Curriculum Planning and Development: A Review of Reviews

Abstract

IN THE first Review of Reviews to appear in February 1962 REVIEW, Harris stated that such a chapter should a judgment of extent to which issue provides more than an abstracting service-valuable as that service may (p. 103). The present reviewer of reviews sees this judgment, for this particular issue, as answering five questions: What reviewed seem to be critically significant? What new and promising areas of curriculum research appear to have been opened? What contributions have been reported to a theory of curriculum planning and development? What new and promising procedures of curriculum research have been identified? What is ahead in research for curriculum planning and development? In answer to last question, in capsule form, reviewer is definitely optimistic about future of curriculum research. This area, notable mostly for neglect since 1930's, is coming to life again. True, little within itself that is worthy of note has been concluded during past three years. Indeed, this reviewer can say again what he did in introducing June 1954 curriculum issue of REVIEW: the chief value of present issue is to point up need for a more significant effort on part of educators to undergird their curriculum theories and practices with specific research studies (p. 193). Now, nine years later, a statement can be made that was not made in June 1954 issue: namely, significant beginnings have been made that are prophetic of meatier curriculum issues of REVIEW in future. By June 1969, if all goes well with cooperative research efforts now initiated or being planned, one would be privileged indeed to review reviews of curriculum research. If 15 years ending in June 1969 witness rebirth and flowering of curriculum research, profession will be able to take great pride in accomplishments of these years.