and powerful countries during colonial period contribute to the development of the different subjects or topics which will be included in the curriculum, at the same time, affect their educational system. As a result, most of schools focus on studies which focus on subjects and issues that are related to moral values, which are very important, primarily in the lower and higher education.
Bibliography
Downey, M., & Kelly, A. V. (1986). Personal, Social and Moral Education, 3rd edn. London: Harper Education Series.
Haarlow, W. N. (2003). Great Books, Honors Programs, and Hidden Origins: The Virgina Plan and the University of Virginia in the Liberal Arts Movement. Routledge.
Haji Ahmad, R. (1998). Educatinal Development and Reformation in Malaysia: Past, Present and Future. Journal of Educational Administration , 36(5), 452 – 475.
Hofstadter, R., & Hardy, D. (1952). The Development and Scope of Higher Educatioin in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lynch, J., Modgil, C., & Modgil, S. (1992). Cultural Diversityand the Schools. Taylor & Francis.
Marsh, C. (2004). Key Concepts for Understanding Curriculum. Routledge.
Mukherjee, H. (1986). Moral Education in a Developing Society: The Malaysia Case. Comparative and Education Series , 7, 147 – 162.
Ying Cheong, C. (1994). Effectiveness of Curriculum Change in School. Internatioal Journal of Educational Management , 8(3), 26 – 34.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment