DottrensRobert. The Primary School Curriculum. Monographs on Education—II. Paris: UNESCO, 1962, 80–81.
2.
Report of the Commissioners. Royal Commission on the Education Department of Tasmania. Hobart: Government Printer, 1909.
3.
AustinA. G.Australian Education 1788–1900. Melbourne: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, 1961, 226.
4.
Editorial. The Australian Journal of Education, 1, 2, July 1957, 69.
5.
BrowneG. S. Revision of the Curriculum. Chapter X of “The Primary School Curriculum in Australia”, ColeP. R. (Ed.). Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1932, 246–247.
6.
GreenhalghJ. C.“Problems in Curriculum Development”. The Australian Journal of Education, 1, 2, July 1957, 90–96.
7.
WebsterA. H.“Revision of the New South Wales Primary School Curriculum”. The Australian Journal of Education, 1, 2, July 1957, 97–105.
8.
Report of the Committee on Educational Aims In The Primary School. Hobart: Education Department of Tasmania, 1946.
9.
WilkinsWilliam. National Education. Cited in Document 70 of Select Documents in Australian Education 1788–1900. Austin, A. G. Melbourne: Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, 1963.
10.
Priorities In The Primary School. Primary School Studies—No. 9. Melbourne: A.C.E.R., 1952, 5.
11.
HerrickV. E.TylerR. W.Toward Improved Curriculum Theory. Supplementary Educational Monographs. No. 71. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, March 1950.
12.
PriestT. A.“Contemporary Philosophy of Education”. The Australian Journal of Higher Education. 2, 2, November 1965, 175.
13.
PriestT. A.Op. cit., 174.
14.
HughesP.“Decisions And Curriculum Design”. Educational Theory, XII, 3, July 1962, 188.
15.
16.
TabaHilda. Curriculum Development, Theory and Practice. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1962, 10.
17.
TabaHilda. Op. cit., 3.
18.
Priorities in the Primary School. Op. cit.
19.
BloomB. S. (Ed.). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1956.
20.
KrathwohlD. R.BloomB. S.MasiaB. B.Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook II. Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Company, 1964.
21.
SchwabJ. J.“Structure of the Disciplines: Meanings and Significances”, in FordG. W.PugnoL. (Ed.), The Structure of Knowledge and the Curriculum. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964, 14.
22.
BrunerJ. S.The Process of Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960, 7.
23.
BrunerJ. S.Op. cit., 13.
24.
AllendoerferC. B.OakleyC. D.Principles of Mathematics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Second Edition, 1963, 1–10.
25.
RosenbloomP. C.Modern Viewpoints In The Curriculum. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1964.
26.
ChasnoffR. E.Elementary Curriculum. New York: Pitman Publishing Corporation, 1964.
27.
HeathR. W. (Ed.). New Curricula. New York: Harper and Row, 1964.
28.
FraserD. M.Current Curriculum Studies In Academic Subjects. National Education Association Project on Instruction, Washington, 1962.
29.
ConnellW. F., The Foundations of Education. Sydney: Ian Novak, 1962, 70.
30.
The Committee on the Objectives of a General Education In a Free Society. General Education in a Free Society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948, 54.
31.
BestorArthur E.“Resolutions Concerning Public Education”. School and Society, LXXVII, January, 1953, 68–70.
32.
DowneyL. W.The Task of Public Education. Chicago: Midwest Administration Center, University of Chicago, 1960.
33.
ConnellW. F., Growing Up in an Australian City. Melbourne: A.C.E.R. Research Series No. 72, 1957.
34.
HughesP. W.“Some Facts of Individual Differences Affecting Education”. Tasmanian Education, 15, 3, April 1963, 122–127.
35.
BassettG. W.Each One Is Different. Melbourne: A.C.E.R., 1963.
36.
BrunerJ. S.Op. cit., 33.
37.
CronbachL. J.Psychological Issues Pertinent to Recent American Curriculum Reforms. Reprinted in Rosenbloom, P. C., op. cit
38.
SuppesPatrick. “Modern Learning Theory and the Elementary School Curriculum”. American Educational Research Journal, 1, 2, March 1964, 79–93.
39.
IsaacsNathan. The Growth of Understanding in the Young Child. London: Educational Supply Association, 1961.
40.
WhiteR. W.“Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence”. Psychol. Rev., 66, 1959, 297–333.