letisia n. hidiwakusha the roles of primary teachers in...
TRANSCRIPT
Letisia N. Hidiwakusha
The Roles of Primary Teachers in the National Curriculum Design
and Development in Namibia
University of Eastern Finland
Philosophical Faculty
School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education
Master’s Degree in Primary Education
October 2018
i
ITÄ-SUOMEN YLIOPISTO – UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND
Tiedekunta – Faculty Philosophical Faculty
Osasto – School School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education
Tekijät – Author Letisia Nandjala Hidiwakusha Työn nimi – Title The roles of primary school teachers in the national curriculum design and development in Namibia
Pääaine – Main subject Työn laji – Level Pro gradu -tutkielma Sivuainetutkielma Kandidaatin tutkielma Aineopintojen tutkielma
Päivämäärä – Date 30 October 2018
Sivumäärä – Number of pages 102
Curriculum education ×
Tiivistelmä – Abstract Curriculum quality depends on the roles and participation of teachers in the developmental process since they are the principal role-players. Their knowledge, experience, ideologies and perceptions play an essential role in understanding how the curriculum can be designed and reformed. Despite that, it is through curriculum development that teachers and educational stakeholders discover new ways of providing useful learning experiences to accomplish the task of educating the young ones. However little is known about the significant roles teachers play in the curriculum development process in Namibia. Therefore, this study sought to investigate the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum design and development in Namibia. The study further aimed to explore the importance of teachers’ participation in curriculum development as well as the barriers encountered during the development and implementation process. This study employed a quantitative research design which used a non-random purposive sampling to select a sample size of (N=60). The participants were from three primary schools in the Khomas region: Havana Primary School, A.I Steenkamp Primary School and Namutuni Primary School. A survey-questionnaire, which consisted of closed-ended and open-ended questions was used to collect data. The collected data were analysed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis. Tables and charts were generated to present the findings from the closed-ended questions, which were then backed up by qualitative data. The findings revealed a high (70.0) percentage of primary teachers who do not participate in the national curriculum design and development process. Hence, they do not have any role in the curriculum design and development other than being the implementers. However, the few (13.3%) teachers that participate in the process have roles of planning, evaluating, advising and assisting fellow developers on the themes to be removed/included in the curriculum. The outcomes also illustrated a significant number of participants, who revealed the importance of teachers’ participation in all stages of the curriculum development process. Buttressing this, teachers indicated that they are the ones who put the reform ideas into practice. Hence, interpretation will be naturally resulting in a practical implementation process. It is further noted that, although it is essential for teachers to partake in the development process, there are some numerous barriers (such as lack of funds, time factor) which hinder the success of curriculum development and implementation process. This study inferred that there is poor participation of primary teachers in the national curriculum planning and development process in Namibia, which makes them only to have a role of implementing the curriculum. Hence, teachers are considered as curriculum implementers instead of being both implementers and developers. Based on the findings, the study recommends the educational officers from the MoE and NIED to engage teachers in decision making outside the classrooms, by involving them in all the developmental stages of the curriculum. Therefore, as much as teachers are the curriculum implementers, they should equally be involved in curriculum development. The present study contributes to the literature of other scholars and raises awareness about the significant roles of teachers in curriculum development process.
Avainsanat – Keywords Barriers; Curriculum; Curriculum development; Design; Importance; Participation; Roles; Teachers.
ii
Acknowledgements Above all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the Almighty Father for his boundless
blessings, grace, strength and protection throughout my entire studies. The support and
motivation from numerous people have been a driving force and inspiration towards the
completion of this thesis.
Firstly, I feel more than a pleasure to extend my heartfelt gratitude to my supervisor, Professor
Sari Havu-Nuutinen, for her valuable support and guidance throughout this research process.
Through her constructive feedbacks and positive encouragements, I was inspired to shape my
thesis in many ways.
I also acknowledge Sanio Mutilifa (Educational officer and PhD student) and Lotty Amunkete
(Master student at UNAM) for their constant support, referrals, coaching and willingness to
assist me in any way during this project. I am very grateful for their reviews.
My most profound appreciations go to NSFAF for supporting me financially during my studies
in Finland, the Director of education in Khomas region and school principals for permitting me
to conduct my survey at three selected primary schools. Furthermore, I would like to give
special thanks to all my delightful participants; this research would be futile without their
wonderful contributions and inputs.
I am humbled by the interest and support provided by all my friends, my fellow Namibian
students, African students in Joensuu, International students and all other acquaintances. They
added more meanings and light to my project.
Lastly, my sincere gratitude to my family, especially my precious mother and my siblings for
their unconditional love, guidance and incredible moral support. Although we have been
thousands of miles away, I felt it all. Their prayers have kept me alive and resilient.
iii
Dedication I dedicate this work to my lovely mother Justina Hamalwa and my late father Josef
Hidiwakusha who could not see it completed. Thanks for all their continual support, love and
for creating conditions which made the study possible. May his soul continue to rest in peace.
iv
Contents Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………………i
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. ii
Dedication .............................................................................................................................................. iii
List of tables ........................................................................................................................................... vi
List of figures ........................................................................................................................................ vii
List of abbreviations ............................................................................................................................ viii
Chapter 1: Introduction of the study ....................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Background of the study ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Statement of the problem ........................................................................................................ 3
1.3. Objectives of the study ............................................................................................................ 3
1.4. Significance of the study ......................................................................................................... 4
1.5. Summary ................................................................................................................................. 4
Chapter 2: Curriculum in the school context .......................................................................................... 5
2.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2. Definitions of curriculum ............................................................................................................. 5
2.3. Curriculum development process ............................................................................................... 11
2.3.1. Stages of Curriculum development ..................................................................................... 16
2.4. Summary .................................................................................................................................... 19
Chapter 3: Participation of teachers in curriculum development process ............................................. 21
3.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 21
3.2. Teachers’ roles in curriculum development process .................................................................. 21
3.3. Teachers’ perceptions toward the curriculum design and curriculum reform ........................... 25
3.3.1. The importance of teachers’ participation in the curriculum development process ............ 26
3.3.2. Barriers to participation in curriculum design and curriculum reform ............................... 30
3.4. Summary .................................................................................................................................... 33
Chapter 4: Research questions .............................................................................................................. 36
Chapter 5: Research methodology ........................................................................................................ 37
5.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 37
5.2. Quantitative research design ...................................................................................................... 37
5.3. Data collection process .............................................................................................................. 37
5.3.1. Sample and participants ...................................................................................................... 38
5.3.2. Survey ................................................................................................................................. 39
5.3.3. Pilot protocols ..................................................................................................................... 41
v
5.3.4. Procedures ........................................................................................................................... 41
5.4. Data analysis .............................................................................................................................. 42
5.4.1. Background information ..................................................................................................... 42
5.4.2. Quantitative analytical method ........................................................................................... 43
5.4.3. Qualitative analytical method ............................................................................................. 44
5.5. Validity, reliability and ethical issues ........................................................................................ 45
5.6. Summary .................................................................................................................................... 47
Chapter 6: Findings and discussions ..................................................................................................... 48
6.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 48
6.2. The roles of teachers in the National curriculum design ............................................................ 49
6.2.1. Summary and discussions of teachers’ roles in curriculum development ......................... 52
6.3. The effect of teachers' role in curriculum design to the pedagogical process ............................ 53
6.3.1. Summary and discussions on the effect of teachers’ roles in curriculum design to the
pedagogical process ...................................................................................................................... 56
6.4. Teachers’ perspectives towards the curriculum design and development process .................... 58
6.4.1. Importance of teachers’ participation in curriculum design and development ................... 60
6.4.2. Barriers to participation in curriculum development and implementation.......................... 61
6.4.3. Summary and discussions on teachers’ perceptions toward the curriculum design............ 64
6.5. Summary .................................................................................................................................... 69
Chapter 7: Conclusions of the study ..................................................................................................... 71
7.1. Research summary ..................................................................................................................... 71
7.2. Implications of the results .......................................................................................................... 73
7.3. Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 75
7.4. Ethics, trustworthiness and limitations ...................................................................................... 77
References ............................................................................................................................................. 79
Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ 87
Appendix A ....................................................................................................................................... 87
Appendix B ....................................................................................................................................... 88
Appendix C ....................................................................................................................................... 89
Appendix D ....................................................................................................................................... 90
vi
List of tables Page No.
TABLE 1. TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS WHO RESPONDED ................................................................ 39
TABLE 2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES AND DATA COLLECTION METHOD .......................................................... 40
TABLE 3. SCHEDULES OF WHEN THE RESEARCH WAS CONDUCTED AT THREE SCHOOLS .................................. 42
TABLE 4. BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF THE PARTICIPANTS ................................................................ 43
TABLE 5. RELIABILITY STATISTICS ...................................................................................................... 44
TABLE 6. SUMMARY OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND CATEGORIES............................................................. 45
TABLE 7. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTIC ON TEACHERS’ ROLE IN CURRICULUM DESIGN........................................... 49
TABLE 8. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTIC ON TEACHERS’ MOTIVATION AT WORK ................................................... 53
TABLE 9. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTIC ON THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS ..................................... 54
TABLE 10. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTIC ON TEACHERS’ PERFORMANCE ............................................................ 55
TABLE 11. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTIC ON TEACHERS TRAINING .................................................................... 56
TABLE 12. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTIC ON TEACHER’S PARTICIPATION IN CURRICULUM DESIGN ........................... 58
TABLE 13. THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHERS’ PARTICIPATION IN CURRICULUM DESIGN .................................. 60
vii
List of figures Page No.
FIGURE 1. AN EDUCATIONAL STRATEGIES APPROACH - DESIGNING THE CURRICULUM (TABA, 1962). ............. 14
FIGURE 2. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT STAGES (CARL, 2005) .............................................................. 17
FIGURE 3. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ................................................................................ 20
FIGURE 4. TEACHERS’ PARTICIPATION IN CURRICULUM DESIGN ............................................................... 29
FIGURE 5. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TEACHERS AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT ........................... 35
FIGURE 6. DATA COLLECTION PROCESS .............................................................................................. 38
FIGURE 7. STAGES IN QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS (MODIFIED FROM LICHTMAN, 2006) ............................ 44
FIGURE 8. SUMMARIZED METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY ........................................................................ 47
FIGURE 9. THE MAJOR ROLES OF TEACHERS IN CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT .............................................. 49
FIGURE 10. MAIN FOCUS WHEN DESIGNING THE CURRICULUM ............................................................... 51
FIGURE 11. EFFECT OF TEACHERS’ ROLES IN CD TO PEDAGOGY PROCESS .................................................. 57
FIGURE 12. BARRIERS WHEN PLANNING AND DEVELOPING CURRICULUM .................................................. 61
FIGURE 13. BARRIERS TO CURRICULUM IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................... 62
viii
List of abbreviations
CD Curriculum Development/Design
MEC Ministry of Education and Culture
MoE Ministry of Education
MoNE Ministry of National Education
NIED National Institute for Educational Development
UEF University of Eastern Finland
1
Chapter 1: Introduction of the study
1.1. Background of the study
The curriculum is the foundation of any education system; hence it is important to ensure that
the development of the curriculum receives proper attention in order to provide quality
education. According to Adentwi (2005), the curriculum is the total of educationally valuable
experiences that children undergo to schools or other training institutions. Similarly, the
Namibian Ministry of Education defines curriculum as a coherent framework that “guide
schools on how to organise the teaching-learning process to make sure that there is consistency
in delivery of the subject content” (Ministry of Education, MoE, 2015, p.1). Therefore, it
delineates the content children are to learn as it gives direction to planning, organising, and
implementing the pedagogy. The curriculum is designed in a way that it delivers the outcomes
to ‘employment opportunities’ and ‘economic needs of the society’ (Brady & Kennedy, 2013).
According to some recent studies, curriculum development is the consolidation of various
processes employed in the pursuit of certain sets of goals and objectives in the school system
(Mligo, 2008; Ornstein & Hunkins 2009; Otunga & Charles 2008). It covers the entire process
of curriculum construction, from the initial conceptualisation and planning to design
implementation and evaluation. Hence, the development process helps educational
stakeholders to discover new ways of providing more effective learning experiences. Besides
that, it also strives to find modern, better and more efficient means to carry out the task of
educating the young ones (National Institute for Educational Development, 2003).
The national curriculum in Namibia is developed to give direction to basic education towards
the realisation of the national vision 2030. The national vision 2030 stresses on the provision
of quality and appropriate education to transform the country into a knowledge-based society
and self-sufficient economy (Ministry of Education, 2010). The national curriculum aims to
provide a learner-centred approach. This approach allows children to explore and construct
their knowledge and meanings from new information and based on prior experience in the real
world (Ministry of Education, 2015). Therefore, the subject matter has to be presented and
taught in a way that it is related to learners’ daily life experience with collaborative learning
and more practical work (Ministry of Education, 2015). Learner centred approach provides a
vast opportunity for active learning - whereby children are not passive in the classroom, as well
as the construction of new knowledge, skills and conceptions.
2
Due to this philosophical background, the study uses constructivism theory since the national
curriculum promotes active learning and construction of new meanings as it is urged by the
constructivist theorists (Piaget, 1970, Vygotsky 1978, & Dewey 1964). The curriculum is
developed based on how children learn through social interaction, nature of the knowledge they
use, the context in which pedagogy occur, and methods used by teachers to help children
achieve the curricular goals (Ministry of Education, 2015; Branscombe, Burcham, Castle &
Surbeck, 2013). In this study, terms such as children, pupils, students and learners are used
interchangeably, as they all refer to those trying to gain knowledge and acquire skills through
studying or experience in school.
Curriculum planning and development process differ from country to country. In some
European countries like Finland and Sweden, the national curriculum is decentralised, while in
many African countries like Ghana, South Africa and Burkina Faso it is centralised (Bantwini,
2010; Pietarinen, Pyhältö, & Soini 2017 ). In Namibia, the national curriculum is developed
from the National Institute for Educational Development (NIED). This is the government
institution which is responsible for the development of all the educational policies and
curriculum documents. All the subject syllabuses are developed at NIED by the curriculum
developers committee which consists of higher education institutions (lecturers, Cambridge
consultants), teachers and educational officers.
According to prior studies, it is essential to involve teachers in curriculum committee because
they are the backbone and critical part of the team when developing the curriculum (Carl, 2005;
Kobiah, 2016). Teachers are the backbone of the curriculum committee because of their inputs
and significant roles that they play in curriculum planning and development process. Thus,
teachers have to play a leading role in curriculum development since the teaching profession
is intertwined with curriculum development. Additionally, teachers’ role in the curriculum
development process is regarded as one of the most crucial aspects which foster the
implementation of curriculum reform and enhance the effectiveness of pedagogy in schools.
According to Bantwini (2010), teachers are the “key to the success of curriculum development
and curriculum reform” (p.5). This is because their knowledge, experience, principles, and
perceptions play an essential role in understanding how the curriculum can be designed and
reformed. Furthermore, a study carried out in Kenya advocates the involvement of teachers in
all the stages of curriculum design and development to promote effective implementation
(Kobiah, 2016). The provision of quality education to society depends on how the curriculum
is developed and articulated by teachers (Abudu & Mensah, 2016).
3
Therefore, this study intends to investigate the roles of primary teachers in the national
curriculum development process. Studies of this nature are limited in Namibia; hence, this
knowledge will add to the existing literature.
1.2. Statement of the problem
Teachers are often seen as the central part of any discussions about the curriculum which they
are entrusted to develop and implement. However, a little or lack of training in the planning,
development, evaluation and implementation of the curriculum is given to teachers in Namibia.
Sometimes, not all teachers from diverse schools are conducted for their inputs and make
decisions during the curriculum design and development process. Therefore, most of the
teachers enter the process at the later stage, during the national implementation whereby they
are provided with syllabi designed by NIED. Teachers are, therefore, tasked to deliver the
curriculum effectively to every child and make sure that everything in the syllabi is covered.
Despite that, sometimes there are not enough textbooks or teaching and learning materials,
subject-content is vast, poor school infrastructure and unqualified teachers to implement the
curriculum. This kind of scenario can hinder the attainment of the national goals as teachers’
interpretation of the curriculum might not be well articulated as it was planned in the policies.
Hereafter, many questions arise based on the planning and development of the curriculums
such as: Are all the teachers allowed to participate in all the stages of curriculum design and
development process? If yes? Why is it important to participate? What are the significant roles
and contributions that they make during the process? Are they willing to take up challenges of
participating in the production of learning materials and implementing new reform? Therefore,
this background has driven the researcher to investigate the roles and importance of involving
teachers in curriculum development in Namibia.
1.3. Objectives of the study
Due to concerns mentioned above about the roles and participation of teachers’ in the national
curriculum development in Namibia this study aims to:
Research objective 1: Investigate the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum
design and development.
Research objective 2: Identify how the roles of teachers in curriculum development affect the
pedagogical process.
4
Research objective 3: Identify teachers’ perceptions toward their participation in the national
curriculum design and development.
1.4. Significance of the study
Curriculum plays the crucial central role in the teaching and learning process, as it guides
teachers on how to deliver an efficiency and quality education to every child (Ministry of
Education, 2015). Therefore, this study makes substantial contributions in the field of education
as it provides clarity on the roles and importance of teachers’ participation in the national
curriculum design and development process. The findings can also broaden the educational
stakeholders’ insights on how teachers’ roles in the curriculum design process affect the
teaching and learning process. Significantly, the information from this study can help the
Ministry of Education and educational stakeholders to be aware of barriers encountered by
teachers during the process of curriculum development as well as in the implementation phase.
By knowing the barriers, they will be able to decide and consider on the type of support that
can be provided. Lastly, the results of this study could contribute to the literature of other
scholars who wish to research in the same field.
1.5. Summary
In chapter one, the researcher introduced the study through which few aspects are outlined:
background of the study, statement of the problem, objectives of the study as well as the
significance of the study. It is against this background that the study is carried out to investigate
the role of teachers in the national curriculum design and development in Namibia. Therefore,
chapter two shall be devoted to further clarify curriculum development through which more
detailed aspects and concepts will be provided as viewed by other researchers.
5
Chapter 2: Curriculum in the school context
2.1. Introduction
Chapter two presents a detailed overview of curriculum and how it is perceived in school level
context. This chapter is divided into two sections; section one is composed of definitions of the
major concept which is defined differently based on various perceptions. Therefore, the major
concepts and terms such as curriculum, curriculum reform which sets the theoretical ground of
the study are well delineated. Furthermore, the section touches on the aims and importance of
reforming and developing curriculum. Section two discusses the curriculum development
process as well as the different stages involved in the process.
2.2. Definitions of curriculum
The term curriculum is used in several meanings and defined in many different ways. Kelly
(2009, p.75) argues that curriculum is a “complex concept which does not just relate to the
content or syllabus for any educational programme”; thus it can be perceived differently.
However, in a school context, he defines it as the totality of experience pupils have as a result
of the provision made by any educational institution and subdivides the whole curriculum
(p.77).
According to Null (2011), curriculum is more than simply subject matter organised into
learning experiences which plays a vital role in the education field. He, therefore, define it as,
“a process of taking a subject, preparing it for implementation and following through so that it
makes a lasting impact on learners”. Additionally, curriculum is viewed as the “result of
thoughtful, deliberate efforts that are grounded in the use of a systematic approach to the
development processes” (p.7). Kennedy (2005) regards curriculum as the “totality of learning
experience offered to students with the aim of attaining general skills and knowledge at a
variety of learning sites”. The stress is more on learning aspects rather than just on teaching.
Therefore it focuses on the learning and acquiring of skills and knowledge at sites other than
schools.
Researchers above are of the views that curriculum is mainly the comprehensible progression
of educational experiences that address issues and needs of the society (Null, 2011; Kennedy,
2005). Therefore, these experiences are organised consecutively, in a manner that concepts
build on one another and connect to other content areas or real-world situations.
6
Furthermore, “curriculum needs to be developed appropriate, be grounded in relevant learning
theories and provide necessary resources and techniques for effective implementation with the
intended audiences in specified learning settings” (Smith et al., 2017, p.35). According to Bell
and Baker (1997), curriculum refers to the understandings and meanings constructed by
teachers and learners in the classroom context, that is the teachers and pupils perceived,
assembled, lived or experienced curriculum. Hence, the curriculum is seen as the meanings that
learners make of the planned learning activities that are most important for teachers to consider.
Furthermore, the Finnish national core curriculum (2016) defines curriculum as a national
regulation issued by the Finnish National Board of Education compliance with which local
curricula are prepared. Curriculum plays a primary role in the teaching and learning process as
it guides teachers on how to deliver an efficiency and quality education to every child. This
curriculum intends to support and steer the provision of education and schoolwork, as well as
to promote the same implementation of comprehensive and single-structure of basic education.
The Finnish national core curriculum describes the general goals, principles, core content of
teaching all school subjects and guidelines of the basic education. According to Pietarinen et
al., (2017), the curriculum aims to preserve the most valuable aspects and promote changes in
the future of society.
In the South African context, curriculum is viewed as knowledge, which shows ‘how
knowledge is constructed’ and the role of school which is in teaching and learning process
(Chisholm, 2005). The curriculum is developed in a way that it promotes a learner-centred
approach through which hidden knowledge and everyday realities are valorised, and real
learning takes place. South African national curriculum aims to promote democracy and
expand the involvement of all children in education as well as to improve quality of life of all
the citizens and free the potential of every individual. Additionally, curriculum seeks to
create/produce a lifelong learner who is literate, independent, confident, active, compassionate,
and multi-skilled with respect for the environment and to participate in the society as a critical
and active citizen (Masila, 2007).
Similarly, in the Namibian context, the term curriculum is defined “as an official policy for
teaching, learning, and assessment that gives direction to planning, organising and
implementing the teaching and learning process” (Ministry of Education, 2015, p.1). Moreover,
curriculum is also regarded as a framework which devises syllabuses, learning materials, and
textbooks to be used in various subjects and areas of learning.
7
Teachers develop the schemes of work and lesson plans from these syllabuses so that the goals
and aims are consistently put into practice. The Namibian national curriculum aims to provide
a coherent and concise framework to ensure that there is consistency in delivery of the
curriculum in schools and classrooms throughout the country. It is designed in a manner that it
is consistent, meaningful, coherent and relevant to learners and manageable to teachers.
From the definitions above, it is evident that curriculum has various meanings based on
different perspectives and context. Therefore, the researcher opted to view curriculum as a
combination of all these definitions as the aforementioned experts’ view it, with the special
emphasis on Namibian definition. According to the Ministry of Education (2015) “curriculum
is an official policy for teaching, learning, and assessment that gives direction to planning,
organising and implementing the teaching and learning process (p.1). It further emphasises
that, curriculum plan for all the experience that learners encounter under the guidance of the
teacher and direction of the school. The researcher view curriculum entailing the provision of
instructional strategies and methods to be used in a pedagogical manner, to accomplish
curriculum objectives and to provide quality education to all the children. The curriculum aims
both to preserve what is considered valuable and to promote change for the future of the society
(Pietarinen et al., 2017).
As indicated above, each country has its national curriculum with different aims and objectives
which are formed based on the countries’ needs and demands as well as on the global economic
competitiveness (Smith et al., 2017). The national curriculum gives a set of subjects to be
taught at each phase with prescribed time allocations for their delivery that indicates the
number of hours that each subject has to be taught (Masila, 2007). In some countries such as
United Kingdom, Namibia, South Africa and Ghana, their governments perceive subjects like
English, Mathematics, and Science as the core knowledge that children need to learn (Carl,
2009). Therefore, these governments believe that these subjects have to be placed at the heart
of the children learning in state schools. According to Kelly (2009), the curriculum has a great
legal basis as it undergoes numerous reviews and revisions. Thus, developing and reforming it
is a very demanding process that requires a lot of time. Furthermore, the curriculum is not set
in stone, but in a social construction which consists of a selection of the subject content and
other aspects made by curriculum developers. Oghuvbu (2011, p.149) states that curriculum in
school context can further be viewed as the totality of a “systematically planned process of
pedagogy based on the aims and objectives of the educational policy of any country”.
8
It describes the core aims and objectives for education on how the teaching process can be
conducted. It further consists of the academic and subjects-based curriculum, and non-
academic or other curriculum programmes. Primary school curriculum subjects are academic
curriculum based on all subjects/content designed for the primary school level (Alavi, 2016).
Furthermore, some studies reveal that during the formation of the primary school curriculum,
the curriculum developers consider the essential core competencies like creativity, critical
thinking, comprehension, cross-cultural communication and citizenship (European
Commission, 2007; Kelly, 2009).
Additionally, Alavi (2016) urges for the primary school curriculum modules or subjects to be
designed well with coherent basic competencies. In some countries like Ghana, Namibia and
Nigeria the national curriculum is prepared in a well-detailed manner and simplified in different
subjects. Each subject has its syllabus outlining the basic competencies and learning
objectives. These syllabi are derived from the national curriculum. Primary teachers design
their scheme-of-work from the national syllabus which guides them during the teaching and
learning process (Ministry of Education, 2015; Oghuvbu, 2011).
In Namibia, the national curriculum is designed based on different phases in the education
system. Each subject in each grade has different basic competencies which are the continuation
of the other (Ministry of Education, 2015). The main curriculum objectives in the Pre-primary
school curriculum are devised to prepare children for formal education; thus children are taught
how to develop communication, concepts formation and motor; and social skills. From Grade
1 to 3, curriculum is designed based on four key areas: “literacy, numeracy, broad knowledge
of the immediate environment of the learner, and personal health” (p.18). Here, the curriculum
aims to familiarise learners with information and communication technology as a primary tool
for the learning process. Furthermore, “teaching and learning process is through the medium
of the mother tongue or predominant local language”, as learners learn how to read and write.
Besides that, the Senior Primary phase continues on a broad base, consolidates the foundation
laid at Junior Primary, and develops it further. The curriculum is thus designed for learners to
create irreversible literacy and numeracy, learning skills and basic knowledge in all the key
learning areas, (Ministry of Education, 2015). Each school subject is designed with different
basic competencies and learning objectives which are a continuation of the other in the next
grade.
9
Similarly, the primary school curriculum of Malaysia is formed based on the six pillars across
knowledge, skills and values domains which are essential to human physical, mental, social
creative and critical thinking. These pillars are: (a) communication, (b) spirituality, attitudes,
and values, (c) humanity; (d) science and technology; (e) physical development and aesthetics;
and (f) personal skills (Ministry of education, Malaysia, 2014a). Despite that, the Malaysia
primary school curriculum enhances creativity, embrace diversity and provide an opportunity
to students to integrate their knowledge, skills and values learned in the classroom and during
their extracurricular activities (Barghi, Zakaria, Hamzah & Hashim, 2017). So, to attain these
curriculum objectives and aims it requires positive co-ordination of the man and sufficient
teaching and learning resources through effective supervision. According to Oghuvbu (2011),
supports and encouragements are the most effective supervision tools in schools that enhance
the professional growth of teachers to develop appropriate teaching methods, techniques and
procedures which will improve their overall performance and efficiency.
The curriculum serves essential roles in school, as it guides teachers on how to go on with the
teaching and learning process. Thus, the actual implementation of the curriculum depends on
the teachers’ involvement in curriculum development as well as in the school supervision. A
study conducted by Pietarinen et al. (2017) based on the large-scale curriculum reform in
Finland indicates that curriculum mostly describes the general goals, core aims, and objectives
of education, including the teacher who will teach a specific subject to which grade and when.
Furthermore, it direct and guide teachers on how to implement the subject content and learning
objectives to be included during the lessons. Vitikka (2009, p.45) adds that “curriculum
knowledge content reflects to the didactic tradition, the pedagogical approach adopted
emphasises the integration of subjects and a coherent learning experience and human growth”.
Voogt et al. (2011) describe the development of curriculum as a means of curriculum reform.
Hence, school curriculum is reformed due to development in the country and changes in the
education system. According to McCulloch (2005), curriculum reform is a vital component of
educational innovation. Therefore, the curriculum is reviewed and revised to remove the old
content and update the existing educational curriculum in response to profound and
multifaceted changes occurring in the world today. Besides that, Badran (2011) buttress that
curriculum is reformed to address the societal and individual needs. For instance, in Namibia,
the Ministry of Education reformed the curriculum soon after independence, where the English
language become the new medium of instruction, which had been previously Afrikaans.
10
The primary purpose for curriculum reform is to provide basic education to every Namibian
child and redress the past inequalities and injustices through the four primaries “goals: access,
equity, quality, and democracy” (Ministry of Education, 2004). Furthermore, the national
curriculum was reformed recently (in 2015) to ensure that it remains relevant to the challenges
that Namibia face and strengthen the quality of education (Ministry of Education, 2015).
Therefore, this confirms the views of Bantwini (2010) that curriculum reforms are mainly
intended to bring “new changes in the education system and the classroom during the
pedagogical process” (p.87). Education reform is viewed as the mechanisms for solving
educational problems and redress educational injustices. Hence, prior researchers indicate that
the reforming of the curriculum provides a central tool for school development (Saracaloglu et
al., 2010).
On the other hand, curriculum changes advocate the enquiry learning approach which indicates
active pedagogy and construction of new knowledge and meanings. Rogan and Grayson (2003)
suggest that curriculum reform have to be accompanied by a comprehensive plan of how the
new concepts and new ideas will be implemented, based on the resources in the classroom or
at school. By doing so, it will reduce the waste of resources and avoid discouraging the
experience of the teachers. Hence, curriculum reform can be successfully implemented based
on teachers’ ownership of their knowledge and skills about reform ideas (Handelzalts 2009;
Huizinga et al., 2014).
The efficacy of the curriculum reform requires commitment from all the curriculum designers
as well as active roles of teachers in every step. Therefore, Rogan and Aldous (2005), pleads
for the policymakers and curriculum developers to focus more on “how” to bring the new
curriculum in practice than just on “what” enacting curriculum policy of what desired the
educational change. By doing so, it will avoid a gap between the curriculum that is developed
and that which is actually implemented. Teachers need to have up-to-date knowledge and skills
to be able to design, implement and deliver the curriculum reform very well. According to
Vitikka (2009), the success of curriculum development depends on the roles of teachers in the
developmental process since they are the implementers and key contributors to educational
changes and quality education. Hence, changes in curriculum reform have to be always situated
in the society, culture and education system of the country in which the reform takes place
(Kelly, 2009).
11
2.3. Curriculum development process
Curriculum development is a continuous and recurring process. Oliva (2009) defines
curriculum development as a comprehensive and multi-dimensional process whereby the
curriculum is planned, designed and implemented in the classroom. In support of Olivas’
definition, Lunenburg (2011) adds that during the curriculum development process educational
stakeholders plan, implement and evaluate curriculum that ultimately results in curriculum
design. According to Johnson (2012), curriculum development is a statement which identifies
the elements of curriculum, states what their relationship is to each other, and indicates the
requirements and principles of the organisation for the administrative conditions under which
it is to operate. While, Kuiper, Nieveen and Voerman (2004), perceive curriculum development
as an intentional process or activity directed at (re)designing, developing and implementing
curricular interventions in formal or corporate education. However, according to Carl (2005),
curriculum development is “an umbrella and continuous process in which structure and
systematic planning methods figure strongly from design to evaluation” (p.226). Therefore,
curriculum development can as well be seen as a process which involves making necessary
choices about who to participate in curriculum decision-making process, when to participate
and how it will proceed (Adentwi, 2005).
Curriculum development has many interpretations and definitions. Hence, for the purpose of
this study, all the above definitions are accepted since they are all similar and consist of the
same components of curriculum development process - from planning, designing,
dissemination, implementation and evaluation. Terms such as design and planning are used
interchangeably, to define the process of constructing, forming and creating the curriculum.
The national curriculum is developed differently based on the individual country. Each state
has diverse programs, policies and institutions which are involved in supervising and guiding
the curriculum developmental process (Khan & Law, 2015). McKernan (2007) indicates the
three different approaches used to design the curriculum; top-down, middle-up, and bottom-
up. In the top-down approach, the administrator determines the curriculum for teachers. While,
in the middle-up approach, administrators provide time and resources for revisions determined
by the school and teachers. Lastly, in a bottom-up approach or “grassroots” administrators
believe that curriculum can be revised only by those who teach it.
12
According to Abudu and Mensah (2016), variations in the planning and development process
are due to the approaches mentioned above and preferences of the nations. For instance, some
countries such as Ghana, Burkina Faso prefer a centralized (top-down) designed curriculum
where there is ‘less interaction between curriculum planner of the system and the classroom’.
While other countries like Australia and the United Kingdom prefer decentralised (bottom-up)
curriculum whereby teachers are active during the process of curriculum development
(Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2010a). However, when the
curriculum is designed centrally, teachers are not fully involved in the process. Therefore they
are only ordered or instructed to implement the curriculum. While in decentralised curriculum
teachers are fully engaged in all the curriculum phases (Chitate, 2005). Based on the Finnish
National Core Curriculum (2016), the national core curriculum is centralised, through which
the Finnish National Board of Education a state agency invites all the education stakeholders
to participate in the developmental process.
In other words, curriculum development can be done local, regional or national through which
curriculum developers such as; educational officers, national specialists, teachers and
educational stakeholders are responsible for planning and developing the curriculum (Golden-
Jubilee, 2013). Thus, curriculum developers are required to design an appropriate curriculum
which is of quality - clear, coherent, consists of the needs of the learner-centred approach and
enhancing collaborative learning. Despite that, it has to state clearly about what would be
taught by the teachers and what learners will need to learn at each stage of schooling to acquire
knowledge and skills (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2010a).
Furthermore, the curriculum developers are urged to ensure that all government schools have
the same curriculum with the same subject’s content and the same structure (Dogan, 2012).
Most importantly, teachers and other curriculum developers are expected to set up the aims and
objectives of the curriculum and point out the problems that need to be tackled during the
teaching and learning process (Huizinga, Handelzalts, Nieveen, & Voogt, 2014). This help to
ensure that the curriculum is developed in a way that it serves the needs of the learners, that of
the society and for the nation at large. However, Crawford and Kirby (2008) argue that there
is no need to limit school curriculum to the contents to be taught, but to enlarge itself to
situations that allow learners to learn how to live together and to live with others for them to
‘learn to be’.
13
In this study, curriculum developers refer to people who participate in certain stages of
curriculum development. According to Marsh (2009), curriculum participants can be all the
education stakeholders including the school-based personnel such as teachers, principals,
parents, community groups, government agencies, subject advisers and learners. Additionally,
curriculum developers can involve people who work/serve in the field of curriculum daily.
Hence, curriculum specialists and technicians are all required to develop the curriculum for
school contexts.
The process of curriculum development and reform goes through several stages (which are well
explained in section 2.3.1.), and it is undertaken after every specified period which is defined
by the educational institution based on different nations (Kahn & Law, 2015). For instance, in
the Namibian education system, school curriculum is reformed and reviewed after every five
years while in Finnish education system it is amended and reviewed after every ten years. Once
the curriculum is well designed and revised, then it will be distributed to schools for
implementation and evaluated after a certain period. Thus, Kobiah (2016) pleads the need for
evaluating curriculum empirically with the aim of realizing and achieving the intended learning
goals and objectives. The curriculum reviews and redesign have to be undertaken as necessary.
Additionally, Huizinga (2009) urges that when planning and designing curriculum, the
designers need to make use of different stages such as: “analysis, design, development,
implementation and evaluation activities, which are operationalized in specific tactics” (p.49).
On the other hand, during the planning process, it is essential for curriculum developers to
consider the curriculum mapping. Curriculum mapping plays a significant role in eliminating
differences between planned and taught curriculum; as well as the curricular elements such as
the content, learning experience, objectives and goals (Christy, 2003; Johnson, 2012). Despite
that, curriculum mapping is a practical system which is used to enlighten the academic content
standards that contribute to the development of vision and mission of the schools (Hale, 2008).
Recent studies reveal that curriculum mapping is a new and innovative model to curriculum
development process which includes components such as curriculum planning, teacher-teacher
collaboration, technology integration and reflective inquiry (Indian department of education,
2009; Johnson 2012).
14
An investigation carried out by Wilansky (2005) - based on teachers’ attitudes toward
curriculum mapping - indicates that most of the teachers have positive attitudes towards
curriculum mapping as it improves instruction and enlightens curriculum planning efforts in
three areas of professional collaboration, standards alignment and assessment. Hence, teachers
are obliged to possess the skills and knowledge for developing a curriculum based on a specific
subject matter where they are expert on (Handelzalts, 2009). Huizinga (2009), classified the
required knowledge and skills into six different categories based on the existing curriculum
and instructional design models’ activities. The categories are; knowledge and skills to
formulate a problem statement, idea generation skills, and systematic curriculum design skills,
formative and summative evaluation skills, curricular decision-making skills and
implementation management skills. These categories are seen to be pertinent to teachers for
enacting design processes.
Taba (1962) has created instructional strategies which are recently used by Lunenburg (2011)
in his study based on curriculum development: inductive models, where he explicitly shows
how the curriculum plan can be developed through modelling. Using models in curriculum
development can produce greater efficiency and productivity since the models are essential
patterns which work as guidelines for actions (Oliva, 2009). He further adds that the curriculum
model consists of “interactive elements – objectives, content, learning experiences, teaching
strategies and evaluative measures” (p.25) which ensure that the pedagogy process is well
presented. Besides that, models can help curriculum makers to conceptualize the development
process by stating out particular concepts and procedures that need to be followed. Taba
instructional strategies model is portrayed in the figure below;
Figure 1. An educational strategies approach - Designing the curriculum (Taba, 1962).
15
Taba instructional strategies model depicts that, planning of teaching and learning process
provides the basis of curriculum design, through which it determines the learning objectives
and subject content. The learning experience is selected and organised based on specific
criteria; teaching strategies that indicate various teaching methods, teaching and learning
materials, technology, and assessment and evaluation methods which are being used. Factors
external to the model that may affect its internal components are as well presented in the model.
And these factors include (a) policies of the school district; (b) nature of the community in
which the school is located – its pressures, resources and values; (c) nature of student
population; (d) nature of particular school – its goals and administrative strategies; and lastly
(e) the personal style and characteristics of the teachers involved. Subject content consists of
the learning objectives of each subject emphasising the degree yearly theme. Hence, during
curriculum design, teaching strategies are designed in a way that they clearly show specific
procedures which teachers may use in the teaching process (Luneburg, 2011).
Objectives aids in providing a consistent focus on curriculum for initiating criteria
of choosing the type of subject content and learning experiences, as well as to guide
and direct the evaluation of learning outcomes. The teaching strategies are planned
and developed based on the selected objectives, content and learning experiences
(p.3).
Therefore the process of identifying the objectives commence with the development of the
overall goals, derived from different sources, such as to reflects the needs and demands of the
nation (Oliva, 2009). Besides that, objectives are also determined based on the behavioural
statements and learning outcomes expected from the students, for instance, the acquisition and
understanding of the knowledge, and the development of thinking skills (Lunenburg, 2011).
Thus, it is very significant to include the goals, objectives, content and evaluation in the
curriculum development process since they play an imperative role in curriculum development.
Based on the research carried out by Verma (2012) on curriculum planning and development,
it outlines essential suggestions that can be used to improve the curriculum development
process. These suggestions are; revision and analysis of curriculum to be done after every five
years, provision of feedback to all the educational stakeholders as one of the curriculum
development strategy and lastly, making use of technology for the fulfilment of demands of
stakeholders.
16
The study further recommends curriculum developers to follow certain principles of curriculum
development such as; child-centred principle, active policy, the dignity of labour principle, and
preparation of real-life principle and socialism. O'Sullivan (2002) support these views, by
emphasising on the importance of revisions, evaluation and assessment of the curriculum, as it
enhances the developmental process. He further adds that when developing curriculum, an
arrangement has to be made for the panel discussion, workshops, seminars, orientation
programmes. Additionally, they have to ensure that teachers are fully involved in the process
since they are the most significant curriculum developers.
2.3.1. Stages of Curriculum development
The curriculum is reformed depending on the needs and demands of the society as well as to
the educational needs of the students (Golden-Jubilee, 2013). Therefore, during the preparation
of the curriculum, developers look on certain factors such as the formulation of the subject
content, assessments, instructional development, the teaching methods to be used, materials &
media development. Huizinga et al. (2009) are of the views that when planning and developing
curriculum, the curriculum makers have to make sure that the process goes through various
stages such as; preparing, planning, designing, developing, implementing, evaluating, revising,
and improving to produce quality curriculum. He further urges the curriculum developers to
follow all the stages in chronological order. In addition to this, Ornstein and Hunkins (2009)
confirm (Golden-Jubilee, 2013) sentiments by stressing on the importance of following all the
stages and steps of curriculum development. These researchers indicate that the stages are
composed of crucial elements of how to plan, implement and asses the curriculum; as well as
the process and procedures that need to be followed by the developers.
Traditionally, the development of the curriculum is more based on a sustained process of
teaching and learning in a formal institutional setting (Ornstein and Hunkins, 2009). However,
some researchers such as Carl (2005); Golden-Jubilee (2013); Marsh and Willis (2007) indicate
the most crucial stages for curriculum development process as; planning, dissemination,
implementation, and evaluation. Figure 2 below portrays these four curriculum development
stages
17
Figure 2. Curriculum development stages (Carl, 2005)
Stage 1: Curriculum Planning
Curriculum planning is regarded as what the knowledge is most valued through which the
learning goals and objectives are clearly stated out. The planning stage involves analysis of
philosophy, social forces, needs, goals and Objectives, subject content, treatment of
knowledge, human development, learning process & instruction, and decision (Campbell,
2006). Furthermore, curriculum planning determines the knowledge, skills, attitudes and
behaviours that learners need to know. This is the most hectic stage, through which curriculum
designers have to identify all the learning problems and learning needs before setting up the
objectives and goals of the curriculum. Recent scholars confirm that curriculum planning stage
requires a lot of time and more money since it is a planning phase that lays the foundation of
all the curriculum development phases (Marsh & Willis, 2007). Therefore, most of the
curriculum designers find it challenging to select the content that will make a real difference in
the lives of the learners as well as the society at large.
Stage 2: Curriculum Dissemination
This stage is explained as a way of making sure that the curriculum outreaches the target people
as it is aimed by the curriculum developers (Carl, 2005). This stage includes the preparation of
teachers (which involve sufficient training) for them to acquaint necessary knowledge, skills
and positive attitude towards the new reforms, which they are expected to adopt and use in
schools. Despite that, the curriculum dissemination stage requires the formation of newly
updated resources which are reflecting on the curriculum reforms and ensure that adequate
teaching and learning materials are provided to all the schools. However, (Campbell, 2006)
argues that curriculum developers find it hard to develop enough teaching and learning
resources to all the school. This is due to financial cost, time and commitment needed to create
new materials.
18
According to Golden-Jubille (2013), during this stage curriculum, designers decide on the
teaching strategies and methods that will be used to ensure that the curriculum reaches learners
effectively.
Stage 3: Curriculum Implementation
Implementation of the curriculum consists of the instructional scheme of each subject to be
completed in the semester. Hence, the new designs and methods are put into play. During
pedagogy process teachers plan the lessons as per timetable, use the transactional strategies
and appropriate media, providing learning resources, promoting classroom learning
experiences and continuous testing (Golden-Jubilee, 2013). Therefore, the effective
implementation of the newly developed curriculum is not likely to occur when there is no
proper planning made. Hence, a lot of planning and effort is required, so that appropriate
mechanism are put in places, for instance; distribution of new syllabus to all schools,
workshops are erected, provision of curriculum support materials and continuous supervision
as well as monitoring in schools. However, (Marsh & Willis, 2007) state that curriculum
implementation is a very complicated phase through which the involved people might have
conflicting ideas or lack of knowledge on how to go on about curriculum or with the reforms.
Therefore, curriculum facilitator needs to be carefully trained about the reforms and do
revisions based on how the reformed curriculum can be implemented.
Stage 4: Curriculum Evaluation
Curriculum evaluation stage deals with making professional judgements on the type of
curriculum to be implemented and to be evaluated. This stage consists of teachers’ evaluating
the; subject content, materials, tests and examination, learning outcomes, evaluation of teachers
by learners, curriculum review and modifications (Campbell, 2006). This evaluation is done in
both formative and summative way which are used during the curriculum development process.
Formative evaluation is used during the needs of assessment product development and testing
steps, while the summative evaluation is undertaken to measure and report on the outcomes of
the curriculum. According to Carl (2005), implementation of the curriculum needs to be
monitored closely to ensure that it is being used in schools faithfully by the teachers as planned.
Hence, the monitoring process needs to mainly focus on the objectives, content, methods of
instruction and assessment procedures to obtain information that can be used to review the
curriculum.
19
Moreover, curriculum developers evaluate the prepared curriculum and determine whether the
intended goals are being achieved or not. Thus, when it is not satisfactory, then the developers
turn for revising and improving the future curriculum development process (Golden-Jubilee,
2013; Marsh, 2009).
2.4. Summary
The review of this chapter was more based on extensive works of literature that exists in the
field of curriculum development. The chapter summarised the definitions of the curriculum
since it is a broad concept which has different interpretations based on different perspectives.
The curriculum is regarded as the foundation of education. The chapter further portrays that
curriculum reform occurs after a certain period with the aim of removing the outdated content
and update it in a way that it is reflecting the country’s needs. School curriculum guide teachers
on how to deliver efficient and quality education to every child, and so it is vital for them to
have roles in the planning process. Previous studies expose that curriculum is the foundation
of any education system. Therefore, to design and provide quality education teachers need to
be at the centre of the developmental process. There is variation in curriculum development
thus the roles and involvement of teachers in curriculum design depend on individual countries.
These variations occur since the curriculum is planned and developed based on the needs of
the children, society and that of the country. For instance, some countries such as Ghana,
Nigeria prefer centralised curriculum while countries like Australia and Finland prefer
decentralised curriculum. Most studies in the literature reveal that the preparation of curriculum
design and development is one of the most complicated tasks that consume more time, require
a lot of resources and more funds. Despite that, the researcher emphasises the most important
curriculum aspects (planning, curriculum content, implementation and evaluation) that need to
be painstaking during the process of curriculum development. These aspects are portrayed in
the figure below:
20
Figure 3. Curriculum development process
Figure 3 depicts the process of curriculum development which is a cyclic process. The figure
illustrates crucial aspects and stages that curriculum developers follow when designing
curriculum. Therefore, during the planning and development process, developers determine the
curriculum objectives and themes to be incorporated/removed from each subject. The
curriculum is evaluated before, during and after the implementation process.
21
Chapter 3: Participation of teachers in curriculum development process
3.1. Introduction
This chapter is composed of a literature review on which the study is based on the roles and
participation of teachers in the curriculum planning and development process. The chapter is
split into two sections. In the first section, the researcher looks at the roles of teachers in
curriculum design and development. The second section is on the teachers’ perceptions toward
the curriculum design and curriculum reform. This section focuses on the significance of
teachers’ participation in the curriculum development process, as well as on the challenges and
barriers that they encounter during curriculum development and implementation process.
3.2. Teachers’ roles in curriculum development process
Teachers’ roles in the national curriculum development process are one of the most significant
tools that need to be considered. Teachers are the primary source and most effective
practitioners in developing the curriculum (Lucas, 2005). According to Doğan & Altun (2013),
once teachers are involved and have roles in the planning process, they become aware of all
the changes made in the curriculum and be able to interpret it very well. As a result, it enhances
the implementation process which can accelerate and enable the achievement of ‘education for
all’. South African researchers such as Bantwini (2010); Blignaut (2007) and Haney et al.
(2002) state that teachers are the key players to the success of curriculum development as well
as to curriculum reform. Teachers are key players in CD because of their knowledge,
experience, beliefs, and perceptions play a fundamental role in understanding how the
curriculum needs to be designed and reformed. The success of curriculum development and
reforms mostly lay on their shoulders as they are the ones who put reform ideas into practice
(Huizinga et al., 2014). It is noteworthy that teachers play significant roles in each phase of
curriculum development process since they possess some qualities of working as designers,
managers, interpreters, scholars, assessors, implementers, researchers, decision-makers,
administrators as well as evaluators for the assessment of the learning outcomes (Golden-
Jubilee, 2013).
According to Hayward (2000), teachers play respective roles in each stage of curriculum
development process. They are the curriculum advisors and planners, who provide information
on the themes and objectives to be included and removed from the curriculum.
22
As curriculum planners, they analyse the learners’ needs, splitting objectives into specific
learning objectives based on each subject, combining each subject matter, specifying the
required time and formulating syllabus for each subject (Golden-Jubilee, 2013). While in the
evaluation stage, teachers have the roles of evaluating and assessing the curriculum to ensure
that it measures what it is intended to measure and if it is reflecting the needs of the country
and that of the learners. The curriculum evaluation process includes; the evaluation of learners,
evaluation of materials, and verification of methods, teachers’ self-evaluation and the
curriculum reviews (Golden-Jubilee, 2013; Uchiyama & Radin, 2009).
Recent studies reveal that teachers have a role of being curriculum agents (Bantwini, 2010;
Doğan & Altun, 2013). Accordingly, they are regarded as curriculum agents whereby they are
systematically empowered to develop curriculum and optimise the teaching and learning events
in the classroom. Despite that, they act as mediators between the curriculum and learners
because they know various needs of the learners, educational institutions and stakeholders.
Hence, this process increases the learning outcomes and other experience that may flow from
it and contribute to the development of the learners’ potentials (Altinyelken, 2010). Most
researchers recommend the teachers to be curriculum developers instead of being only
curriculum receivers. The reasons being that teachers’ participation provides an opportunity to
make guidelines and syllabus more relevant and meaningful effective curriculum agent
(Bantwini, 2010; Golden-Jubilee, 2013).
Furthermore, Lucas (2005) emulates that when teachers are empowered and have roles in
curriculum development, they act as facilitators and make learners realise that they have a share
not only in their learning process but also in the learning process of others as well. Khan and
Law (2015) make a case for teachers to be empowered and be “active participants in the process
of curriculum development” (p.68) since they are the people who are directly involved in the
classroom practice. They further added that teachers’ roles in the planning process enhance
their participation and freedom in the classroom. Hence, the success of this process lies in the
hands of the teachers when they are “at the heart” of the process (Talbot, 2015). These views
are supporting the claims made by Hayward (2000) and Carl (2005) of the extension of
teachers’ roles in democratic decision making, as well as the introduction of democratic in
curriculum development process which establish the participation of all the role players.
23
As stated earlier, the involvement of teachers from the initial phase of curriculum planning and
development promotes ownership (Bakah, Voogt & Pieters, 2012) and a more pragmatic
implementation strategy (Elizondo-Montemayor, Hernández‐Escobar, Ayala‐Aguirre &
Aguilar, 2008). Furthermore, teachers’ roles in curriculum development are needed to ensure
effective pedagogy in schools (Carl, 2005). According to a research conducted by Huizinga
(2014), it is essential to engage all the teachers in curriculum design and development process
in order “to provide an opportunity to experience the practical alternatives and to make their
choices” (p.25). This is because their collaboration in the curriculum development generates
opportunities to exchange and share educational experiences and expertise with their peers
from different schools (Havnes, 2009).
Mockler and Sachs (2011) express that teachers’ professional identity which is central to an
understanding of the professional pedagogy and development needs to contribute and advance
a more productive and transformative vision for education. When teachers get involved in the
process of construction, they create learning environments that are meaningful for learners
during pedagogy (Ault, 2008). Meanwhile, Uchiyama, and Radin (2009) support the
collaboration and roles of teachers in curriculum planning as it is one of the most effective
ways to promote successful implementation of the curriculum. They further state that it is good
to work together from the beginning of the process of comprehension, especially in a joint
intellectual effort. On the contrary, the shared operational understanding of the curriculum
reform and its implications might help them create ownership, and a more realistic
implementation strategy (Elizondo-Montemayor et al., 2008).
Within the South African context, there are various requirements regarding the roles of teachers
and their competencies in curriculum development and the whole education system
(Department of Education, 2002). Teachers’ roles are stipulated in the official documents as;
interpreters and designers of learning programmes and materials, mediators, researchers and
implementers, assessors, a learning area and subject specialists, leaders and administrators.
Hence, this presents a great indication of what the national education department expects from
teachers regarding their possible curriculum functions. However, some South African
researchers Bantwini (2010) and Carl (2005) argue that although the roles are well stated in the
educational policies most of them are not incorporated in the designing and development of the
curriculum. While other studies reveal that, most of the teachers are neglected from the
curriculum innovations and development process.
24
This type of negligence is caused because curriculum innovation in most African countries and
a few other parts of the world are initiated “top-down” (Ramparsad, 2001; Beswick, 2009)
through unilateral administrative decisions. The studies show that most countries such as
Ghana, South Africa and Nigeria indicate rare engagement of teachers in the curriculum design
and development process hence, their role is viewed as to implement the curriculum
(Oloruntegbe, 2011).
The same case is also observed in Turkey, whereby researchers reveal that the Ministry of
National Education (MoNE) and their Boards of Education are the ones responsible for
preparing and designing the national curriculum which is made compulsory for all the schools
(Doğan & Altun, 2013). Therefore, teachers’ participation in curriculum planning and
development is limited, since they are regarded as curriculum implementers and facilitators
whose role is to adopt the official curriculum to their classroom (Abudu and Mensah, 2016;
Marsh, 2009). On the same case, a Namibian research study conducted by O’Sullivan (2002)
indicates that the roles of teachers in curriculum design and development have received a little
attention in Namibia, which tends not to be considered seriously by the policymakers. He,
therefore, request for the recognition of teachers’ role in all the stages of curriculum
development as well as the needs of the assessment which provides an appraisal of “class roots
realities” or “cognitive schemata” to ensure an effective implementation (p.132).
Based on a research project carried out by Carl (2005) on the “voice of the teachers in the
curriculum development in South Africa”, the results show that most of the time teachers never
partake in any curriculum development levels outside the classroom. This implies that teachers
do not have any role in the planning process since they are not granted an opportunity to
participate. Buttressing this, Mokua (2010) states that teachers are of the ideas that little or no
attention is given to their voice although they are the subject or learning area specialist. Hence,
they only participate when receiving training on how to apply curriculum at school and
classroom level (Carl, 2005). Subsequently, in South Africa teachers’ roles in curriculum
development is regarded as that of a facilitator since they are only assigned to implement the
curriculum. This is very discouraging and demotivating, especially that teachers are the one
who put the reform ideas into practice and they best know the learners’ needs. According to
Mouraz, Leite, and Fernandes (2013), the enactment of professional identity by teachers’
assumption of their role as real curriculum designers is still far from being achieved in Portugal.
25
The study shows that teachers who participate in CD do not consider themselves as true
curricular decision-makers, because they seem to deal with a centralizing logic of the
curriculum complying with what is prescribed in the official documents.
This also implies in Kenya, whereby the Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD) is the
one that develops the national curriculum and supply teachers with the curriculum package
consist “of comprehensive syllabuses, curriculum support materials, teaching suggestions and
test for learners” (Kobiah, 2016, p.186). As a result, teachers’ role becomes that of the
“consumer rather than a producer”, because they are only involved in the last stage of the
process- in the implementation stage. The researcher further stress that, this kind of approach
leaves teachers with the perceptions of not having any role in the other curriculum development
phases except in the classroom: where they have a role of implementing what they received
from the central office, following the externally planned syllabus. Therefore, this type of anti-
democratic approach can create what Okda (2005) calls “pedagogical dogmatism”. The study
recommends teachers to have roles in curriculum planning process to ensure effective
implementation of the curriculum. Furthermore, it will avoid the lack of ownership and
commitment necessary for the success of curriculum reform.
From the above literature, many recent scholars argue that the majority of the teachers in
African countries and the other part of the world are positioned as receivers and delivery of the
curriculum. Hence their roles are being ‘perceived as of executing the innovative ideas’ of
those who develop curriculum which is mostly the policymakers and educational researchers.
The curriculum is handed down to them from the top which makes them feel that their
contribution to the curriculum is just in the classroom, as they only receive insufficient
guidance on how to apply it correctly. So, this makes teachers have no role in the development
process other than being just curriculum implementers. Hence, the little or lack of teachers’
involvement in the curriculum development is worrisome because teachers are the key to
success of any curriculum.
3.3. Teachers’ perceptions toward the curriculum design and curriculum reform
Perception is a broad term with diverse meanings, in this study perception is defined from the
physical psychological and physiological perspectives, the process by which people attach
meaning to experience (Adediwura & Tayo, 2007). Therefore, the researcher will review the
previous literature, experience and views of teachers towards their participation in curriculum
design and development process.
26
This section is composed of two components: the importance of teachers’ participation in
curriculum development process and barriers that they encounter when developing and
implementing the curriculum.
3.3.1. The importance of teachers’ participation in the curriculum development process
According to Oloruntegbe (2011, p. 447), “there is no curriculum development without teacher
development; hence, curriculum development is about teacher development”. The curriculum
is regarded as the “heart and soul” of all the educational institution and the “foundation” of the
teaching and learning process (Khan & Law, 2015). Therefore, it is imperative for teachers to
participate in the process of curriculum design and development. Teachers’ participation in this
study refers to the active engagement of teachers in all the curriculum planning and
developmental process. Teachers perceive curriculum planning as one of the most valuable
tools in curriculum reform and development, as well as in improving the teaching and learning
process. Thus, for them to be part of the planning process is a great experience and
contributions (Dogan & Altun, 2013). Necessarily, teachers are the ones who implement the
curriculum and sharing their opinions on what they experience in the classroom enhance the
teaching and learning process. This is because they have the closest relationship with the
curriculum since they are always in touch with it in classes. Hence, they prefer actions where
their individual decision-making power is present, rather than decision of areas that involve
collective agreements (Mouraz et al., 2013).
The effectiveness of school curriculum development depends on the participation of the
teachers. Thus the involvement of teachers in curriculum development is essential since they
collaborate with the curriculum specialist to organise the subject matter and teaching/learning
resources when designing the curriculum (Oloruntegbe, 2011). Based on a study conducted by
Abudu and Mensah (2016), on the basic school teachers’ perceptions about curriculum design
in Ghana, which reveal the importance of involving teachers in the development process in
order to feed their field experience about what and how to teach, and how to work with other
developers to design a curriculum that suits all the children.
Golden-Jubilee (2013) emphasizes the importance of teachers’ role in curriculum design to
guide the instructional lessons that they use in the classroom. Curriculum defines whether
learners have learned new information and concepts from the class as it is expected. Hence,
these help teachers to determine if they achieved their lesson objectives and basic
competencies.
27
Despite that, the researcher further shows that teachers are willing to take part in curriculum
design because it provides them with new ideas of solving problems and various methods or
ways of teaching and assessing learners’ progress. Therefore, without the guidance of the
curriculum, then teachers will not be able to perform well either to be certain that they
transmitted the necessary knowledge to the learners. In support with this, Carl (2005) indicates
that decisions are taken in regard to the content as to what needs to be included, how it can be
presented and evaluated. Hence, it is within this process of curriculum development that
teachers need to be involved for effective implementation. Kobiah (2016) sturdily emphasize
that strong curriculum can only be developed if teachers play a fundamental role in every step
and stage of the curriculum development process.
Moreover, the significance of teachers’ participation in curriculum development is that they
are given conditions to be able to answer to the challenges they deal with on a daily basis as
they act as agents between learners and curriculum (Doğan & Altun, 2013). Therefore, they
need to be curriculum designers and not only mere doers of what is prescribed by the
educational administration. Buttressing this, Maphosa and Mutopa (2012) claim that teachers
are the ones who deal with pupils in everyday life hence their involvement helps in identifying
children’s needs and find a solution to address these needs. Additionally, the participation of
teachers in curriculum development provides an opportunity to improve the existing curriculum
as well as to enhance its effectiveness (Abudu & Mensah, 2016). They feel positive about their
contributions and satisfaction of participating in curriculum decision making. This implies a
deep level of knowledge about the curricular organization modes during the developmental
process (Mouraz et al., 2013).
According to a study conducted by Chisholm and Leyendecker (2008) based on Curriculum
reform in post-1990s sub-Saharan Africa, it indicates that many teachers believe that their lack
of participation in curriculum planning has a negative impact on the effective implementation
of curriculum reform. This is because teachers lack information about the changes made in the
curriculum and they are unable to articulate it accordingly. Additionally, the exclusion of
teachers in the decision-making process can as well cause the lack of commitment and
ownership, which may prevent the success of the curriculum (Kobiah, 2016). Consequently, it
may result in “misinterpretation of innovative features” thereby “hindering the attainment of
educational objectives” (Okda, 2005, p.6).
28
Various scholars argue that external curriculum where teachers are inactive in the planning
process might cause them to lose control of the curricula and pedagogical skills (Kobiah, 2016;
Carl, 2009). As a result, many of them tend to be deskilled by such curriculum.
Accordingly, for the subject content to be taught exactly as it is planned in the national
curriculum, teachers need to play a role in the developmental process. By doing so, it will avoid
the gap between the planned curriculum and the taught curriculum. Therefore, teachers are
eager to create an overall approach to curriculum design rather than to follow the prescribed
course of action which they have never partake (Wasil, 2014). Teachers’ involvement in the
development process is essential because curriculum guides the instructional lessons that
teachers’ use which defines the content learners need to learn (Golden-Jubilee, 2013).
Subsequently, they become aware of the teaching methods and strategies which need to be used
since they all know about the psychological and educational needs of the learners. With the
guidance of curriculum, teachers can assess students work and evaluate themselves if they
applied the necessary knowledge (Atkin, 2000).
According to Carl (2009), curriculum includes teaching and learning objectives, basic
competencies and general proportions of different type of instructional strategies suitable to
use in order to achieve these objectives. Hence, the teacher uses different teaching-learning
approach to transmit the subject matter and create opportunities for learners to acquire the
content. Teachers create learning opportunities for learners to be actively engaged with the aim
of obtaining the most meaningful and vital experience from collaborative learning (Kobiah,
2016). Therefore, they are eager to create an overall approach to curriculum design rather than
to follow the prescribed course of action which they have never partake (Wasil, 2014).
According to Munazza (2004), teachers understand “the nature of learning, pose challenging
tasks, encourage students to articulate their ideas, set goals for instruction, create appropriate
contexts and pose problems” that have relevance and meaning to their learners in the classroom
(p.19). All these activities show explicitly the need of involving them in all the developmental
stages to advance effective pedagogy (Kobiah, 2016).
Quality of involving teachers in curriculum design is crucial for nurturing their personal and
for personal growth (Wasil, 2014). This is because when they are fully involved, they feel
motivated subsequent them to perform well and produce positive results (Christou, Eliophotou-
Menon & Philippou, 2004). A study conducted by Van Den Berg (2002) shows that many
teachers perceive it more significant to be engaged in all the steps of curriculum development
29
to enhance their commitment, enthusiasm and morale in their work. This is also supported by
the findings from numerous studies, which reveal that the inclusion of teachers’ meaning,
opinion, belief, attitude, concept and cognition advocate their participation and freedom in the
classroom (Verma, 2012; Van Driel, Beijaard, & Verloop, 2001).
Despite that, Bakah et al., (2012) disclose in their study titled “curriculum reform and teachers
training needs” that, teachers in Ghana are keen to be more involved in curriculum design
process. These teachers argue that it helps them improve their subject knowledge which
advocates their confidence when teaching. Therefore, most of the teachers do not want to be
perceived as the “recipients and implementers” of the curriculum, yet, they want to be seen as
curriculum designers (Van Den Berg, 2002). They want to be involved in the early stage of
meaningful decision making where their voice can be heard.
According to Oloruntegbe (2011), curriculum implementation and delivery of quality
education can be a success if all teachers and communities partake in the development process
and structural changes. Teachers are well-informed about the curriculum hence the enactment
process becomes more natural. This results in the attainment of the intended educational goals
(see figure 4). Thus, recent studies urge for teachers to be involved and convinced enough to
participate in the curriculum development process. By informing them about their positive
contributions to the process and towards the educational development of the children (Bakah
et al., 2012).
Figure 4. Teachers’ participation in curriculum design
Attainment of educational goals
Deliverance of quality education
Good interpretation
Teachers engaged in CD
30
Figure 4 above summarize the importance of teachers’ participation in curriculum development
process in the education system. As mentioned earlier, it is essential to engage teachers in all
developmental stages because it gives them a clear guidance on how to plan and develop the
teaching process which is in line with the educational goals. Therefore, when teachers are
empowered in the planning process, curriculum becomes clear, meaningful and relevant to
them.
3.3.2. Barriers to participation in curriculum design and curriculum reform
Barriers to participation in curriculum development refer to the constraints and challenges that
teachers and curriculum developers encounter during the process of curriculum development
as well as during the implementation of curriculum reform. Most recent studies reveal that
developing education curriculum is one of the most complicated tasks through which teachers
encounter various problems (Kuiper, Nieveen, and Voerman, 2004). In support with this,
Huizinga et al., (2014) indicate that although teachers’ participation in curriculum design
fosters the implementation of the curriculum reforms, they experience numerous challenges
while designing and sometimes after making changes in curriculum. These challenges can be
generally classified into two types, internal challenges of the education and global (external)
challenges (Golden-Jubilee, 2013). The internal challenges include the shortage of highly
skilled human resources, diversification of the economy and the need to invest more in
education research. While external challenges include the; critical process of technological
progress, an increase of social inequalities, progress of democracy and radical transformation
in the work field. On the other hand, Abudu and Mensah (2016) point out other challenges like;
insufficient funds, incompetence, inertia, lack of resources, insecurity and inadequate training
as they might also hinder curriculum developers from designing quality curriculum and from
implementing the new curriculum effectively.
According to Fullan (2001), one of the major problems is that most teachers have no clear
picture neither a coherent understanding of what the aims and purpose of educational reform
are, what it is all about and how it is supposed to proceed. Some teachers lack the knowledge
and skills needed to enact collaborative curriculum design processes. Researchers such as
Mokua (2010) and Ramparsad (2001) indicate that most teachers lack information about the
designing process of the curriculum since the whole curriculum development process is not
clear. Thus, even if they are willing to participate, they would not do so because their roles are
not well defined and stipulated. Therefore, the limited knowledge which teachers have about
the curriculum development serves as an obstacle towards their engagement in the process.
31
Buttressing this, Handelzalts (2009) agree that teachers lack design expertise and have
insufficient time in working and dealing with the variations in expectations within the teachers’
curriculum design team. Some recent scholars reveal that teachers do not have enough time to
participate in curriculum development due to enormous responsibilities and high workload. For
instance, some Zimbabwean teachers are arguing about their daily lesson preparation, grading,
teaching, extramural activities, being loaded with a lot of periods per week and having classes
with more than 40 learners (Bantwini, 2010; Chinyani, 2013). Such situations limit their ability
in partaking in the curriculum development process. However, the literature from Kenya and
South African studies show that teachers are not putting more effort in participating in
curriculum development since there is no remuneration for their effort (Carl, 2005; Mokua,
2010).
On the other hand, Mouraz et al. (2013) express that “A key issue and major challenge in
curriculum development is how curricular interventions can be (re)designed, (re)developed,
and implemented in order to achieve a satisfying balance between the ideals of a curriculum
change and their realization in practice” (p.485). Researchers further argue that the translation
of intentions into outcomes; regarding learning experiences, and performances of students and
trainees; is not a simple, linear process. The transformation process is complicated since
numerous things might occur unexpectedly (Eunitah et al., 2013). Therefore, these researchers
plead for the provision of support and guidance to novice teachers who are designers in order
to improve and enhance their designing expertise. Oliva (2009), is in line with the points made
by Golden-Jubilee (2013); Abudu and Mensah (2016), as he emphasises on the essentials of
curriculum reform, though he indicates numerous implications involved that can hinder the
effective curriculum development as well as the attainment of the intended educational goals;
Financial implications - Curriculum development and reform cost a lot of money which make
it more expensive (Khan & Law, 2015). There are many things involved during and after the
process of curriculum development for example; carrying out research, creating of materials,
training of teachers and re-education of personnel are expensive. Hence, sometimes curriculum
tend not to be reformed or adjusted on time since the government does not have sufficient funds
(Oliva, 2009).
Teacher preparedness during curriculum design - Issues such as teacher preparedness need
to be tackled at the starting point of curriculum development process to ensure effective
implementation of the innovation (Oliva, 2009).
32
The teacher preparedness and several kinds of support that may be needed by the teacher to
cope with and contribute to the curriculum developed have to be well maintained.
Attitudes of teachers, society and pupils - Unqualified and inexperienced novice teachers
already struggle with the implementation of some themes/topics in the curriculum hence the
reforms might affect their teaching performance negatively. While the qualified ones tend to
be traditional as they see the curriculum reform as a threat to their security (Oliva, 2009). Due
to this perception, teachers stick to their old teaching methods as they find it hard to acquire
the new content. On the other side, pupils may have little interest in the reformed curriculum
as they are mainly concerned about success being measured by examination. The society
members will also be against the new changes as it might threaten their perceptions and
concepts of the excellent curriculum (Carl, 2009). With this uncertainty about the purpose of
curriculum reforms and the existence of different viewpoints which are hard to reconcile, the
implementation can be affected (Oliva, 2009). Furthermore, the negative attitudes of the
teachers, students and society can impair the progress expected in curriculum changes.
Therefore, it is always good to demonstrate the importance of positive attitudes.
Time factors - Curriculum development is time-consuming hence enough time is needed to
make changes and to develop the curriculum because it is long-term planning (Carl, 2005). It
is further outlined that the variable that can make changes now may no longer be held over a
long period because this situation is dynamic (Oliva, 2009). On the other hand, some teachers
may not want to work in the curriculum committee, feeling that they don’t have enough time
due to school workload.
According to Collopy, (2003); Schneider and Krajcik (2002), other challenges with curriculum
reform is the difficulty in designing enough educative curriculum materials (teaching and
learning materials) which are in line with the reformed curriculum to promote pedagogy.
Curriculum materials play a significant role in fostering teachers and learners, toward
enhancing the educational changes. Furthermore, it is challenging to help teachers connect their
ideas as some of them might not have a clear picture of the changes made in the curriculum
(Davis & Krajcik, 2005). In support with this, Christou et al. (2004) conclude that the changes
in curriculum can create disjunctions between teachers' prior knowledge and practice which
require resolution.
33
Several authors such as Van Driel et al., (2001) and Mligo (2008) point out that teachers’ view
and knowledge on the subject matter and pedagogy of the new curriculum does not change
easily nor rapidly. Especially if they were not involved in all the stages of curriculum
development, thus they find it difficult to implement the reform ideas.
Atkin (2000) examines issues about the teachers’ perceptions towards educational change and
curriculum reform. This researcher indicates that curriculum reform affects the skills, beliefs
and general perspective of the individual teacher. Hence, individual beliefs and preferences
may seem to present an indistinct, elusive and inefficient target for school reformers. On top
of that, South African teachers argue that they are not well trained on how to execute the
curriculum (Carl, 2005). The same situation also applies to countries like Namibia, Nigeria and
Swaziland, where challenges such as; lack of technology at some schools, untrained teachers,
writing textbooks and learning resources that are reflecting the curriculum reform were raised
(Iipinge & Kasanda, 2013; Ottevanger, 2001; Kobiah, 2016). Implementation is one of the
major challenges of curriculum reform, though the government always tries hard to achieve the
successful enactment of the curriculum. Therefore, it is essential that all teachers who are the
“implementers of the curriculum, take ownership and execute it with commitment” (Ministry
of Education, 2015, p.2).
3.4. Summary
The literature review of this study is more based on external studies which are carried outside
Namibia in the field of curriculum development since there are limited studies conducted in
Namibia towards this topic. The previous studies reveal that curriculum is one of the crucial
aspects, which guide and direct teachers on how to proceed with the teaching process and how
to deliver quality education to every child. Teachers play essential roles in curriculum
development; they are regarded as the “hearts and souls”, planners, advisors and developers of
the curriculum. Hence, it is crucial to involve them in all the steps and stages of curriculum
development, as it improves their teaching process and enhances the effective implementation
of the curriculum. Furthermore, teachers’ participation in curriculum development provides
them with new ideas for solving educational problems and numerous methods of teaching and
assessing learners’ progress.
34
Prior researchers strongly support the engagement and roles of teachers in the curriculum
development process since it assists them to advance the existing curriculum. Despite that, it
as well advocates their effectiveness, enthusiasm, commitment and morale in their work. When
teachers have roles in the curriculum designing process, they interpret the curriculum very well,
implement it accordingly and subsequently achieve the curriculum goals.
Based on the existing literature, teachers play significant roles in each step of curriculum
development process, because they possess qualities of working as planners, designers of
learning materials, interpreters, scholars, assessors, implementers, researchers, decision-
makers, administrators and evaluators. However, several studies from different countries depict
that, although teachers’ role in curriculum development is well stated in the educational
policies, they are not put into practice during the designing and development process. This is
because their participation in curriculum planning is minimal in most of the countries. Studies
conducted in Nigeria, South Africa, Turkey and Kenya have shown that most of the teachers
are not granted an opportunity to partake in the planning process since they are only involved
in the implementation phase. Therefore, their roles are regarded as just being implementers and
facilitators of the curriculum. The negligence of teachers shown in these countries is because
curriculum innovation is initiated through the Top-Down approach. In this approach, teachers
are instructed to adopt the official curriculum to their classroom by following the prescribed
syllabus. What is worse is that teachers who participate in curriculum development process do
not consider themselves as true curricular decision-makers, because they seem to deal with a
centralizing logic of the curriculum complying with what is prescribed in the official
documents.
The participation of teachers in curriculum design is worrisome in these countries, which may
have an impact on the pedagogy process and in the education system at large. The reason is
that many teachers are not involved in the process and without their guidance in the curriculum
breeds poor performance. Therefore, prior literature urges teachers to have roles and participate
in all the stages of curriculum development process. As a result, it ensures a practical
implementation of the curriculum and avoids the lack of ownership and commitment needed
for the success of the curriculum. The findings from the above literature do not necessarily
conclude on the roles and participation of primary teachers in the curriculum design and
development in Namibia. Figure 5 briefly summarise teachers’ participation in curriculum
development process.
35
Figure 5. The relationship between the teachers and curriculum development
Figure 5 above briefly summarises the relationship between teachers and curriculum
development process based on the reviewed literature. The figure indicates different ways of
developing curriculum and how teachers are involved. It further illustrates teachers’ roles in
the developmental process and how it affect the pedagogy process.
36
Chapter 4: Research questions
This research is a central concern on the roles and participation of teachers in the national
curriculum design and development in Namibia. Teachers’ role in the developmental process
is one of the crucial aspects which enhance the teaching and learning process. Hence, the
overall focus of this study is to investigate teachers’ roles in the national curriculum design and
development process. The study further seeks to obtain information and personal experience
from primary teachers towards the importance of participating in the national curriculum
development. Therefore, in order to attain and fulfil these objectives of the study, the researcher
has designed research questions from the target and aims of the study, which are as follow;
RQ 1: What are the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum design and
development?
The first research question intends to investigate various roles, tasks, functions and
responsibilities that teachers have in the planning and development process of the national
curriculum.
RQ 2: How do teachers’ roles in curriculum design affect the pedagogical process?
Research question two seek to obtain information on the impact of teachers’ roles in the
developmental process to the teaching process. Are there any differences in how to interpret
and implement the curriculum between teachers with roles in the planning process and those
without roles?
RQ 3: What are the perceptions of teachers towards their participation in the national
curriculum development?
This research question focuses on the views of teachers regarding the importance of
participating in the curriculum development process. Besides that, it also measures the barriers
encountered by teachers when developing curriculum as well as during the implementation
process of the curriculum reforms.
In trying to answer these research questions, the researcher expects to obtain useful information
from the target population. The wealth of collected data is based on the inputs, perceptions and
experience of the teachers from the selected schools.
37
Chapter 5: Research methodology
5.1. Introduction
This chapter presents the methodology of the study. The purpose of this study is to investigate
the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum development in Namibia. Therefore,
this chapter intends to present and justify all the research procedures followed by the
researcher, such as the research approach and the data collection process. In addition to that,
the chapter will elaborate more on the data collection methods, data analysis as well as the
validity and the ethical issues of the study. The research methodology chapter will provide an
overview of how research tasks and research questions were carried out and addressed by the
researcher.
5.2. Quantitative research design
The methodological research design used in this study is a quantitative design which used a
survey approach, to obtain numerical data and descriptions on the roles of primary teachers in
national curriculum design and development in Namibia. According to Creswell (2013),
quantitative is a design used for testing objectives theories by examining a relationship among
variables. In this study, quantitative research focuses on gathering numerical data, generalizing
it across a group of people and explain the current status of this phenomenon. The survey
research approach was employed because it involves the most effective strategy to find
essential and appropriate information reflecting the research questions of the study (Creswell
& Miller, 2000).
5.3. Data collection process
The data collection involves a series of activities connected, which allows the researcher to
obtain answers to the research questions and evaluate the outcomes (Creswell, 2009).
Therefore, the data collection process of this study starts with the sample and participants,
followed by data collection method which emphasizes on the instrument that was used to obtain
data and lastly the piloting of the protocols. Collected data were analysed both quantitatively
and qualitatively. These steps are briefly illustrated in figure 6 below.
38
Figure 6. Data collection process
5.3.1. Sample and participants
A non-random purposive sampling was used to select a sample of (N= 60) qualified teachers
with a teaching experience of more than four years. However, because of the fear that not all
teachers will respond nor return the questionnaires, a total of (N=90) questionnaires (see table
1) were distributed to three schools. Purposive sampling was chosen because researcher made
a specific choice about the type of people or group to include in the sample that can provide
fundamental concepts and central phenomena of the study (Bertram & Christiansen, 2014).
Therefore, this was the right sampling to use in order to select teachers who have been in the
teaching profession for a long time.
The study was conducted at three primary schools in the Khomas region in Namibia. These
schools were purposively selected based on the criteria that they were all primary schools
which were the main focus of the study (primary teachers’ roles in CD). Furthermore, the
choice was also influenced by the fact that all schools were government school (they all use
the same curriculum) and they are all situated in the capital city, Windhoek. Hence, the
researcher had easy to access the participants and save the transportation costs. Table 1 below
depicts the total number of participants who responded to the questionnaire from all the
schools.
39
Table 1. Total number of participants who responded
As it is indicated in table 1, out of (N = 60) primary teachers who responded to the survey,
8.3% of participants were from pre-primary phase, 35.0% from junior primary phase, while
56.7% were from senior primary phase. The table further shows, 85.0% participants in the
survey were female while 15.0% were males. Thus, due to an unequal number of males and
females participants the researcher was unable to compare gender in data analysis.
5.3.2. Survey
In order to obtain the most relevant and valuable information, the researcher has to select the
most accurate data collection method and comprehensively design the research instrument.
Hence, in this study, a survey-questionnaire was designed as a research instrument to gather
enough data on the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum development in
Namibia, from a large set of teachers. The choice of the survey-questionnaire was influenced
by the research questions and objectives of the study. According to Guthrie (2010), a survey-
questionnaire is a useful tool that collects factual data and helps participants to give their views/
facts freely without any intimidation. This questionnaire was developed comprehensively and
consistently in order to obtain authentic data on the current status of primary teachers’ roles in
the national curriculum development. The research instrument was printed and distributed in
hard copies. The questionnaire was divided into three sections (see Appendix D): the first
section consists of the background information which had variables such as age, gender,
teaching experience, primary phase, qualification and school name.
40
It was essential to gather this information to ensure that the participants meet the criteria of the
study of whether they are qualified primary teachers who have been in the teaching profession
for more than four years. Hence, this information aids the researcher to obtain inputs and data
on teachers’ roles in curriculum development from experienced teachers. Furthermore, the
background information was as well used to determine whether all teachers from the primary
phase participate in the planning process. The second section entails the structured (close-
ended) questions which were presented in an ordinal scale of two different Likert-type scales:
The five-point Likert-type scale (Strongly agree=1, Agree=2, Neutral=3, Disagree=4, strongly
disagree=5) was combined to three-point Likert-type (Agreement= 1, Neutral= 2,
disagreement=3) during data analyses. The second Likert-scale type of (Never = 1, Sometimes
= 2, Always = 3). Section 2 variables were created to measure how often teachers participate
in curriculum planning process, if they have roles in all developmental stages, whether their
roles affect the pedagogical process, as well as if they receive training on how to develop and
execute the curriculum. The last section has unstructured (open-ended) questions, which
focused on the subjective views of teachers toward their roles in the process of curriculum
development. This section allowed participants to clarify and describe in their own words the
roles, importance and barriers encountered during curriculum development and
implementation process. These variables were created based on the theoretical framework and
aims of the study, as well as on the previous questionnaires from Kobiah (2016) and Mokua
(2010). The survey-questionnaire was proper and appropriate for this study because it helped
the researcher to acquire factual data from teachers based on their beliefs, experiences and
views. According to Bertram and Christiansen (2014), survey-questionnaires are used to
capture the reality of the participants lived experience and their thoughts about the particular
situation.
Table 2. Research objectives and data collection method
Research objectives Data collection method (Questionnaire)
To investigate the roles of teachers in the national
curriculum design and development.
Structured and unstructured
questions
To identify the impact of teachers’ roles in curriculum
design on pedagogy process.
Structured and unstructured
questions
Determine the perceptions of teachers toward their
participation in curriculum design and development.
Unstructured questions
41
Table 2 above shows how the questionnaire sections were used to collect data from teachers,
in order for the researcher to achieve the objectives of the study.
5.3.3. Pilot protocols
Firstly, a pilot study was conducted a month before carrying out the main research, with the
aim of testing whether the questionnaire was measuring what it intends to measure if it was
valid and reliable. In addition to this, a pilot study was also conducted to ensure that questions
in the research instrument were all comprehensive, appropriate and relevant, as well as if the
participants could understand the fundamental concepts very well. Permission was attained
from the supervisor to carry out a pilot study with any Namibian teacher residing in Joensuu,
who is willing to participate. Criteria were still the same as the one in methodology that only
teachers who taught for more than four years were allowed to participate. Therefore, a total
number of seven Namibian teachers doing their Masters’ Degree in Education at the University
of Eastern Finland (UEF) took part. After piloting the questionnaire, minor changes were made,
before handing the final draft to the supervisor for reviewing and rectifications. Testing the
questionnaire in advance, assisted the researcher in refining and eliminating all errors that were
found in the research instrument which might hinder the success of the research process. Baker
(2002) indicates that the primary goal of the pilot study is for the researcher to identify all the
possible complications, mistakes and errors in the research instrument, and rectify them before
carrying out the main study.
5.3.4. Procedures
When the supervisor approved the final draft of the questionnaire, the researcher obtained a
permission letter from UEF (see Appendix A) to conduct the research. Then later, a letter was
written to the Director of education seeking for a permission to conduct a research at three
primary schools in Khomas region. After attaining an approval letter from the Regional
Director (see Appendix B), it was then addressed to all the three school principals.
Subsequently, a permission was granted to the researcher by all the school principals to carry
out the study at their schools without any interruption. Furthermore, an internal arrangement
was made by the school principals with the qualified teachers who have a teaching experience
of more than four years. These teachers decided and agreed on the dates of when the researcher
has to distribute and collect the questionnaires from each respective school.
42
Table 3. Schedules of when the research was conducted at three schools
Table 3 above showed the dates when the research was conducted at three schools. Each school
was given 30 questionnaires to complete in one week. On the first day at each school, the
researcher read the instructions and explain the aims of the study to all the participants in the
staff room. Out of 90 questionnaires that were distributed to three schools only 65
questionnaires were collected by the researcher. From these collected questionnaires 5 of them
were not fully answered. Therefore, data analysis was based on the 60 completed
questionnaires.
5.4. Data analysis
During the data analysis process, the researcher firstly analysed and presented the background
information which consists of the biological information of the participants (see table 4). Two
methods were used to analyse the data since the questionnaire was divided into three sections.
The structured section was analysed using quantitative analytical method while the
unstructured section was analysed using qualitative analytical method (see section 5.4.2 and
5.4.3). The questionnaires were completed in absolute anonymity without any provision of
names collections or other methods of identification.
5.4.1. Background information
The first part of the questionnaire, contains the biographical information of the participants
which shows that, out of the total number of participants (N=60), most of them (43.3%) were
between the age of 25 – 30 years old, while (36.7%) were between 31 – 40 years old and only
(20.0%) were above 40 years old. Concerning their teaching experiences of 61.7% have 5-10
years of teaching experience, 28.3% have 11-20 years of teaching experience, and 10.0% taught
for more than 20 years.
43
Table 4. Background information of the participants
Participants f %
Ages 25 – 30
31 – 40
40+
Qualifications Master degree
B. Ed
Diploma
Others
Teaching experience 5 - 10 years
11 – 20 years
20+
26 43.3
22 36.7
12 20.0
0 0
33 55.0
25 41.7
2 3.3
37 61.7
17 28.3
6 10.0
Table 4 above illustrates the background information, which depicts that most participants were
qualified and have been in the teaching profession for more than four years. Hence, they were
able to give informed views, facts and inputs based on their teaching experiences.
5.4.2. Quantitative analytical method
Quantitative data were prepared, organized and entered in the SPSS, where the researcher used
descriptive statistics to summarize and analyse the collected data from closed-ended questions.
According to Atieno (2009), using descriptive statistic is one of the most fundamental ways to
summarize data by indicating the general tendency in the data and vital in interpreting the
findings of quantitative research. Therefore, the data were processed into means, frequencies,
percentages and standard deviation with the help of Microsoft Excel 2016 spreadsheet software
and the IBM SPSS Statistic software, version 25. Despite that, data were converted and
presented in different tables and graphs for discussions.
Furthermore, the researcher measured the quality of the research instrument (structured
questions) using Cronbach alpha (α) to maintain and ensure the reliability of the study. Table
5 below shows the reliability statistics of the instrument.
44
Table 5. Reliability statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
Cronbach's Alpha
Based on
Standardized items N of Items
,801 ,810 20
Table 5 reveals an overall reliability test yielded .801 which depicts 80.1% of internal
consistency. These results indicates that the research instrument was more reliable since α >.8
(Muijs, 2004).
5.4.3. Qualitative analytical method
The collected data from open-ended questions were analysed using qualitative content analysis
which involved inductive hand-coding. Firstly, the researcher organised, interpreted, coded and
categorised the data into themes to provide a coherent explanation of a single phenomenon.
Central research themes were identified in the responses and grouped accordingly. Hence, each
participant’s responses were carefully/equally examined and analysed using the
aforementioned tools and categories. The researcher followed the systematic procedure of
analysing qualitative data. According to Taylor and Gibbs (2010), systematic procedure consist
of “preparing and organizing the data for analysis, then reducing the data into themes through
the process of coding and finally presenting the data into figures or discussion” (p.13).
Figure 7, shows the systematic procedures of qualitative content analysis which was used by
the researcher, during the analysis of the open-ended data.
Figure 7. Stages in qualitative data analysis (Modified from Lichtman, 2006)
Categories that shared a similar description as per the teachers were combined and put under
one research question (RQ). For instance, the majority of teachers responded on how they are
involved in the national curriculum development process before identifying their roles and
responsibilities. Therefore, under each research question are responses/categories that were
made mostly by the teachers.
45
Table 6. Summary of research questions and categories
Research questions Categories
RQ 1: Teachers’ role - Planners and Designers
- Assessor and evaluators
- Advisors
- Implementers, Facilitators
RQ 2: Effect of teachers roles in a CD on
the pedagogical process
- Advocate implementation
- Positive performance
- Achievement of the curriculum goals
RQ 3: Participation
Importance
Barriers
- Few participate - not encouraged
- Good interpretation of the curriculum
- well-informed
- Implementers
- Knows learners’ needs
During planning process
- Lack of experts, no enough training,
teachers not involved, Time
During implementation
- Lack of funds, resources, facilities, lack
of understanding
The qualitative data increased the validity and trustworthiness of the study. Despite that, it also
aids in buttressing the quantitative data which is more on the roles of the teacher in CD, the
effect of teachers’ roles on pedagogy, the importance of teachers’ participation in CD as well
as barriers encountered during the process of designing the curriculum. Therefore, the analysis
of data began with the structured responses which were then backed up by the answers from
open-ended questions.
5.5. Validity, reliability and ethical issues
To ensure that the interpretation of data was valuable, the researcher made sure that the research
instrument which collected the data is both valid and reliable (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2013).
46
Therefore, the questionnaire was designed in a way that it produces accurate and reliable results
that are trustworthy. Besides that, the right instrument was used to measure the concepts that
were intended to be measured, as well as to collect quality data which reflected on the roles of
primary teachers in the national curriculum development in Namibia. The trustworthiness of
the researcher determined the quality of the findings. The questionnaire was piloted and
reviewed by the supervisor, to maintain its validity and ensure that it is coherent and reflecting
the research questions of the study. On the other hand, the researcher refrained from making
bias during data collection, interpretations, generalizing of findings as well as from making
measurements errors during data analyses. Hence, the claims of the results are supported by
the data and not generalized beyond what the case can warrant (Muijs, 2004).
The ethical consideration was adhered to, respected and practised in this study. According to
Gay et al. (2013), ethical considerations play an imperative role in all research studies hence
the researchers need to be aware of the research ethics and attend to ethical considerations
related to their studies. Firstly, the researcher obtained a permission letter from the University
of Eastern Finland (see Appendix A) to conduct the research in Namibia. Then after, the
researcher was granted a permission letter which was requested by the Director of Education
in Khomas region (see Appendix B). These letters were then presented to all the three schools.
In the letter that seeks for the permission, the researcher briefly explained the objectives and
aims of the study and how the research is relevant in the Namibian context. Since the research
was carried out at the beginning of the semester, the school principals could not provide a
permission letter to the researcher due to their hectic and tight schedules.
Furthermore, to assure that the participants’ confidentiality was put into consideration, the
researcher designed the research instrument in a way that it does not require any individual
identity. Therefore, the participants’ identity and rights were respected. Participants were
informed that they were free to decline or to withdraw at any time of the study, without any
threat, counter-attack or recrimination. Consequently, the participation of the teachers was
voluntary. An informed consent letter (see Appendix C) was attached to the questionnaire
outlining the purpose of the study and what it entails before they participate.
The researcher can confirm that participants of the study were treated with courtesy as their
privacy and anonymity were protected (Hennik, Hutter, & Bailey, 2011). The ethical
considerations were undertaken within the ethics of respecting people, their knowledge as well
as respect for the quality of educational research (Muijs, 2004).
47
5.6. Summary
The research approach used in this study is a quantitative method which employed a survey
research design. The researcher used a non-random purposive sampling to select a total
population of (N=60) primary teachers, with the teaching experience of more than four years.
The survey questionnaire was used to collect data regarding teachers’ roles in the curriculum
development process, with the aims of achieving the research objectives. This research
instrument had undergone a pre-testing process before carrying out the main study. The pre-
testing enables the researcher to obtain feedback in order to rectify, refine and finalise the
questionnaire. During this study, the research ethics were put into consideration hence no
research rules were violated because the researcher followed all the research methods and
procedures accordingly. The figure below shows a well-detailed summary of the methodology
of the study.
Figure 8. Summarized methodology of the study
48
Chapter 6: Findings and discussions
6.1. Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to present and discuss the findings of the study that emerged
from the survey (semi-structured questionnaire) that was conducted at three selected primary
schools in the Khomas region in Namibia. The chapter encompasses of three main sections
which respectively attempt to answer the research questions described in Chapter 4 of this
study.
The findings are designed and presented in order of the research questions of the study. Firstly,
the researcher presents and discuss the results of the first research question, which is on the
roles of the teachers in the national curriculum design and development. Secondly, the
researcher continues to present the findings on the effect of the teachers’ roles in curriculum
development on the pedagogical process as well as on the performance of the teachers. The
third section covers the perceptions of the teachers toward their participation in curriculum
design and the implementation process. Here the focus is mainly on why teachers think it is
crucial to participate in the national curriculum development process. Additionally, the third
section further examines the challenges and barriers that teachers encounter during the process
of curriculum development as well as during the implementation of the curriculum reforms. A
descriptive statistic is used to report the quantitative data which is then backed up by the
qualitative data. The presentation of data for each research question is followed by the summary
and discussion of the findings, which enable to provide extensive explanations and insights on
the essential roles of teachers in the national curriculum development in Namibia.
RQ1: Roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum design and development
RQ2: Effect of teachers roles in the curriculum development to the pedagogical process
RQ3: Teachers perspective (importance and barriers) towards the curriculum development
49
6.2. The roles of teachers in the National curriculum design
Table 7. Descriptive statistic on teachers’ role in curriculum design
Disagree Neutral Agree Mean Std.
Deviation
No.
Teachers have roles in an all the developmental stages. 42 (70.0%) 10 (16.7%) 8 (13.3%) 3.78 1.27 60
The results above indicate clearly that, a total of 70.0% participants disagree with the first
statement which states that teachers play major roles in all the stages of curriculum
development process. Of the participants, 16.7% are neutral while 13.3% agree with this
statement. However, the responses from the open-ended question reveal few major roles that
teachers have in CD.
Figure 9. The major roles of teachers in curriculum development
The results elucidate a large number of teachers (f=42) who have major roles only in the
curriculum implementation stage because they do not partake in the planning process. These
teachers indicate that their main task is to execute the curriculum that comes from the top-
down. Thus, their roles in curriculum development process are regarded as facilitator and
implementers of the curriculum, which is developed from NIED. Teachers also provided a
multiplicity of reasons to bolster their stand:
5 1 2
42
12
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Planners Advisor Assistant Implementers Evaluators
Fre
quen
cy (
f)
Roles
The major roles in curriculum development
50
I do not have a role in the national curriculum planning process, because teachers
are undermined and due to lack of well-informed people in curriculum committees
who do not know the significant roles of teachers in the planning process. Hence,
this makes teachers not to have any task in the developmental process other than
teaching and to put reform ideas in practice by following the syllabus (Teacher 10).
Teachers’ role is to implement the curriculum. Thus, we play many roles mainly in
the classroom when implementing the curriculum. For instance: to plan (lesson
plans) on how to deliver subject content, design teaching aids, facilitate curriculum
reformed, assess learners work, evaluate the learning process, ensure that learners
grasp the subject content and master all the basic competencies. As for me, I have
never participated in the planning phase (Teacher 47).
Figure 9, further illustrates a frequency of 12 teachers with the roles of assessing and evaluating
the curriculum. These teachers explain that they are given an opportunity to evaluate the
curriculum before implementation. This is done to verify whether the curriculum is measuring
what it intends to measure. Some teachers state that they evaluate the curriculum during
teaching and learning process; when they are assessing and evaluating the learners, teacher-
self-evaluation as well as evaluation of the materials. While others indicate that;
Teachers review and discuss the new curriculum (subject contents) at the workshop
to familiarize ourselves with the changes made, though our inputs are not always
considered. Hence, our inputs need to be considered during the workshops since we
are the one who implements the curriculum (Teacher 3).
I have a role in the evaluation stage of reviewing the curriculum. It is very significant
to evaluate the curriculum in order to determine whether the curriculum is reflecting
to the needs of the learners as well as that of the country. Besides, that it also
measure the extent to which curriculum objectives and goals have been achieved
(Teacher 12).
On the other hand, the figure show a low frequency of teachers who have three different roles
in the curriculum planning stage. The frequency of 5 teachers have a role of planning and
designing the curriculum. During this stage they decide on the curriculum objectives, subject
content, learning competencies and teaching methods to be used. While (f = 2) teachers have a
role of assisting other curriculum developers in building a better foundation for children and
ensure that every information needed to improve country’s education is included.
51
Besides that, they guide other developers on how to lay out curriculum by providing different
crucial themes to be removed and incorporated/added in the curriculum. The assistant teachers
have also a task of making workshops to the teachers who did not participate in the curriculum
planning process. The figure further illustrates a frequency of (1) teacher who has a role of
advising some curriculum developers on how to design the curriculum.
Figure 10, below depicts the essence of participants’ feedback on the statement: main area that
teachers focus during planning and designing of the curriculum.
Figure 10. Main focus when designing the curriculum
The findings reveal that teachers mostly focus on designing and selecting of the subject content
(54.0%) which consist of; developing learning objectives, themes to be removed/included,
basic competencies, curriculum knowledge, skills and time allocation of lessons. Secondly,
when teachers are designing the curriculum, they focus on the teaching and learning process
(33.0%). Here they decide on how the pedagogy process is going to take place in order to
ensure that curriculum is implemented effectively. Hence they determine diverse teaching
strategies, assessment and evaluation methods, learning approaches; and teaching/learning
materials to be used to implement the curriculum. Lastly, teachers focus on the area of school
support (13.0%). Curriculum developers and MoE ensure that schools are provided with
enough facilities (infrastructures, textbooks, technology and resources) which are reflecting on
the curriculum.
Subject content54 %
Teaching and learning process
33 %
School support13 %
Subject content Teaching and learning process School support
52
6.2.1. Summary and discussions of teachers’ roles in curriculum development
The results from both quantitative and qualitative data indicate a high percentage of teachers
who do not have roles in all the stages of curriculum development process. Most teachers reveal
that they do not have any role in the curriculum planning process because curriculum is
developed from NIED, where they only engage few teachers. In addition to this, teachers’ tasks
are regarded as to implement and facilitate the curriculum. Therefore, the majority of teachers
are only involved in the implementation stage when they are putting the reform ideas into
practice. Their roles tend to be more in the classroom when they are executing the subject
matter to learners following the syllabus. They describe their roles in the classroom as to make
daily lesson preparations, design teaching aids, assess and evaluate students work. These results
corroborate prior literature by Abudu and Mensah (2016) which disclose that most teachers are
regarded as implementers and facilitators of the curriculum, whose role is to adopt the official
curriculum to their classroom. Hence, their roles are being perceived as of executing the
innovative ideas of those who develop the curriculum, since their role become as that of the
consumer rather than of producer (Carl, 2005). Majority of the participants of this study
contend that playing no role in the curriculum planning process prevent an effective
implementation of the curriculum. Due to this, teachers are not well-informed about the reforms
in the curriculum. These results are also confirmed by Bakah et al. (2012) as they state that
teachers’ roles in curriculum design promote ownership and more realistic implementation
strategy of the curriculum.
The results from the survey further disclose that few teachers who participate in curriculum
planning process, have numerous roles like; planners/designers, assistants and advisors. During
this process, they guide their fellow curriculum developers on how to design the curriculum
and build a better foundation for children to ensure that every information needed to improve
country’s needs are included in the curriculum. The sentiments made by teachers are in line
with Lucas (2005) as he indicates that teachers are primary designers and most effective
practitioners of curriculum development, who act as mediators between the curriculum and
learners. Furthermore, the findings of the study show that teachers with roles in curriculum
planning stage indicate that they mostly focus on selecting and developing the subject content.
By doing so, they decide on the basic competencies and learning objectives that need to be
included in each subject, as well as different teaching approaches that can be used to implement
the curriculum. Hence, these areas are regarded as the most significant aspects that need to be
considered during the planning process.
53
In support with this, Uchiyama and Radin (2009) accentuate on curriculum developers to
always ensure that teaching strategies and learning materials are reflecting the curriculum.
Thus, teaching and learning process has to be in line with the subject content to prevent
variation between the official/planned curriculum and what is taught in class.
On the other note, teachers who have an opportunity to evaluate the curriculum before the
implementation process appreciate this role, as they familiarise themselves with the new
changes made in the curriculum. However, they indicate that sometimes when revising the
curriculum, their views and inputs are not considered during the planning process at the
national level. Therefore, it is vital to make use of their inputs when amending the final
document of the national curriculum. Bolstering this, Golden-Jubilee (2013) elucidates on the
importance of evaluating the curriculum before the implementation process as it allows
teachers to determine whether learners’ needs are addressed in the curriculum.
In conclusion, the collected data clearly shows that the majority of teachers have no role in
curriculum planning and designing process, because they are not engaged in all the
developmental stages. Therefore, individual decision-making power is absent at the national
level since curriculum-decisions are made on their behalf by NIED. As a result, this left the
participants with strong feelings that more need to be done regarding their roles in the
curriculum development process, especially from the ground level. Therefore, researchers like
Okda (2005) recommends all teachers to have roles in the national curriculum design and
development process.
6.3. The effect of teachers' role in curriculum design to the pedagogical process
Table 8. Descriptive statistic on teachers’ motivation at work
Disagree
Neutral Agree Mean Std.
Deviation
No.
The participation of teachers in curriculum design enhance teachers’
motivation at work. 4 (6.7%) 6 (10.0%) 50 (83.3%) 4.55 .723 60
Table 8, portrays that 83.3% of teachers agree that their inputs in curriculum design enhance
their motivation and boost their morale, 10.0% are uncertain about this, and only 6.7% disagree
with the statement. Teachers who agree indicate that they are always eager to implement the
subject content that they have designed themselves without experiencing many challenges nor
implications.
54
Furthermore, the more roles they have in curriculum design, the more they feel so empowered,
trusted, respected, tend to love their jobs and perform effectively without any intimidation.
Additionally, teachers are of the views that when they participate in all stages of curriculum
development, they develop new skills, self-confidence, critical thinking, collaborative work,
share ideas and promote the learning skills. They gain knowledge on how to go on about
classroom situation and how to create a conducive learning environment which can enhance
the pedagogy process. Therefore, their roles in curriculum planning process, give them an
insight on how to deliver quality education in the classroom because they are well-informed
about the curriculum. In bear with this, some participants indicated in the open-ended responses
that teachers who participate in the curriculum design are always enthusiastic to deliver the
best education and evaluate the success and failure of the curriculum.
Table 9. Descriptive statistic on the implementation process
Teacher
Yes No Total
Teachers implement the curriculum very well once they have
roles in its developmental process?
f 51 9 60
% 85.0 15.0 100.0
f = frequency; % = percent
The results of the study show that teachers’ roles in curriculum design and development have
an impact on the teaching and learning process. Table 9 reveals that the majority of the teachers
(85.0%) agree that their roles in curriculum design and development process have a positive
effect on the implementation process, whilst 15.0% disagree. Teachers who agree indicate that
once they have roles (of designers, decision-makers, researchers, evaluators and mediator) in
curriculum planning process than they will be able to facilitate the curriculum very well and
achieve the educational target goals. In light of all the above, are some quotations that present
teachers’ views;
There is always a successful implementation of curriculum once teachers play the
major roles in planning and designing of the curriculum. This is because they are
well-informed, have a better understanding and capable of interpreting the
curriculum very well (Teacher 41).
55
Teachers’ roles in curriculum development enhance the pedagogy process because
they become familiar with the subject content, curriculum objectives, teaching
methods and changes made in the curriculum (Teacher 7).
On the contrary, 15.0% of teachers who disagree express that their roles in curriculum design
have no impact on the implementation process. Hence, they always teach and enact the
curriculum very well, even when they have no role in the planning process. However, these
teachers stress that as long as there is enough training on how to enact the curriculum, then the
implementation process will always be at ease. Others added that teachers’ roles in curriculum
design do not have any effect on the teaching process, because they are always provided with
the syllabuses which are designed by the curricula specialists who are experts. Therefore, it is
of no use for them to partake since they have limited time.
Table 10. Descriptive statistic on teachers’ performance
Disagree
Neutral Agree Mean Std.
Deviation No.
Teachers’ role in curriculum development contributes to teachers
performances. 3 (5.0%) 7(11.7%) 50(83.3%) 4.12 .833 60
Teachers need to participate in all stages of curriculum development in order to achieve the educational objectives.
0 6 (10.0%) 54 (90.0%) 4.73 .312 60
The results in Table 10, show teachers (88.3%) who agree that their role in curriculum
development contributes positively to teachers’ performance and only 5.0% disagree while
11.7% are neutral. Many teachers who agree, report that;
It is always easier to teach the content and objectives that they set up themselves than
the one that is designed by officials from NIED who do not have any classroom
experience and not being in realities faced by the teachers (Teacher 54).
Teachers who have roles in curriculum planning and development process always
perform well than those who do not have. Because they are aware of the changes made
in their subjects and they can interpret and explain the content very well to the learners.
Thus these learners perform well in their subjects (Teacher 12).
Table 10, further exposes that 90.0% of teachers agree that the educational objectives and goals
can only be achieved if teachers are involved and have roles in the national curriculum design
and development process. However, only 10.0% of teachers disagree with this statement.
56
Table 11. Descriptive statistic on teachers training
Disagree Neutral Agree Mean Std. Deviation No.
Teachers receive training on new curriculum 15 (25.0%) 18 (30.0%) 27(45.0%) 2.20 .819 60
Based on the statement of whether teachers receive training on how to implement the reformed
curriculum and discuss issues related to the curriculum, 45.0% participants agree, 30.0% are
neutral and 25.0% participants disagree. According to the participants who agree, although the
training is very crucial, it is not sufficient at all since it only lasts for one week. Participants
who disagree demonstrate that only a few teachers who have been in the field for so long are
selected to attend the training and workshops on the reformed curriculum.
6.3.1. Summary and discussions on the effect of teachers’ roles in curriculum design to the
pedagogical process
The findings of the study reveal that teachers’ roles in curriculum design and development have
a positive effect on the pedagogy process, as well as on their performance. This is because their
roles in the developmental process empower and give them a broad insight on how to deliver
quality education in the classroom since they are well-informed about the curriculum reform.
Teachers become aware of the curriculum objectives, subject content, learning activities, as
well as different teaching approaches that can be used to meet the curriculum expectations.
They can be at ease of executing the curriculum as they fully understand how best they can
approach it. Many participants of the study are of the views that, once they are engaged in the
planning process, they can have a better understanding of the curriculum and motivates them
to perform well during the implementation process. Hence, they become enthused, committed
and eager to do their job. The results resonate with those of Bakah et al. (2012). These
researchers express that teachers’ roles in CD help them acquire various skills on what to teach
and how to teach, which enhance their confidence in teaching and freedom in the classroom.
As a result, they tend to perform effectively. Responses from the survey further explain that it
is always unchallenging for teachers to implement the curriculum when they play the roles of
being planners, designers, evaluators and decision-makers in the developmental process. Due
to this, they become knowledgeable about the curriculum; changes made, truth and reality of
what learners need in terms of curriculum and educational needs. In spite of that, teachers feel
more valued when they have active roles in the decision-making process; they will be
enthusiastic to work hard in order to attain the curriculum objectives that they designed.
57
As a result, the pedagogical process tends to go smoothly as there are no implications neither
misperceptions in certain domains of the curriculum. Carl (2005) equally indicates that when
teachers have roles in all the stages of curriculum development, they become motivated and
ready to assist the learners and facilitate the curriculum effectively. Therefore, their roles in
curriculum development advocate the pedagogical process. To concur with this, prior
researchers highlight that the success of curriculum implementation lies in the hands of teachers
when they are at the heart of the process (Kobiah, 2016; Talbot, 2015). Thus, the relevance of
the subject content can only be fruitful if teachers have active roles in the developmental
process since they are the one responsible for preparing teaching and learning activities for the
learners. On the other note, Chisholm and Leyendecker (2008) observe in their study a high
frequency of teachers who believe that the lack of teachers’ roles in the national curriculum
planning process has a negative impact on the actual implementation of the curriculum.
Therefore, their study concludes that teachers tend to perform well when they have major roles
in the designing process while poor performance arises when they are not engaged. This is
because curriculum might not be well interpreted and articulated as it is planned in the policies.
In the end, this can hinder the attainment of the national goals.
Figure 11 summarised the overall outcomes of how teachers’ roles in CD process affect the
pedagogy process and the whole education system.
Figure 11. Effect of teachers’ roles in CD to pedagogy process
Figure 11 above shows how the majority of teachers perceive their roles in curriculum
development affect the teaching and learning process as well as the whole education system.
However, the findings of this study seem to be quite interesting, as it appears not to be a case
with the other teachers who disagree with the statement in table 9. They emphasize that having
roles merely in the curriculum development process might not enhance the teaching and
learning process. This is because the pedagogical process depends on the commitment and
dedication of individual teachers.
58
Therefore, teachers need to put more effort during the implementation process by ensuring that
there is good communication skill, a practice of learner-centred approach, use of different
assessment methods, and development of consistent teaching and learning aids.
Furthermore, teachers need to have the love for the learners and passion for their work, in order
to advocate effective implementation of the curriculum. These findings confirm a study by
Marsh (2004) which reveal that actual implementation is not only associated with teachers’
roles in CD but, also with active and hardworking teachers who are enthusiastic to make
changes in children lives. Such type of teachers possess good qualities of being friendly, open-
minded, compassionate and respectful, promote value diversity, encourage learners to study
and accept their different learning needs. On a similar note, Kobiah (2016) argues that teachers
should not just give excuses that poor performance is caused when they do not have any role
in the CD process. However, they need to engage all the educational stakeholder at least to
discuss the challenges in the curriculum, different teaching approaches and how learners can
be assisted to understand the subject content correctly.
6.4. Teachers’ perspectives towards the curriculum design and development process
This section focus on the perceptions of teachers toward their participation in the national
curriculum design and development process. The primary teachers give their views, experience
and facts on the importance of being involved in the developmental process. Despite that, they
emphasize the challenges that they encounter during the process of developing and
implementing the curriculum reforms.
Table 12. Descriptive statistic on teacher’s participation in curriculum design
Table 12 above, shows teachers’ responses regarding their participation in the national
curriculum design. A huge number of 42 (70.0%) teachers indicate that they never participate
in all the stages of curriculum development process, especially in the first stage of the
curriculum planning. Majority of the participants confirm these quantitative data in the
unstructured responses.
Never Sometimes Always Mean Std.
Deviation
No.
Teachers are fully involved in all the developmental stages.
42 (70.0%)
10 (16.7%) 8 (13.3 %) 3.78 1.27 60
Teachers avail themselves to be involved in CD 5 (8.3%) 35 (58.3%) 20 (33.3%) 2.25 .600 60
Teachers being encouraged to participate in CD. 30(50.0%) 23 (38.3%) 7(11.7%) 1.62 .691 60
59
They explicate that they have never been granted an opportunity to participate in the designing
process nor to engage in the curriculum decision making outside the classroom. Teachers
further added that in practice, curriculum development in Namibia is “centralized”. Hence, they
are not all engaged in the early stage of curriculum planning where they can present all the
concerns and issues related to the previous curriculum. According to some participants;
Teachers do not participate in the national curriculum planning process. Although,
this is one of the crucial stages which needs teachers’ presence since curriculum
development is part of their daily task. Furthermore, teachers are the curriculum
experts that can best reflect actual practice and make a huge contribution during the
development process (Teacher 33).
Only a few teachers are involved in the developmental process which is not good
because our hands-on proposals, inputs, practical experience and concerns are not
all considered (Teacher 21).
The table further portrays that, although 33.3% of teachers avail themselves to participate in
the CD process, they are not granted an opportunity to partake beforehand, since the chance of
participation does not exist. Therefore, from these findings, it is clear that most of the
participants are eager to be part of the curriculum development and to participate in the
decision-making process
With regard to the statement of whether teachers are encouraged and motivated to participate
in all stages of CD other than in the implementation stage. Table 12, unveils 50.0% of teachers
who have never been motivated nor encouraged by the MoE or educational officers to
participate in all the developmental stages, despite the evaluation and implementation stage.
Teachers provide an assortment of reasons to support their stand;
Teachers have never been invited to partake in CD process especially at the ground
level of the decision-making process. This is because there is a poor/gap in
communication between the curriculum developers and the teachers (Teacher 6).
The educational officers from NIED do not provide any opportunities for teachers
to participate in the curriculum development process since the curriculum is forced
upon them (Teacher 17).
60
6.4.1. Importance of teachers’ participation in curriculum design and development
Table 13. The importance of teachers’ participation in curriculum design
Disagree
Neutral Agree Mean Std.
Deviation No.
It is important to involve all teachers in curriculum decision making process. 0 0 60 (100.0%) 4.93 .252 60
The table above presents the responses in regard to teachers’ perceptions toward the importance
of participating in curriculum design and development process. All participants of this study
agree with the first statement of whether it is important to involve teachers in the curriculum
decision-making process and none disagree. Teachers perceive it more necessary to be
involved in the curriculum development process from the initial stage, to provide the most
substantial information based on what they experienced in the classroom. The information
gathered from the open-ended questions, advance that it is utmost significant for teachers to be
part of the curriculum decision-making process because they are the roots and foundation of
children’s education. Therefore, if the foundation is not laid correctly, it will affect the whole
learning of the child. They as well indicate that education is a holistic process and what happens
in the classroom need to take place within the entire context, community and the child in
totality. Teachers further illustrate that it is essential to participate in the developmental process
since it convinces, motivate and make them believe in the significance of the content.
Some other common overwhelming comments made by teachers are quoted as follow;
It is crucial to involve teachers in curriculum designing since they are the curriculum
implementers. Hence, they have the first-hand experience because they are the one
who is in contact with the learners and they know exactly their needs, strengths and
weaknesses. Additionally, it is advantageous to be engaged in the curriculum
development process to improve the quality of teaching and learning process
(Teacher 12).
Teachers need to participate in the curriculum planning process so that it becomes
easier to understand the new concepts and implement reform ideas accordingly.
Besides that, it is important for their inputs and experience to be heard and not just
to impose the curriculum from above-NIED (Teacher 7).
61
6.4.2. Barriers to participation in curriculum development and implementation
The participants of this study were requested to give their sentiments on the challenges and
barriers that they encounter when planning and developing curriculum as well as during the
implementation of the curriculum reforms.
Barriers and challenges to curriculum planning and development process: These barriers
are raised up by teachers who participate in the planning process.
Figure 12. Barriers when planning and developing curriculum
Figure 12 shows the most categorized barriers experienced by teachers during the curriculum
planning and development process. The barriers include selecting and determining of the
subject content (28.0%), lack of finance to carry out research and develop resources (25.0%),
shortage of curriculum experts (22.0%), lack of designing strategies (17%) and insufficient
time to plan the curriculum for all the grades (8.0%).
Teachers support the essence of these responses as they express their views in the open-ended
responses:
It is a huge challenge to select and determine the content of each subject which will
suit all the learners across the country. This is because learners are from different
backgrounds and have different experiences. Sometimes teachers find it hard to
determine the themes and topics that need to be removed or added in the curriculum
(Teacher 3).
Content28 %
Experts22 %
Time8 %
Finance25 %
Designing stg17 %
Content Experts Time Finance Designing stg
62
Curriculum implications are caused due to lack of experts and knowledgeable
people in the curriculum development committee. Thus, all the teachers need to be
involved in order to avoid this. Besides that, there are not enough funds for people
to carry out researches, to organize training or to at least recompense teachers who
participate in the CD process (Teacher 12).
Majority of the teachers provided reasons to support their standpoint on the barrier of
inadequate curriculum expert. They indicate that most of them and some curriculum developers
are inexperienced as they lack extensive knowledge and a shortage of adequate training on how
to develop the curriculum. Furthermore, there is a lack of information about the significant
roles that teachers play in curriculum development process. Lack of information is caused
because there are not enough contributions made by all of the educational stakeholders.
Therefore, the shortage of curriculum experts may result in poor designing strategies.
On the other hand, some teachers report that they do not have enough time for planning and
developing curriculum, while others note that they lack the expertise in curriculum design.
Therefore they cannot partake in this process. Despite that, another barrier to curriculum design
and development process is the lack of curriculum leaders at schools.
Barriers and challenges when implementing the curriculum reforms: These barriers are
raised up by all the participants of the study.
Figure 13. Barriers to curriculum implementation
Workload29 %
Resources23 %
Time allocation
23 %
Adopting25 %
Workload Resources Time allocation Adopting
63
The figure above portrays the categorized barriers that teachers experience when implementing
the curriculum. Majority of the teachers point out the; workload (30.0%), adopting of
curriculum reforms (25.0%), lack of resources (23.0%) and time allocation to the periods
(22.0%) as some of the main challenges that hinder the successful implementation of the
curriculum. Many participants provided reasons to back up their opinions. Firstly, on the barrier
of workload, they indicate that teachers have many responsibilities such as teaching, writing
daily lesson preparations, marking learners’ work, many lessons to teach, classes overloaded,
administrative work and attending to other extramural activities. These tasks already take much
of their time hence they are unable to participate effectively in the curriculum development
process and implement the curriculum very well.
Furthermore, on the barrier of adopting curriculum reforms. Teachers emphasize that they
experience difficulties of interpreting the curriculum since they are unaware of what the
curriculum reform is all about, the changes made, teaching strategies to use, how to assess and
what is expected from them. Hence, it takes time for them to adopt to the reform ideas and
master the subject content.
On the barrier of lack of resources. Teachers point out that, although it is essential to make
changes in the curriculum it remains a challenge to implement it due to lack of resources and
facilities in schools. For example; schools are not provided with enough textbooks, no internet
and computers as well as inadequate teaching and learning materials reflecting on the
curriculum. Therefore, this may hinder the prosperous implementation. They further, advance
on the time allocation barrier that it is very limited and not enough at all. The subject content
is quite vast and sometimes teachers fail to cover all the basic competencies in the syllabus on
time.
Other challenges are difficulties in implementing curriculum which is designed by officials
from outside the teaching fraternity and the exclusion of parents, teachers and learners from
the curriculum planning and development process (as they state that it is already a challenge to
be excluded from the curriculum development process).
64
6.4.3. Summary and discussions on teachers’ perceptions toward the curriculum design
Teachers’ participation: The results reveal that most of the primary teachers held the
perception that their level of engagement in curriculum development processes is very low and
discouraging. The low participation is caused because the national curriculum development in
Namibia is initiated from ‘Top-Down’. As a result, most of the teachers tend not to have any
voice outside the classroom since they are not involved in the curriculum planning and
development process. These insights lead teachers not to regard themselves as curriculum
planners or decision makers because they are only assigned to execute the curriculum. The
results of poor involvement of teachers in curriculum planning and development process
corroborate the previous studies by Carl (2005); Kobiah (2016) and Hayward (2000). These
prior researchers indicate that in most of the African countries and few other countries in the
world, teachers are neglected from the curriculum innovations and development process
because the national curriculum is developed from ‘Top-Down’ through unilateral
administrative decisions.
Similar results on the formation of curriculum were as well found in Turkey by Doğan & Altun
(2013) who disclose that the Ministry of National Education (MoNE) and their Boards of
Education are the ones responsible for development and preparation of the national curriculum.
In this regard, teachers do not see themselves as true curricular decision-makers because their
participation in the curriculum planning and development process is minimal. This situation
suggests that there is a crucial need of empowering all the teachers in the national curriculum
development process. In doing so, it provides an opportunity for making guidelines and
syllabus more relevant and meaningful. Additionally, the effectiveness of curriculum
development depends on the participation of teachers (Oloruntegbe, 2011). Therefore, previous
researchers (Kobiah, 2016; Carl, 2005) believe that there should always be a means to involve
teachers in curriculum development process.
The findings indicate that although many teachers are willing to participate and play significant
roles in the national curriculum development process, they are not provided with an opportunity
to partake in the process. They emphasize that the Ministry of Education and other educational
stakeholders in Namibia do not encourage nor create platforms for teachers to participate in
any curriculum stage other than in the implementation stage. In correspondence with this, the
previous literature of Oloruntegbe (2011) and Bakah et al. (2012) urge educational authorities
to create platforms and convince teachers to participate in the curriculum decision-making
process.
65
Teachers’ participation in the planning process is essential because they make positive
contributions towards the planning process and educational development of the children. On
the other hand, the data reveals that only a few workshops are given to some teachers on how
to implement the curriculum. As a result, it might cause variations in curriculum
interpretations, articulation and teaching procedures. Bakah et al. (2012) stressed the
importance of providing enough training and seminars to teachers on how to develop and
implement the curriculum.
Importance of teachers’ participation in CD: The results of the study in table 13, show that
all the teachers agree with the statements posted to them, concerning their importance of
participating in the national curriculum design and development process. Hence, it is evident
that all teachers regard it as more significant to partake in the curriculum decision-making
process. The above results are in line with those of Talbot (2015) who asserts that teachers have
major roles to play in curriculum development. Therefore, it is substantial to engage them in
all the developmental stages. The data gathered from the survey show that primary teachers are
the roots and foundations of the children education. Therefore, they believe that the learning
foundation of the child can only be laid properly when they participate in the developmental
process. Furthermore, teachers’ engagement in the developmental process is one of the
fundamental aspect, which has a huge impact on the education system. Hence, the curriculum
reform and quality education can only be implemented well, once teachers are at the centre of
the process. These views support the findings from the previous literature that quality education
can be effective if all the educational stakeholders (teachers, learners, parents and
communities) are involved in the curriculum development process and the structural changes
(Bantwini, 2010; Oloruntegbe, 2011; Haney et al., 2002).
According to the findings of the study, teachers are the implementers and potential curriculum
agents, who know all the educational needs of the learners. Once they are involved in the
planning process, they ensure that the outcome reflects the needs of the learners. Besides that,
they find it more appropriate to be part of the designing process to facilitate its smooth
implementation. Therefore, since teachers are curriculum implementers, then they are the best
able to recognize the implementation difficulties and challenges that they encounter.
Accordingly, if teachers participate in the curriculum formation process, then they will be able
to share their opinions of what they experience in the classroom.
66
In doing so, they will provide credible inputs of how the subject content has to be and how the
implementation implications can be tackled. These perceptions can be linked to those of
Bantwini (2010) who points out that teachers’ empowerment in curriculum development
optimize the teaching and learning events in the classrooms. As a result, the process enhances
the learning outcomes and other experience (teaching experience) that may flow from it and
contribute to the development of learners’ potentials.
On the other hand, teachers perceive that when they become part of curriculum design process,
they advance their teaching skills and attain adequate insight of the curriculum. This motivates
them to execute the reform ideas accordingly. While others believe that, when teachers are
fully involved in all the developmental stages they can be able to create conducive and
meaningful learning environments for the learners. These findings are in agreement with (Carl,
2005) who states that teachers are the major components of the teaching process. Teachers are
the closest to the learners, curriculum and classroom atmosphere; therefore, their participation
is more imperative.
The results further show that teachers perceive it essential to partake in the designing process,
however not all of them are consulted for their inputs, which is against the Okada's views
(2005). They claim that although they are the subject specialist, they are voiceless in the
curriculum planning process. Hence, they do not teach with the aim of achieving the curriculum
objectives, but to finish the vast content which is imposed on them. Such things create a
negative relationship between the teachers and the curriculum. Mokua (2010) support this view
as he contends that teachers are always demotivated to perform well when their roles are not
recognized in the CD and when they are not engaged in the process. Therefore, the fact that
they are inactive in the CD process can cause them to lose control of the curricula and
pedagogical skills. Due to that many of them tend to be deskilled by such curriculum (Kobiah,
2016; Lucas, 2005). Moreover, the rich practical experiences that teachers would bring on
board during the designing process might be missed due to their lack of involvement.
Developing curriculum is one of the significant aspects which helps curriculum developers to
make changes and add components which address the needs of the children and those of the
country. However, participants of this study have noticed that even though it is important to
have roles in the curriculum development process, there are some challenges involved when
designing it and implementing the curriculum reform.
67
Barriers to participation in curriculum development: This study reveals that curriculum
design and development is a dynamic process which consists of many challenges that may
prevent its effectiveness. Those teachers who participate in the developmental process report
that, they experience various barriers both during the designing process as well as during the
implementation of curriculum reform. Researchers such as Huizinga (2014) and Golden-
Jubilee (2013) confirm that construction of educational curriculum is one of the most
complicated tasks, through which teachers encounter many problems during the process and
sometimes after the reforms. According to the prior literature, the critical issue in the
curriculum development mostly lays on how the curricular interventions have to be
(re)designed, (re)developed, and implemented in order to achieve a substantial balance between
the ideals of a curriculum change and their realization in practice ( Mouraz et al., 2013).
The study discloses that among the challenges listed, the most include poor designing
strategies, the formation of the subject content and the lack of curriculum experts in the
development committee. Teachers who participate in the planning process express their
inexperience and lack of expertise in curriculum development. As a result, it becomes difficult
for them to determine the curriculum objectives since they lack knowledge on how to design
the national curriculum. Furthermore, many curriculum developers have inadequate
information about the learners’ needs. Inadequate information is caused because developers do
not conduct proper research nor involve all the educational stakeholders (teachers, parents,
public) with the necessary information about the learners’ backgrounds. In support with this,
Mokua (2010) and Ramparsad (2001) describe a lack of extensive knowledge and skills among
the curriculum developers. Sometimes the whole curriculum development process is not clear
to them. As a result, it can affect teachers since they do not have a coherent understanding of
the aims and purpose of curriculum development/reform, what it is all about and how it is
supposed to proceed (Fullan, 2001).
Though, some teachers are of the views that, they have adequate information concerning the
learners’ needs, they do not receive enough training on how to design the curriculum. These
views are consistent with what Mouraz et al. (2013) and Mensah (2016). These researchers
discovered that incompetence and limited knowledge within teachers in the curriculum design
and development serve as an obstacle towards their engagement in the process.
68
Apart from the barriers mentioned above, teachers point out other constraints such as finance
and time which they encounter during the development process. It is evident that finance is one
of the huge contributing factors to the ineffective of curriculum development. Teachers argue
that, due to insufficient funds, they are unable to carry out proper researches on the crucial
components/domains that need to be included in the curriculum. Furthermore, the department
of education cannot organize enough workshops nor in-service training for teachers on how to
develop the curriculum. Teachers are further not equipped with all the necessary resources and
equipment (curriculum materials, textbooks) that need to be used during the planning process.
Insufficient funds prevent teachers from developing enough teaching and learning materials.
Khan and Law (2015) argue that curriculum development process is costly because there are
many things involved such as conducting research, training teachers and other resources. As a
result, the education department ends up developing or reforming the curriculum after a long
period. Additionally, the fact that there is no token of appreciation (like certificates or
diplomas) given to participating teachers in the curriculum development process is a
demotivation. These results are in agreement with Mokua (2010).
Concerning the time factor, the study exposes that curriculum development process is time-
consuming. Thus some teachers believe that they do not have enough time to work in the
curriculum designing committee nor to attend workshops since they are loaded with
schoolwork. According to Carl (2005), the curriculum development process is a long-term
planning process which requires a long period and more time from the curriculum developers.
Similarly, teachers’ responses correspond with those of Chinyani (2013) as he reports that
Zimbabwean teachers have enormous responsibilities and high school workload which prevent
them from participating in the planning process.
Barriers to implementation: Most teachers find it hard to implement the curriculum reform
because they lack knowledge about how to apply it. Besides that, teachers struggle with the
interpretations and adoption of the reforms in the curriculum because they are failing to cope
with the new changes made. These views are also supported by Oliva (2009) who states that
the implementation of the curriculum reform is not that easy since it is very demanding to
interpret and implement it in the classroom context. He further describes the unpreparedness
of the teachers on how to facilitate the reform ideas as another challenge which can hinder the
practical implementation.
69
On the other hand, the analysed data reveal that majority of teachers do not feel comfortable
when they are imposed with huge subject content and syllabus which they are expected to cover
within a short period. They claim that they are overloaded with many things like teaching,
writing daily lesson preparations, marking learners’ work, many lessons to teach, classes full
and administrative work. Subsequently, these make it hard for them to interpret the curriculum
very well and execute it accordingly (Handelzalts, 2009). Moreover, the results reveal a lack
of teaching and learning materials, facilities and equipment which remains a big challenge
during the pedagogy process. These results are consistent with a study conducted by Schneider
and Krajcik (2002) who recommend the curriculum implementers to be aware of the subject
content and the pedagogical procedures before practising them in the classroom settings.
Hence, it is imperative for them to be trained about the new changes in the curriculum. The
finding reveals that although teachers appreciate the changes made in the curriculum, they are
worried about the barriers mentioned earlier as they affect the successful implementation of the
curriculum.
6.5. Summary
Data analysis of this study yielded findings of the main research questions which are presented
and discussed separately. The first section focused on the roles of the teachers in the national
curriculum development process. This section revealed that most of the primary teachers are
rarely involved in the national curriculum development process hence their roles are regarded
as to implement and facilitate the curriculum. As a result, many teachers tend not to have any
role outside the classroom. However, few teachers who participate in the designing process
indicate that their roles in the process are to advise and assist the curriculum developers, plan,
assess and evaluate the curriculum.
The second section discussed the effect of teachers’ roles in curriculum development on the
pedagogy process. The results showed that most teachers see it useful to have roles in the
developmental process because it promotes effective interpretation which results in the actual
implementation of curriculum reform. Despite that, teachers’ role in curriculum development
advocates the pedagogy process because when they have roles in planning and designing, they
become aware of the subject content, teaching and learning approaches. Furthermore, once
teachers become empowered in the CD process, they gain deep insight on how to deliver quality
education in the classroom since they are well-informed on the new curriculum. This enables
the Ministry of Education to achieve the educational objectives and goals.
70
The third section described the teachers’ perception toward curriculum design and development
process. The section focused on the importance of teachers’ participation in the process and
the barriers they encounter when developing and implementing the curriculum. The results
show that most teachers perceive it significant to participate in the national curriculum
development process because it advocates their teaching and learning process. Information
gathered from the open-ended questions also indicate that the primary teachers are the roots
and foundation of the children education. Hence, if the foundation is not laid correctly, it will
affect the whole learning cycle of the child. Consequently, teachers need to be at the heart of
the process to develop a curriculum which is reflecting the needs of the children.
Despite the importance of involving teachers in national curriculum development, teachers
experience challenges when developing the curriculum. For example how to design the subject
content (themes to remove/include), lack of curriculum experts, insufficient funds, and
inadequate time. Hence, they are of the views that developing curriculum is complicated as it
complicated as it becomes an added workload to their classroom work. Furthermore, it is
difficult to implement the curriculum effectively because schools are not provided with enough
resources and facilities reflecting on the syllabus.
71
Chapter 7: Conclusions of the study
7.1. Research summary
As previously mentioned, the rationale of this present study was to investigate the roles of
primary teachers in the national curriculum development process in Namibia. The term
curriculum is observed to have numerous meanings based on different context, however, for
this study the focus was mainly on the school context. Ministry of Education in Namibia (MoE,
2015) defines curriculum as a coherent framework that “guides schools on how to organize the
teaching-learning process” to ensure consistency in the implementation process (p.2).
Curriculum direct teachers on how to deliver an efficiency and quality education to every child.
Thus it is crucial to include teachers in all the stages of the national curriculum development
process.
According to prior researchers, curriculum development is a process which covers the entire
course of curriculum construction from initial conceptualization and planning to design,
implementation and evaluation (Ornstein & Hunkins 2009; Otunga & Charles 2008). In most
cases, the national curriculum is planned differently because it is developed based on the needs
of the learners and that of the country. Therefore, teachers are the primary source and most
active practitioners in developing curriculum. Additionally, teachers are the one who put the
reform ideas in practice hence they are familiar with the needs of the learners.
While the focus of the study was to investigate the roles of the primary teachers in the national
curriculum development process. The researcher developed three research questions which
were approached during the study. Firstly, the study explored the significant roles teachers have
in the curriculum development process. Secondly, the survey inquired about how teachers’
roles in curriculum design and development process affect the pedagogical process. Then
lastly, the researcher looked at the perceptions of the teachers toward their participation in
curriculum design and development. The last question looked at the participation of teachers,
the reasons they think it is essential to participate in curriculum development, as well as the
barriers that they encounter when developing and implementing curriculum.
The findings of the study revealed that most teachers do not have any role in the curriculum
designing process since they are considered as facilitators and implementers of the curriculum.
Hence, their major roles are only in the classroom during the implementation process.
72
In the implementation process they are tasked to develop the teaching and learning materials,
make lesson preparations, create a conducive learning environment, assess and evaluate
learners’ work. However, the results showed that only a few teachers have roles in the national
curriculum design and development process. Their roles are to plan, advice and assist the
curriculum designers to develop an effective curriculum which will provide quality education.
Teachers’ roles in curriculum design and development process have a positive impact on the
pedagogical process. The findings reveal 85.0% of teachers who agreed that teachers’ roles
advocate the teaching and learning process (see table 13). Therefore, this implies that once
teachers play a role in the planning process, they become aware of the curriculum and be able
to interpret it accordingly. Consequently, the implementation process becomes effective which
result in the attainment of the educational goals. From these findings, it is evident that teachers’
roles in the developmental process advocate the teaching and learning process which is in
agreement with Bakah et al. (2012).
Throughout the entire period of the study, teachers’ participation in curriculum development
process is seen as one of the vital aspects due to crucial roles that they play in the process.
However, the study determined a large number (n=42) of teachers who do not participate in the
curriculum designing process. These teachers are not granted an opportunity to partake in the
planning stage since the curriculum is developed from NIED, whereby only a few teachers are
conducted. Majority of teachers perceive it more significant to participate in all the stages of
curriculum development process because they are the implementers of the curriculum.
Therefore, they have the first-hand experience of the learners and know exactly their
educational needs, strengths and weaknesses. They contribute rich practical experience in the
curriculum development, as they can identify the crucial themes that need to be added and
removed from each subject (Kobiah, 2016; Lucas, 2005). The quality of teachers’ participation
is vital, not only for developing the school or national curriculum but also for enhancing their
personal and professional growth. Despite the importance of involving teachers in the
development process. The study prevailed that, developing national curriculum involves many
challenges which can hinder the curriculum from being planned and designed expertly. This
study noticed that few teachers who participate in CD process encounter various problems like
lack of curriculum designing strategies, inadequate training/resources, lack of expertise,
insufficient funds, and time factor.
73
Teachers further outlined that, it becomes hard for them to implement curriculum effectively
because there are not enough resources and facilities at schools which are reflecting the
curriculum. Some teachers find it challenging to interpret the curriculum since they lack
knowledge and skills about the reform ideas.
Based on the foregoing summary of the study, it is observed that the results of this study go in
accordance with the conclusions from the previous studies of Bantwini, (2010); Carl, (2005)
and Oloruntegbe, (2010). These researchers reveal poor participation of teachers in curriculum
development process in most African countries. As a result, teachers tend to be neglected from
the curriculum innovation, since they do not have any voice nor role at the national level. This
type of negligence is against teachers’ views as they do not want to be perceived as mere
‘recipients’ and ‘implementers’ of the curriculum. Teachers’ aspiration is to be included from
the early stages of meaningful decision-making where their inputs and voice can be heard.
Therefore, it is critical to involve teachers in the curriculum development stage as much as they
are involved in the implementation stage. The study concluded that, although it is evident that
teachers’ roles in CD advocate the pedagogical process. Most primary teachers have no roles
in all the developmental stages (especially in the planning stage) since the curriculum is
imposed upon them. Hence, their roles are mostly regarded to facilitate and implement the
curriculum.
7.2. Implications of the results
Implications of the results on teaching practice and educational policies
In this study, teachers’ roles in curriculum design and development process are one of the
critical aspects which contribute positively to the teaching and learning process. Hence, it is
noted to be important for all teachers to have roles in every stage of curriculum development
process to attain the curriculum goals. The identified roles of teachers in this research can
enable them to be successful implementers and facilitators of the curriculum. Contrary to this,
the majority of the teachers of this study are only involved in the last stage of curriculum
development which is in the implementation phase. Therefore, this gives challenges to teachers
in adopting changes made in the curriculum because they are not well acquainted with the aims,
goals and subject contents.
Additionally, misinterpretation of the curriculum rises causing the implementation not to be a
success (Okda, 2005). It is evident from the present research that when teachers are not
involved in the developmental process, they fail to interpret the curriculum very well.
74
As a result, variations might occur between the curriculum taught and the planned (official)
one. Despite that, crucial information on the learners’ needs can be missed if teachers are not
involved in the designing process. As a result, the national curriculum will become impractical
as it is not reflecting the needs of the learners and that of the society. Therefore, this study gives
an indication of the roles and significance of teachers’ participation in curriculum design and
development process. The essential of teachers’ roles in CD process is to avoid a gap between
the planned curriculum in the official documents and the implemented one. Hence, workshops
or seminars can be organised where teachers can discuss and share their experiences about the
curriculum (Saracaloglu et al., 2010). Only this way teachers can have clear insights of what
the curriculum is all about and how the reform ideas can be put in practice. Through this study,
MoE and teachers will be able to determine the substantial contributions teachers make to
curriculum design and development process.
The findings of this study are valuable to the MoE, NIED and all the educational officers as
they will be aware of the barriers encountered by teachers during curriculum development and
implementation process. Hence, by outlining these barriers, it will assist the educational
officers to consider the type of support to provide in order to fix these barriers and ensure
effective development and implementation of the curriculum.
Implications of the results of the educational policies and curriculum research
Currently, the official curriculum policy for formal basic education in Namibia is not clear
about the roles of teachers in the national curriculum development process. This existing policy
state only about teachers being the central role players to successful curriculum implementation
(Ministry of Education, 2015). The policy is silent about teachers’ roles and their participation
in the planning and development process. Therefore, official curriculum policy needs to be
revised so that it can be inclusive and stress on the needs of teachers’ participation in the
planning process. Additionally, the policy can stipulate and emphasise more on the significant
roles of teachers in curriculum development. By doing so, it will strengthen an effective
implementation of the curriculum and provision of quality education.
Furthermore, the amendments of educational policies need to be maintained as it is done based
on the real-life situation and for developmental changes in the country. Policies need to be
informative to cater the needs of both teachers and learners. Therefore, it is important to include
and consult all the necessary stakeholders (teachers, learners, parents and society) for their
inputs since they know more about the learners’ needs.
75
It will as well assist teachers who are the implementers to be fully aware of the aims, goals and
reforms in curriculum. The official national curriculum policy can be planned, evaluated and
piloted by all the teachers before the final document is distributed to schools.
Moreover, the national curriculum policy states that every learner should be given all the
textbooks and materials appropriate to their learning ability and needs. Additionally, schools
have to be provided with all the necessary facilities reflecting on the curriculum to ensure that
the subject content is delivered successfully. However, what is written in the policy is not put
into practice by the Ministry of Education. Teachers are complaining about the lack of
resources (textbooks, teaching and learning resources) and facilities in schools which are
hindering the effective implementation. This study suggests that what is written in the policy
should be fulfilled by the stakeholders (MoE, educational officers) for the educational goals to
be attained.
7.3. Recommendations
Recommendations to the MoE, NIED and educational stakeholders
This study focused on the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum design and
development in Namibia. Based on the summary of the research and conclusion presented, this
study has the following recommendations to the Ministry of Education and the National
Institute for Educational Development;
Throughout this study, the teachers’ roles in the national curriculum development process are
one of the most useful aspects that enhances the teaching and learning process. However, the
study reveals that only a few primary teachers are involved and have roles in the national
curriculum designing and development process. This study recommends the educational
officers from the Ministry of Education and the National Institute for Educational Development
to involve all teachers in decision making outside the classrooms. In other words, teachers need
to be empowered and be active participants in every step of curriculum development process,
for the educational innovations and curriculum reforms to be effective. In achieving this,
educational officers from NIED need to initiate the curriculum development and reform
process from grassroots (bottom-up approach). Basically, by teachers who are in the field since
they know what and where the changes are needed. By doing so, it will enable teachers to have
other roles in decision-making, planning and developing the curriculum instead of just being
facilitators and implementers.
76
Furthermore, educational officers can organize curriculum leaders and curriculum committees
at each school cluster. In these committees, teachers will discuss the themes to be
added/removed, curriculum aims and other issues in curriculum. The outcomes from the
committees will be reviewed and utilised at NIED during the curriculum development process.
By serving in the committees, teachers will provide significant inputs, share their knowledge
and concur with other curriculum experts on how to design the curriculum.
Teachers’ roles in curriculum development can be attained through the process of collaboration
between the national and local authorities which highly develop practice. Hence, local
authorities and school clusters will be given autonomy and become a central part of formulating
the curriculum. They will have the roles of planning and evaluating the curriculum, as well as
developing the teaching and learning resources. This method is also used in developed
countries like Finland, and it works perfectly.
This study further recommends the MoE and NIED officers to provide adequate in-service
training to teachers with roles in the CD process. This training should be on how to develop
curriculum, emphasis on the importance of involving them in CD and their significant inputs
in the process. The MoE and NIED can give rewards (certificates/remunerations) to teachers
for participating in the national curriculum planning and development process. Furthermore,
curriculum seminars, workshops and other formal platforms can be organised by the
developers/educational officers in order to promote a better understanding of the curriculum.
By doing this, it will allow teachers to share their views and experiences about the old and
reformed curriculum. Therefore, teachers who did not participate in the developmental process
will get a chance to discuss curriculum reforms with others. As a result, teachers will interpret
the curriculum accordingly, and there will be no misconceptions and reluctance in the
implementation process.
The vastness of the subject content makes it hard for teachers to complete their syllabuses in
the termly stipulated time slot. Thus it is essential for the curriculum developers to revise and
consider how the content has been allocated regarding the needed time for the completion of
the syllabuses. The subject content can be well simplified in the curriculum policy (syllabuses)
for it to be understood well by all the teachers and learners. Addition to that, theoretical part of
the subject content can as well be adjusted and minimised to provide enough opportunity for
practical work.
77
Recommendations for further studies
Firstly, further scholars in the field of curriculum education are encouraged to conduct a
comparative study with a little twist on how the national curriculum is developed in other
countries with the main focus on the teachers’ role. Secondly, the study recommends further
scholars to conduct a study comparing the pedagogical performance of teachers who have roles
in the national curriculum designing process with those without roles in the process. By doing
this, it can provide rich information on how teachers’ roles in CD enhances the teaching and
learning process. Lastly, this study was confined to three primary schools from Khomas region
in Namibia, to explore roles and importance of involving teachers in the national curriculum
development. Therefore, the study of the same nature can be conducted in a wider geographical
area, which will include a larger sample from the Junior and Senior secondary phase, in all the
educational regions in the country. This will help the researcher to obtain results which are
more reliable.
