Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 2 no. 1 (2024)

MATATAG Curriculum: Why Curriculum [must] Change?

Carie Justine P Estrellado

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Curriculum changes dovetail with societal needs and advancements. As the world evolves, the educational landscape adapts to prepare students effectively. Technological progress, globalization, political acumen, and shifts in societal values necessitate updates to curriculum content and paradigms. This paper stimulates a macro-sociological vista on the MATATAG curriculum in the Philippine context. This revised curriculum, effective from the school year 2024 to 2025, addresses challenges faced by the current K to 12 curriculum, including numerous contents, misplaced prerequisite learning competencies, social inequities, and imbalances in thinking demands. This paper advances discourse regarding the adaptation to humanized learning and addresses the shortcomings of existing systems. In essence, curriculum changes are not just a response to challenges but a proactive stance for the demands of everchanging needs. Although the context of the MATATAG agenda is not a mere blank ideation, it can be considered a national movement. Undeniably, education cannot be put at stake here because it determines what and how the Philippine nation will become in the next generation.



References:

  1. Ahmad, S., Umirzakova, S., Mujtaba, G., Amin, M. S., & Whangbo, T. (2023). Education 5.0: requirements, enabling technologies, and future directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15846.
  2. Escuadro, R. (2023, November 7). Transformational journey of learners through MATATAG curriculum. Philippine Information Agency. Click here to enter text.https://pia.gov.ph/features/2023/11/07/transformational-journey-of-learners-through-matatag-curriculum
  3. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Routledge.
  4. Giddens, A. (1991). Living in the World: Dilemmas of the Self. In A. Giddens (Ed.), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age (pp. 187-201). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  5. Havelock, R. G. (1969). A Comparative study of the literature on the dissemination and utilization of scientific knowledge.
  6. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Cambridge: Polity.
  7. Goodson, I. F. (2013). School subjects and curriculum change. Routledge.
  8. Lowry S. (1992). Strategies for implementing curriculum change. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 305(6867), 1482–1485. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.305.6867.1482
  9. Nordin, A. & Sundberg, D. (2018). Exploring curriculum change using discursive institutionalism – a conceptual framework, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50:6,820-835, DOI: 10.1080/00220272.2018.1482961
  10. Priestley, M. (2011). Schools, teachers, and curriculum change: A balancing act?. Journal of educational change, 12(1), 1-23.
  11. Priestley, M. (2011). Whatever happened to curriculum theory? Critical realism and curriculum change. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 19(2), 221–237. 
  12. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New York, Free Press of Glencoe.
  13. Rusman, A., Mas’udi, M. M., Hermoyo, R. P., Yarno, Yunianti, S., & Rafsanjani, H. (2023, June 7). Education transformation in 5.0 society development era. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2727(1), 020050. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0141657
  14. Wood, P., & Butt, G. (2014). Exploring the use of complexity theory and action research as frameworks for curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(5), 676–696

Tools

All Comments (1)


Copyright © 2024  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic