Abstract
This chapter presents views, opinions, and perceptions about the curriculum theories that propagate educational perspectives of social injustice, cultural exclusion, supremacy, socio-economic inequality, and inequity. The data collection method was question and answer and deductive reasoning conducted in small groups in education studies classes. Pieces of information recorded in video clips during the COVID-19 lockdown were analysed through qualitative procedures, transcribing verbal data, and sorting coded categories of data. First, the frequencies of statements indicating trends in thoughts form themes classified as convergent and divergent perspectives. The interpretation of themes identified during data analysis seeks to address the problem statement in this chapter, which is the paradigm shift for a conceptualised decolonised curriculum in South Africa. Thus, the research question asked in the study is “what principles should underpin pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) of pre-service teacher education and training?” The source of data was interviews and document analysis. The synthesis of the results drawn from the raw data was based on the theoretical and conceptual framework established from the works of scholarship researchers on decolonised education. The interpretation of the findings addressing the problem statement and the research question was presented through convergent and divergent perspectives that characterise the beliefs and thoughts of students about curriculums for decolonised education in South Africa. The study highlights uncertainties about the concepts, divergent conceptual stances on decolonised education, and the lack of uniformity in the perceptions of philosophical principles or foundations of perspectives on decolonised education.
Reference36 articles.
1. Apple MW. Ideology and Curriculum. New York: Routledge Printers; 2009
2. Pinar WF, Reynold WM, Slattery P, Taubman PM. Understanding Curriculum. New York: Peter Lang; 2014
3. Shor I. Empowering Education: Critical Teaching for Social Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1999
4. Slattery P. Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. London: Routledge; 2006
5. Muller J, Young M. Knowledge, power and powerful knowledge re-visited. The Curriculum Journal. 2019;30(2):196-214. DOI: 10.108/09585176.2019.157029