7.4. Ethics, trustworthiness and limitations
Throughout this research project, the researcher adhered to the ethical considerations which
basically ranges from; proper citations, referencing, data collection and presentation of the
findings. Therefore, in this report efforts have been made to reference and acknowledge all the
work, information and ideas from other people. Furthermore, anonymity was preserved to
protect the privacy of the participants, and they were informed that they were free to withdraw
any time of the study without any threat. This study was developed with the voluntary
participation of teachers that work as informants on their roles in curriculum design and
development process. The results of the study are trustworthy, valid and reliable. Satisfactory
reliability was yielded (Cronbach’s Alpha = .801), which implies that the instrument used is
valid and reliable.
There are some few limitations encountered through this research project. Firstly, the
researcher could not do the inferential tests due to bias in male and female participants. The
study was planned to have an equal number of male and female participants, but due to the low
participation of male teachers, it turns to have nine (9) males and fifty-one (51) females’
participants. Therefore, the researcher could not make comparisons between males and females
teachers’ roles in the curriculum design development process. However, the author still
obtained valuable data which were used for the descriptive statistic.
78
Moreover, because the selection of participants of the study was non-random, the
generalizability of the results on the primary teachers’ roles in CD is considered lower than if
the sampling process could be random. Hence, the results for this study cannot be generalised
but will be kept within the context in which the study was conducted. The results could have
been more significant if a large and diverse sample could be selected randomly from various
primary schools in Namibia. In doing so, it would offer the generalizability of the study’s
results.
On the other hand, the results of the study could be more precise, if document analysis could
be used to compare teachers’ performance between those that have roles in the planning process
and those that do not have any role in the planning process. The document analysis could be
done by reviewing and analysing assessment documents and educational reports for both
teachers and learners. The use of observation could as well produce better and reliable results,
as this research instrument could allow the researcher to observe the roles of the teachers in the
classroom and how the curriculum reform is implemented. Lastly, the lack of recent literature
was a drawback since this topic is not well researched in Namibia. Hence, the researcher used
international articles during the literature review section.
79
References
Abudu, A. M., & Mensah, M. A. (2016). Basic School Teachers' Perceptions about Curriculum
Design in Ghana. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(19), 21-29.
Adediwura, A. A., & Tayo, B. (2007). Perception of teacher’s knowledge, attitude and teaching
skills as a predictor of academic performance in Nigerian secondary schools. Educational
Research and Reviews, 2(7), 165-171.
Adentwi, K.I. (2005). Curriculum development: An introduction. Ghana: WILAS Press
limited.
Alavi, J. (2016). The role of EFL teachers’ perceptions of curriculum change in their job
satisfaction. SRTTU, Tehran.
Altinyelken, H. K. (2010). Curriculum change in Uganda: Teacher perspectives on the new
thematic curriculum. International journal of educational development, 30(2), 151-161.
Atieno, O. P. (2009). An analysis of the strengths and limitation of qualitative and quantitative
research paradigms. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 13(1), 13-38.
Atkin, C. (2000). Lifelong learning-attitudes to practice in the rural context: a study using
Bourdieu's perspective of habitus. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(3),
253-265.
Ault Jr, C. R. (2008). Achieving querencia: Integrating a sense of place with disciplined
thinking. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(5), 605-637.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2010a). the shape of the
Australian curriculum, version 2.0. Retrieved from
http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Shape_of_the_Australian_ Curriculum.pdf
Badran, A. (2011). The excluded past in Jordanian formal primary education: The introduction
of archaeology. In New Perspectives in Global Public Archaeology (pp. 197-215).
Springer, New York, NY.
Bakah, M. A. B., Voogt, J. M. and Pieters, J. M. (2012). Advancing perspectives of
sustainability and large-scale implementation of design teams in Ghana’s polytechnics:
Issues and opportunities. International Journal of Educational Development, 32, 787–
796.
Baker, D. (2002). Where is gender and equity in science education? Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 39(8), 659-663.
Bantwini, B. D. (2010). How teachers perceive the new curriculum reform: Lessons from a
school district in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. International Journal of
educational development, 30(1), 83-90.
80
Barghi, R., Zakaria, Z., Hamzah, A., & Hashim, N. H. (2017). Heritage education in the
Primary School Standard Curriculum of Malaysia. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61,
124-131.
Bell, B., & Baker, R. (1997). Developing the science curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Longman.
Bertram, C., & Christiansen, I. (2014). Understanding research: An introduction to reading the
research. Van Schaik Publishers.
Beswick, C. (2009). Innovation…Is it top down or bottom up? FC Member Blog.
Blignaut, S., (2007). The policy-practice dichotomy: can we straddle the divide? Perspectives
in Education 25 (4), 49–61.
Brady, L. & Kennedy, K. (2013). Curriculum construction. Pearson Higher Education AU.
Branscombe, N. A., Burcham, J. G., Castle, K., & Surbeck, E. (2013). Early childhood
curriculum: A constructivist perspective. Routledge.
Campbell, E. (2006). Curricular and professional authority in schools in Curriculum Inquiry
36(2) 111-118. Oxford: Blackwell.
Carl, A. E. (2005). The\" voice of the teacher\'in curriculum development: a voice crying in the
wilderness. South African Journal of Education, 25(4), 223-228.
Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into
practice (3rd Ed.). Juta and Company Ltd., SA.
Chinyani, H. (2013). Exploring the Feasibility of School-Based Curriculum Development in
Zimbabwe, Inter. J. Acad. Resin Progressive Edu. Dev, 2(1), 58-64.
Chisholm, L. (2005). The making of South Africa's national curriculum statement. Journal of
curriculum studies, 37(2), 193-208.
Chisholm, L., & Leyendecker, R. (2008). Curriculum reform in post-1990s sub-Saharan Africa.
International Journal of Educational Development, 28(2), 195-205.
Chitate, H. (2005). Post-independent Zimbabwe's new 'O' Level History syllabus 2166: a crisis
of expectations. Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research, 17(3), 234-257.
Christou, C., Eliophotou-Menon, M., & Philippou, G. (2004). Teachers' concerns regarding the
adoption of a new mathematics curriculum: An application of CBAM. Educational
studies in mathematics, 57(2), 157-176.
Christy, J. W. (2003). Roadmap to success: A curriculum mapping primer. Retrieved from
http://www.glencoe.com/sec/teachingtoday/educationu close.phtml/35
81
Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a
mathematics textbook affected two teachers’ learning. The Elementary School Journal,
103(3), 227–311.
Crawford, E. O., & Kirby, M. M. (2008). Fostering students' global awareness: Technology
applications in social studies teaching and learning. Journal of Curriculum and
Instruction, 2(1), 56-73.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approach
(3rd Ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. SAGE Publications, Incorporated.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry: Theory
into practice. 39(3), 12–130.
Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote
teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
Dewey, J. (1964). John Dewey on education. New York, NY: Random House.
Department of Education (2002). Revised National Curriculum Statement. Grades R–9
(Schools). Overview. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Doğan, S. (2012). The views of teachers about curriculum mapping process. Yıldız Technical
University, Istanbul.
Doğan, R. S., & Altun, A. P. D. S. (2013). Teachers' perceptions of the effectiveness of
curriculum mapping: the case of turkey'. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies
in the World, 3(4), 50-60.
Elizondo‐Montemayor, L., Hernández‐Escobar, C., Ayala‐Aguirre, F., & Aguilar, G. M.
(2008). Building a sense of ownership to facilitate change: The new curriculum.
International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11(1), 83-102.
Eunitah, V., Chindedza, W., Makaye, J. & Mapetere, K. (2013). Centrally designed curricula
in developing educational contexts: Challenges and possibilities. Standard Journal of
Education and Essay, 1(3), 40– 44.
European Commission (2007). Science Education Now: A Renewed Pedagogy for the Future
of Europe. Report by a High-Level Group on Science Education. Brussels: EC.
Finnish National Board of Education (2016). The national core curriculum for basic education.
Finland Patent No. 5.
Fullan, M. (2001). The New Meaning of Educational Change (Third edition). Teachers College
Press. Columbia University. New York and London.
82
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2013). Educational Research: Pearson New
International Edition: Competencies for Analysis and Applications. Pearson Higher Ed.
Golden-Jubilee, D. R. F. (2013). Role of teachers’ in curriculum development for teacher
education. Shivaji University, Kolhapur. India.
Guthrie, G. (2010). Basic Research Methods: An Entry to Social Science Research. New Delhi,
India: Sage Publications Pvt. Ltd.
Hale, J. A. (2008). A guide to curriculum mapping: Planning, implementing and sustaining the
process. California: Corwin Press.
Handelzalts, A. (2009). Collaborative Curriculum Design in Teacher Design Teams (Enschede:
University of Twente).
Haney, J.J., Lumpe, A.T., Czerniak, C.M., Egan, V., (2002). From beliefs to actions: the beliefs
and actions of teachers implementing change. Journal of Science Teacher Education 13
(3), 171–187.
Havnes, A. (2009). Talk, planning and decision-making in interdisciplinary teacher teams: A
case study. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 155–176.
Hayward, F. M. (2000). Internationalization of US higher education: Preliminary status report
2000. A.C.O. Education.
Huizinga, T. (2009). Towards an Instrument to Measure Teacher’s Competencies for the
Development of Curricula (Enschede: University of Twente)
Huizinga, T. (2014). Developing curriculum design expertise through teacher design teams.
University Twente.
Huizinga, T., Handelzalts, A., Nieveen, N., & Voogt, J. M. (2014). Teacher involvement in
curriculum design: Need for support to enhance teachers’ design expertise. Journal of
curriculum studies, 46(1), 33-57.
Indiana Department of Education. (2009). Tools for designing curriculum through mapping
and aligning. Chicago: Learning Point Associates.
Iipinge, S. M., & Kasanda, C. D. (2013). Challenges associated with curriculum alignment,
change and assessment reforms in Namibia. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy
& Practice, 20(4), 424-441.
Johnson, J. A. (2012). Curriculum revision that works: Principles of effective change. New
Jersey: Alyn and Bacon.
Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum: Theory and practice. London: Sage Publications.
Kennedy, A. (2005). Models of continuing professional development: a framework for
analysis. Journal of in-service education, 31(2), 235-250.
83
Khan, M. A., & Law, L. S. (2015). An Integrative Approach to Curriculum Development in
Higher Education in the USA: A Theoretical Framework. International Education
Studies, 8(3), 66-76.
Kobiah, L. K. (2016). Teachers' Perspective towards Their Involvement in Selection and
Organization of Learning Experiences and Implementation of Secondary School
Curriculum in Kenya. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(28), 53-59.
Kuiper, W., Nieveen, N., & Visscher-Voerman, I. (2004). Curriculum development from a
technical-professional perspective. Curriculum landscapes and trends (pp. 177-198).
Springer Netherlands.
Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Lucas, R. M. (2005). Teachers’ perceptions of the efficacy of curriculum mapping as a tool for
planning and curriculum alignment. Seton Hall University, New Jersey.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Curriculum development: Inductive models. Schooling, 2(1), 1-8.
Maphosa, C., & Mutopa, S. (2012). Teachers’ awareness of their role in planning and
implementing school-based curriculum innovation. The Anthropologist, 14(2), 99-106.
Marsh, C. (2009). Key concepts for understanding curriculum. London: Routledge/Taylor &
Francis Group.
Marsh, C. & Willis, G. (2007) Curriculum: Alternative Approaches, Ongoing Issues, 4th
edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Masila, V. (2007). From apartheid education to the Revised National Curriculum Statement:
Pedagogy for identity formation and nation-building in South Africa. Nordic Journal of
African Studies, 16(2), 146-160.
McCulloch, G. (2005). Curriculum reform, educational change and school improvement. The
practice and theory of school improvement III, 69–81. Dordrecht: Springer.
McKernan, J. (2007). Curriculum and imagination: Process theory, pedagogy and action
research. Routledge.
Mligo, R. I. (2008). The Perception of Educational Stakeholders on the Implementation of the
Teaching Methods Only Curriculum for Teacher Education in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam:
The University of Dar es Salaam.
Mockler, N., & Sachs, J. (Eds.). (2011). Rethinking educational practice through reflexive
inquiry: Essays in honour of Susan Groundwater-Smith (Vol. 7). Springer Science &
Business Media.
84
Mokua, B. (2010). An evaluation of the curriculum development role of teachers as key agents
in curriculum change. North-West University, Potchefstroom.
Mouraz, A., Leite, C., & Fernandes, P. (2013). Teachers’ role in curriculum design in
Portuguese schools. Teachers and Teaching, 19(5), 478-491.
Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC), (2004). National Report on the development of
education In Namibia: International Conference on Education. Geneva. The Republic of
Namibia.
Ministry of Education, (2015). The national curriculum for basic education. Namibia. NIED.
Okahandja.
Ministry of Education, Malaysia, (2014a). Main information. Ministry of Education Malaysia's
Official Portal. Retrieved 20 March 2017, from http://www.moe.gov.my/en/home
Muijs, D. (2004). Validity, reliability and generalizability. Doing quantitative research in
education with SPSS, 64-84.
Munazza, A. (2004). Analysis of Curriculum process and Development of a Model for
Secondary Level in Pakistan. University of Arid Agriculture, Rawal Pindi.
National Institute for Educational Development (NIED), (2003). Learner-centred Education in
the Namibian Context: A Conceptual Framework. Upgrading African Languages Project
(Africa), Namibia.
Null, J. (2011). Curriculum: From theory to practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Oghuvbu, E. P. (2011). Implementation of the primary school curriculum modules in Nigeria:
the role of supervision. The Anthropologist, 13(2), 147-150.
Okda, M.E. (2005). A proposed model for EFL teacher involvement in on-going curriculum
development. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 7(4), 33-49.
Oliva, P. (2009). Developing the curriculum (7thed.). USA: Allyn and Bacon.
Oloruntegbe, K. O. (2011). Teachers’ involvement, commitment and innovativeness in
curriculum development and implementation. Journal of Emerging Trends in
Educational Research and Policy Studies, 2(6), 443-449.
Oloruntegbe, K.O., Duyilemi, A.N., Agbayewa, J.O., Oluwatelure, T. A., Dele, A. & Omoniyi,
M.B.I. (2010). Teachers’ involvement, commitment and innovativeness in curriculum
development and Implementation. Educational Research, 1(12), 706-712.
Ornstein A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2009). Curriculum foundations, principles and Issues (5th
Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
O'Sullivan. M. C. (2002) Reform Implementation and the Realities within which Teachers
Work: a Namibian case study. Compare, vo1.32, No.2, University of Limerick.
85
Ottevanger, J. W. (2001). Teacher support materials as a catalyst for science curriculum
implementation in Namibia. Universiteit Twente.
Otunga, R.N., and Charles N. (2008). The Context of Curriculum Development in Kenya.
Accessed 24 April 2018. http://international.iupui.edu/kenya/resources/pdf
Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's theory.
Pietarinen, J., Pyhältö, K., & Soini, T. (2017). Large-scale curriculum reform in Finland–
exploring the interrelation between implementation strategy, the function of the reform,
and curriculum coherence. The Curriculum Journal, 28(1), 22-40.
Ramparsad, R. (2001). A Strategy for Teacher Involvement in Curriculum Development. South
African Journal of Education, 21, 4, 287-291.
Rogan, J.M. & Aldous, C. (2005), ‘Relationships between the constructs of a theory of
curriculum implementation’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 313–36.
Rogan, J. M., & Grayson, D. J. (2003). Towards a theory of curriculum implementation with
particular reference to science education in developing countries. International Journal
of Science Education, 25(10), 1171-1204.
Saracaloglu, S., Yılmaz, S., Cengel, M., Cogmen, S., Karademir, C.A. & Kanmaz, A. (2010).
Elementary teachers’ views about their roles in curriculum development and evaluation
process: The case of Denizli. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2(2),
24272434.
Schneider, R. M., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of
educative curriculum materials. Journal of science teacher education, 13(3), 221-245.
Smith, M. H, Worker, S. M., Meehan, C. L., Schmitt-McQuay, L., Ambrose, A., Brian, K., &
Schoenfelder, E. (2017). Defining and Developing Curricula in the Context of
Cooperative Extension. Journal of Extension, 55(2), 2FEA4.
Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum development: theory and practice. New York, NY: Harcourt,
Brace & World.
Talbot, D. M. (2015). Tracing complexities of teacher professional learning to evidence of
transformed practice.
Taylor, C., & Gibbs, G. R. (2010). How and what to code. Online QDA Web Site, 19.
Uchiyama, K. P., & Radin, J. L. (2009). Curriculum mapping in higher education: A vehicle
for collaboration. Innovative Higher Education, 33(8): 271-280.
Van den Berg, R. (2002). Teachers' Meanings Regarding Educational Practice. In Review of
Educational Research, Vol. 72, No.4, pp. 577-625
86
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in
science education: The role of teachers' practical knowledge. Journal of research in
science teaching, 38(2), 137-158.
Verma, S. (2012); Curriculum planning and Development; New Delhi: Astha publishers.
Vitikka, E. (2009). Opetussuunnitelman Mallin jäsennys. Structuring curriculum design:
content and pedagogy constructing the whole. Finnish Educational Research
Association: Research in Educational Sciences 44.
Voogt, J., Westbroek, H., Handelzalts, A., Walraven, A., McKenney, S., Pieters, J., & De Vries,
B. (2011). Teacher learning in collaborative curriculum design. Teaching and teacher
education, 27(8), 1235-1244.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the
development of children, 23(3), 34-41.
Wasil, F.A. (2014). Pedagogy from Perception to perspective. New Delhi Global Publications.
Wilansky, J. A. (2005). The effects of curriculum mapping on the instructional practices of
professional collaboration, standards alignment, and assessment. Dowling College, New
York.
87
Appendices
Appendix A
Approval letter from UEF
88
Appendix B
Permission letter from the Director of Education, Khomas
89
Appendix C
Informed consent letter
Dear Sir/Madam
I am Letisia Hidiwakusha, a Master student at the University of Eastern Finland. I am conducting a
survey to investigate the roles of primary teachers in the national curriculum design and development
in Namibia specifically in the Khomas region. The study aims to identify the roles and the importance
of involving teachers in the national curriculum development. As you are one of those teachers, your
inputs are more significant to this study hence I am kindly requesting you to complete the survey
attached.
The survey is anonymous. If you choose to participate, do not write your name on the questionnaire
so that no one will be able to identify you or know whether you participated in the study. Hence, the
collected data from the survey will be processed anonymously, and it will be used for the research
purposes only.
Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose to participate, please sign on this form and
kindly complete the questionnaire.
________________
Participant signature
Regards
Letisia Hidiwakusha
University of Eastern Finland
90
Appendix D
Survey for the teachers
Hidiwakusha Letisia
Master student
Email Address: [email protected]
Cell No: +358449531282
Survey for primary school teachers in Khomas region
Section 1
Background information (Please tick in the correct column )
1.1. Gender: Male Female
1.2. Age: ______
1.3. Qualification: Masters B.ed Diploma Others
1.4. Years of teaching experience: ________
1.5. At which primary school do you teach:
__________________________________
1.6. Which Primary Phase do you teach:
Pre-Primary
Junior Primary phase
Senior Primary phase
91
Section 2
1. Please respond to the following items by ticking in the column that most nearly represents
YOUR PERSONAL VIEWS about the importance of involving primary school teachers in the
National curriculum design and development.
2. Answer the following questions by ticking in the correct column.
92
Section 3
The National curriculum design and development in Namibia aims to give directions to planning,
organising and implementing teaching and learning process to teachers (Ministry of Education, 2015).
Based on your experiences what are your perceptions on the following questions?
3.1. Why do you think it is important for primary school teachers to take a role in the National
curriculum Design and Development?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.2. What are the benefits of participating in curriculum design and development?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
3.3. What kind of roles do you have in the national curriculum design and development?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.4. Which areas do you mostly focus during the process of curriculum development?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.5. Do you think teachers implement (teach) the curriculum very well once they are involved in all
the stages of curriculum design and development?
Why?____________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Yes No kkkkk
93
3.6. What are the challenges faced by the teachers during curriculum design and during
implementation process?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
3.7. What can be done to motivate primary school teachers to be have a role in curriculum design and
development?
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Thank you for your Participation!