While admitting that there are no quick fixes or easy answers, this writer argues for broad-based, cooperative curriculum planning and development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashenden, Dean. Indicators, Information, and Education: A Discussion of Possibilities and Problems. Fyshwick, Australia: Curriculum Development Centre, 1988.
2.
Beyer, Landon E., and Apple, Michael W.The Curriculum Problems, Politics, and Possibilities . Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988.
3.
Boyd, William Lowe.Balancing Control and Autonomy in School Reform: The Politics of 'Perestroika '. State College, Pa.: Phi Delta Kappa Institute on Restructuring Public Education, 1990.
4.
Brandt, Ron. "On Curriculum in California: A Conversation with Bill Honig." Educational Leadership, November 1989.
5.
Burns, Kevin J. "Restructuring School and Curriculum for a Global, Technological Society ." NASSP Bulletin, February 1989.
6.
Conelly, F. Michael; Crocker, Robert K.; and Kass, Heidi. "National Curriculum Research: Problems in the Metamethodology of Studies Concerned with State Policy and Local Variation." Comparative Education Review, November 1988.
7.
Hallak, Jacques. "The Future of EducationalPlanning." Prospects 2(1989).
8.
Hunter, BrotherEagan, C.S.C. "A Vision of the Future: Cooperation and Courage." NASSP Bulletin, January 1990.
9.
Lawton, Denis. Education, Culture, and the NationalCurriculum. London : Hodder and Stoughton, 1989.
10.
Lebofsky, Arthur. "Educators Examine the Possibilities, Problems of a National Curriculum ." NASSP Bulletin, September 1986.
11.
Short, Edmund C. "Authority and Governance in Curriculum Development: A Policy Analysis in the United States Context." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 1983.
12.
Taylor, Patricia S. "None of Us Is Smarter Than All of Us: The Reform in California's Curriculum ." English Journal, December 1988.
