Close this search box.

The Analogy and Reconceptualization of Curriculum in the Last 40 Years

As many as other things that we know, the Earthling timeframe for 40 years, means isn’t a short time, it’s roughly 4 decades. The time that brings humanity from a newborn baby to become an old man, which means the time that taught us a lot on how we should define, improve, and adjust to become better and better upon the topic what we called Curriculum System studies. Without comparison and timeline situation, this will become a serious challenge for humanity to know and to see the change in transformation. As much as we know we like to see since seeing is believing, while Eisner (2001) said: “hearing is a reading”. In my last essay, I was mentioned this curriculum theory and application, which are much like LEGO bricks based on my eyes with many forms in different terms. Unlike in the LEGO Bricks history the transformations changes that we can see from the simplification models, into architectural models like we can see between the LEGO Caste and the LEGO Hogwarts Castle, meanwhile with the Curriculum Studies, we are having more content with more clear classification, such four classifications of Curriculum Ideologies that we know, like been mentioned by Werret Charters (1875), “that the objectives along with the corresponding activities, should be aligned with a subject matter or content” and by Hollis Caswell (1901),” that subject matter is developed around the interest of the learners and their social functions”.

This has been 40 years since Pinar’s statement, like any other thing the LEGO already a set of experiences, the LEGO user also brought to certain of classification, and that evidence of transformation curriculum as predicted by Hollis Caswell (1901), “the curriculum is a set of experiences, learners must experience what they learn”. Therefore, in this essay, like Tyler (1902) wrote “any device which provides valid evidence regarding the progress of learning toward educational objectiveness is appropriate”, then I would like to present three big achievements that I think are helpful to understanding in this curriculum.

Firstly, the discovery of various curriculum ideologies, make me thini as LEGO topics, that has allowed being studied by some disciplines. This analogy idea of LEGO topic, like LEGO City, LEGO Ninjago, LEGO Architecture, and many more brought us into a reminder on education is not a discipline in itself but an area to be studied by the disciplines is evident in the work of those of curricularist (Pinar, 1978), in which also in Pinar (1978) book written: “as an evidence about the curriculum change is measured by comparing resulting behaviors with original objectives”. By means, as an educator, while we are sharing our thought for our leaner development is not only the explicit to one singular content that may or may not be connected, but to the one small system that can be called as a topic, like we built the airplane not in the Ninjago LEGO, even though we can, but will be much more fit once we built it in the LEGO City. Nowadays, many educators only focus on content in the curriculum, while there is more than just a curriculum that we know fits into the curriculum systems of education itself and is more necessary.

Secondly, the development of learners throughout their ideas, which I can analogically by the LEGO ideas. As much as we want our learners not only to understand the content they learn as their foundation, but we do want our learners also capable of exploring, and analyzing their idea effectiveness as much as their idea efficiency into the community. Like we know in LEGO ideas, there are tons of interesting models, while, we believe our teaching-learning models should be capable of guiding our learners into a format that is not only capable of solving the question paper but also to have a chance on exploring their thought through trial and error that probably as a life risk-taker with a better understanding to develop. Pinar (1978) mentioned “accepting the curriculum structure as it is, and working to improve it, is what is meant by the technician mentality” as a manifestation in school practice from doing a competency-based to modular settings”. While not only can be brought such a challenge to teaching-learning but also will allow learners on becoming more human due to their experiences of trial and error over their learning like Ralph Tyler (1902) mentioned, “important objective to develop increasing skill in interpreting, not only skill in analyzing the logical development and exposition of an idea, … which objectives that are more than knowledge, skills, and habits”.

Lastly, as we know the purpose of the curriculum is to educate and the process must involve problem-solving (Ralph Tyler, 1902), and that with Patrick Slattery said curriculum development will generate enthusiasm for learning by engagement with a global issue. This concludes that like we can find in LEGO machine, called LEGO SPIKE or LEGO Mindstorm, which allow the user on reconstructing, regards to teaching-learning performance and ability that being performed by workable systems, which not only helpful to our community, but to themselves, and the near future learner. This LEGO SPIKE not only makes the stuff moving, but also adjustable, and challenging for humanity, as well as how our curriculum needs to become.

In conclusion, the traditional curriculum work is focused on the school. Which nowadays, the reconceptualization of curriculum has been updated in many certain factors, from the model, methods, to structure, and purposes. Even though the competition among existences curriculum as well as the philosophical ideology is still competitive, but as fellow educators and humans, we believe this curriculum system development has become more safe, educated, and synergy with humanity purpose of life.


1.     Alvior, M.G. (2014, December 3). Six famous curriculum theorists and their contribution to education. Research-Based Articles.

2.     Eisner, E. (n.d.). What does it mean to say a school is doing well?.  In Flinders, D. J., &   Thornton, S. J. (Eds.), The Curriculum Studies Reader, Fourth Edition, pp.297-305. New York, NY: Routledge.

3.     Kelly, Melissa. (2020, August 26). The Many Purposes of Education. Retrieved from

4.     Pinar, W. F. (1978). The reconceptualization of curriculum studies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 10(3), 205-21.

5.     Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum development in the postmodern era.  Garland Publishing, Inc. Retrieved -November 12, 2021 from

6.     Tyler, R. (1949). In Flinders, D. J., &   Thornton, S. J. (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader, fourth edition.  Routledge.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *