A traditional curriculum is an educational curriculum which follows established guidelines and practices.

This term
can refer both to a curriculum as a whole, as in the set of courses which students must take to graduate and the
order in which they are presented, and to the curriculum in the form of the content taught in an individual class.
This curriculum is sometimes criticized for being too narrow, and a number of education professionals have
developed alternative educational methods, or suggestions for teaching a traditional curriculum in a more
expanded way.
In the sense of an entire curriculum, a traditional curriculum includes core subjects and electives. Core subjects
usually include topics like math, science, history, and English. Students may also take courses in the social
sciences, and can expand their curriculum with topics like art, foreign languages, music, acting, and so forth. The
curriculum is designed in a progressive way, with each level being slightly more challenging than the last, requiring
students to build skills and use them as their work their way through the curriculum.
A traditional curriculum typically involves a teacher conveying facts to students. The curriculum focuses
on a specific body of knowledge to be transmitted to students and relies heavily on memorization and drilling of
facts and formulas. Education systems founded on traditional curricula often focus solely on the subject matter
being taught and favor measurement of educational objectives via a great deal of testing.
Traditional curricula may include transmission of moral standards, social conduct and skills which educators
consider important for students to learn. Students are typically expected to learn what they are taught without
questioning it. Traditional pedagogy involves a teacher lecturing students and students repeating what they have
memorized, then being tested on it. Following a traditional curriculum, all students are taught the same content in
the same time frame, with no adjustments made for students who have difficulty with the material or for those who
find the material easy and are ready to move on ahead of the rest of the class.
Some educators object to traditional curriculum's focus on facts divorced from any real-world application or use of
the facts learned. They believe that traditional teaching methods and curricula do not allow students to develop
problem-solving and critical-thinking skills.
Traditional education, is also known as back-to-basics, conventional education or customary education,
refers to long-established customs found in schools that society traditionally used. Some forms of education
reform promote the adoption of progressive education practices, a more holistic approach which focuses on
individual students' needs and self-expression. In the eyes of reformers, traditional teacher-centered methods
focused on rote learning and memorization must be abandoned in favor of student-centered and task-based
approaches to learning. However, many parents and conservative citizens are concerned with the maintenance of
objective educational standards based on testing, which favors a more traditional approach.
Depending on the context, the opposite of traditional education may be progressive education, modern education
(the education approaches based on developmental psychology), or alternative education.[1]
The definition of traditional education varies greatly with geography and by historical period.
The chief business of traditional education is to transmit to a next generation those skills, facts, and standards of
moral and social conduct that adults consider to be necessary for the next generation's material and social success.
[2]
As beneficiaries of this scheme, which educational progressivist John Dewey described as being "imposed from
above and from outside", the students are expected to docilely and obediently receive and believe these fixed
answers. Teachers are the instruments by which this knowledge is communicated and these standards of behavior
are enforced.[2]
Historically, the primary educational technique of traditional education was simple oral recitation:[1] In a typical
approach, students sat quietly at their places and listened to one student after another recite his or her lesson, until
each had been called upon. The teacher's primary activity was assigning and listening to these recitations; students
studied and memorized the assignments at home. A test or oral examination might be given at the end of a unit,
and the process, which was called "assignment-study-recitation-test", was repeated. In addition to its overemphasis
on verbal answers, reliance on rote memorization (memorization with no effort at understanding the meaning), and
disconnected, unrelated assignments, it was also an extremely inefficient use of students' and teachers' time. This
traditional approach also insisted that all students be taught the same materials at the same point; students that
did not learn quickly enough failed, rather than being allowed to succeed at their natural speeds. This approach,
which had been imported from Europe, dominated American education until the end of the 19th century, when the
education reform movement imported progressive education techniques from Europe.[1]
Traditional education is associated with much stronger elements of coercion than seems acceptable now in most
cultures.[citation needed] It has sometimes included: the use ofcorporal punishment to maintain classroom discipline or
punish errors; inculcating the dominant religion and language; separating students according to gender, race, and
social class[citation needed] , as well as teaching different subjects to girls and boys. In terms of curriculum there was and
still is a high level of attention paid to time-honoured academic knowledge.
Traditional curriculum is a curriculum that was designed to follow certain established guidelines. It follows
established learning practices that have long been accepted.
Curriculum design traditionally has focused on the transmission of discrete pieces of information--frequently rote
facts and formulas--from teacher to student. Because the information is considered important in its own right,
traditional curriculum designers often pay little attention to whether or not students use the information in any reallife context. In this kind of curriculum, segregated "silos" of knowledge (labeled "disciplines") are used to impose
order on information (Beane, 1991).
In reality, most learning situations demand an integration of various kinds of knowledge, and information is
considered valuable insofar as it fills an experienced desire or need for information. For example, to lose weight one
would need information about nutrition, physiology, mathematics, and psychology. The need or desire to lose
weight would determine how valuable the information is.
Because traditional curriculum design does not reflect these realities, it often does not provide students with
opportunities to develop the kinds of critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities that are central to thinking
and learning (Jones, Palinscar, Ogle, & Carr, 1987). Furthermore, traditional curriculum design does not include

opportunities to build the kinds of personal and collaborative skills that support learning (Tinzmann, Jones,
Fennimore, Bakker, Fine, & Pierce, 1990).
What a modern curriculum really looks like
3 SEPTEMBER 2012 2 COMMENTS
Steven Rudolph
For the past many years, we have all been hearing about a call for change in education. There have been countless
articles, TV debates and conference sessions where educational leaders, parents and even students have
clamoured for an end to the mugging up of endless amounts of information for the sake of passing exams. But
when the programmes are over, we return to the same rat race of children chasing marks.
While the calls for change abound, we find ourselves unable to bring about that change. One of the reasons for this
is that people have not understood the problem clearly enough. In this article, I aim to clarify the underlying issue
that we need to acknowledge if we are to know precisely what steps we need to take to achieve the Himalayan goal
of redesigning a curriculum that meets the need of the hour.
To define the problem, we must understand how things have changed over centuries with respect to the trends in
the way we work. Over 30 years ago, futurists Alvin and Heidi Toffler in their book The Third Wavehighlighted three
key eras that we have passed through in the course of human civilization: the Agricultural Age, the Industrial Age,
and most recently, the Information Age. The first period found man involved mainly in the pursuit of farming. The
second was characterized by the mass production of consumer goods. The third, which began in the 1950s, is
defined by a shift away from the blue-collar, factory-based work, towards the white-collar, conceptual-based work.
While most people are aware of these trends in human evolution, what the Tofflers more importantly reveal in their
book, Revolutionary Wealth, are three deep fundamentals of life that change through these eras: time, space and
knowledge.
Time
In the Agricultural Age, time was extremely flexible. Crops grew at a very slow pace so if you showed up late for
work (or not at all for a few days), it didnt really have much impact on the harvest. In the Industrial Age, however,
time became much less flexible. For instance, factories and mechanized production processes required everyone to
be in their place at the same time. Not showing up on time or even a few minutes late could drastically affect
output. However, in the Information Age, time has very different implications. Companies are much more flexible
toward employees with their working hours, as long as they know that the work will get done and knowing that
with technology, people can be working any time even at home and on weekends.
Space
In that same sense, the Information Age has released us from the constraints of space, where activities are no
longer bound to a single location. Mobile phones and the Internet permit people to perform their work wherever
they might be. Think about freelancers who can do the bulk of their work from home or a local coffee shop if they so
wish. And also the entire world of outsourcing, where customers in America talk to support agents in India about
problems with their computers that are produced in China. Compare this aspect of space with the Agricultural and
Industrial Ages, and you see how starkly different things were. In both those eras, work happened at one particular
location (either in the field or at the factory).
Knowledge
In the previous eras, information travelled slowly, and a little knowledge went a long way. Performing agricultural
activities or mass-producing things required a limited amount of knowhow, which stayed more or less the same as
the years went by. A person who learned how to sow seeds for a potato crop or tighten the screws on a widget as it
passed by on the conveyor belt needed very little or no additional training for years or even decades. However, in
the Information Age, because information travels at such a high rate and because the speed of change is so fast,
people are in a constant state of upgrading their knowledge. For instance, in many companies, product sales are
tracked in real time, with analysts monitoring trends and suggesting changes in strategy on the fly . What
characterizes this age when it comes to knowledge is the access to free information, as well as the fact that it is no
longer possible for people to learn once and forget. Rather, people must embrace a constant practice of learning to
stay current.
The implications on education
Education systems are designed to help students acquire the knowledge and skills they will need when they enter
the world of work. The specific problem we have in this regard is that our current education system was fashioned
after the paradigm of the Industrial Age. Below, I compare work in the Industrial Age with schools in the Information
Age. Note the similarities:
Time
Everyone must come to work at the same time.
Everyone must come to school at the same time.
When the bell rings people start and stop work.
When the bell rings, students start and stop learning.
Work schedule is decided by a manager.
Learning schedule is decided by a teacher or the management.
Space
Work happens at the factory.
Learning happens at school.
Workers of the same type work together.
Children of the same age work together.
Work tasks are divided; workers are assigned fixed locations to work in.
Classes are divided; students are assigned fixed classrooms to learn in.
Knowledge
What workers learn stays the same for years and years.
Curriculum largely stays the same for years and years.
There is one way to do things when working (the right way).
There is one way to answer questions (the right way).
What you need to know comes only from your manager.
What you need to know comes only from your teacher.
Only workers learn. Managers know everything.
Only students learn. Teachers know everything.
Education in the Knowledge Age
If this is so, and if educational systems must reflect the age in which we live, it would hold that our current
education system should foster the qualities and skills required for the Information Age. For such a knowledgebased society, here is what a curriculum must look like:

Students create their own daily learning schedules.

Students determine their path for learning the syllabus and go at their own speed.

Students use technology to learn anywhere, anytime.


Students select the rooms they wish to visit to fulfill their learning needs.

Students take exams whenever they are ready.

Students of different age groups learn together.

Students learn both alone and in different-sized groups.

Both teachers and students teach and learn.

Teachers spend more time coaching and facilitating and less time teaching.
In my next article, I will talk about how my colleagues and teachers reacted when I proposed changing our
curriculum at Jiva Public School to one like this. I will discuss the first steps we took in making this curriculum a
reality.
Until then, I encourage you to dream a bit to envision what your school would look like were it to adopt a
curriculum that is in sync with the Information Age. In this stage, dont get bogged down with the reasons for why it
couldnt happen (there will be plenty of time for objection handling). Remember that if we want change, we must
first visualize what that change looks like. For now, lets get a line of site on the peak of the mountain.

The difference is that taditional (in the class) if the student is gifted they dont usually get challeged and
everyone does the same work even if their higher than their grade level , while modern (online school)
challennges them to their abbilities .
Traditional education focused on literature, art, and culture. Modern education emphasis the needs of each
individual child and a more informal curriculum.
Traditional curriculum is the set guidelines that are followed year after year. Modern curriculum has more
advanced techniques in setting the curriculum and allows more flexibility.
Traditional education was very precise and straightforward. Students learned from a set of texts. Modern
education is beginning to turn around and become more hands on. There are different types of schooling,
including Montessori and online schools.
Traditional education focused on literature, art, and culture. Modern education emphasis the needs of each
individual child and a more informal curriculum.
Similarities
Traditional education is still valuable today. It ensures that the basic concepts are still being taught to
students and that they are ready for the real world.

Traditional Curriculum
ADVANTAGES
In spite of the debate over state and national standards reform efforts, it is universally agreed by educators and
experts that a key component of improving student achievement is raising standards. In the 1996 National
Education Summit, state governors, education leaders, and business leaders came to a consensus that use of
standards will:1. Help all students learn more by demanding higher student proficiency and providing effective
methods to help students achieve high standards;2. Provide parents, schools, and communities with an
unprecedented opportunity to debate and reach agreement on what students should know and be able to do;3.
Focus the education system on understandable, objective, measurable, and well-defined goals to enable schools to
work smarter and more productively;4. Reinforce the best teaching and educational practices already found in
classrooms and make them the norm;5. Provide real accountability by focusing squarely on results and helping the
public and local and state educators evaluate which programs work best. Proponents of standards-based reform
argue that flexibility in past reform efforts have not necessarily been shown to be successful. State tests
can highlight gaps and promote pressure for improvement, as well as demonstrate that these gaps will drive the
resources to the neediest schools. On a wider scale, a major advantage of standards-based reform is that standards
and assessments can allow access of curriculum for all students, as well as more equitable outcomes. However, it is
generally agreed that in order to be successful, these higher standards must be aligned with reforms in testing,
teacher education, improved teaching practices, and proper allocation of resources.
DISADVANTAGES
While several states are implementing some form of standards-based reform, there is very little empirical evidence
to prove that standards, assessment, and high-stakes accountability programs are effective in improving public
schools. In many states, such as California, attempts to implement standards-based reform are inconsistently or
carelessly aligned with quality research. The following are some of the shortcomings of standards-based reform.1.
Recent reports on the standards-based reform movement in New York suggest that in many schools the careless
implementation of standards and assessment may have negative consequences for students.2. Vague and unclear
standards in several subject areas in several states complicate matters and do not serve as concrete standards
defining what students should know and be able to do.3. Top-down standards imposed by the federal or state
government are also problematic. They impose content specifications without taking into account the different
needs, opportunities to learn, and skills that may be appropriate for specific districts or regions.
K-12 Curriculum
ADVANTAGES
The Philippine education system can become more competitive among other countries around the world. Though
there are still some problems that the government needs to solve before they can successfully implement the plan.
The proposed program is good but it still won't work if the needed elements to make it work arent present. Such
elements include the addressed problems mentioned above, especially the number of public school classrooms plus
the adequate supply of classroom chairs, books, etc. If the government could allot a bigger budget to educational
needs, then we could be one-step ahead towards the success of the K-12 program. Furthermore, parents (especially
those who belong in the poor sector) should be properly informed and motivated of the advantages of the K-12
Education Plan. This is very important since parents play a major role in providing the child's school allowances,
supplies, and fees for other school projects and activities. Add to that the support of parents towards their children
in terms of guidance and teaching. Once this succeeds, it is best hoped that Filipino students would be more
literate, skilled, and competitive to be able to find jobs more easily and contribute to the country's pride as well as
the country's economy.
DISADVANTAGES
In Philippines, education system is under low level, thus causing lot of problem within the country. To develop good
education, there was the launch of K-12education in the nation, which aims in assisting graduates to get

employment without any troubles. There are international tests, congested syllabi, entrepreneur ship training and
reinforcement of reading aspects that led to development in employment percentage. On the other side, there are
also few negative impacts created by K-12 education such as disintegration, continuous class hours and lack of
faculty to handle classes efficiently. Though, K-12 education advantages and disadvantages have an impact, it is the
Philippines government.

Personal Insights.
Language is dynamic as well as the curriculum. We have different curriculum in the past and in the present, but we
are now in the globally and competitive generation. A world does not just need competitive teachers but also
competitive students. So, how will you become competitive if your curriculum is traditional, and if doesnt aware of
the new learnings of todays generation?
Students now are fond of using computer, they will probably choose going to computer shops rather than attending
class. That is why as a teacher you have to be competitive and made something new to class every day, so that
they will be more challenged and get excite everyday upon attending the class. For me the effective way of solving
this kind of phenomena as a teacher is that we must use technology upon teaching. Well make it as our partner in
delivering a lesson so that our students will not get bored. Well make teaching-learning process lively and
meaningful.
Etc. Focused more on the learners and not on the teacher meaning less memorization and more encouraging for
critical thinking Graduates will be more matured when they enter college or that they will be ready for work
Produce productive, responsible citizens with the essential competence and skills for both life-long learning and
environment.
A traditional curriculum uses older methods like lecturing in a classroom. Progressive programs experiment with newer
methods like online learning.