Eisner (1985) proposes three perspectives of curriculum that occur, irrespective of the school’s ideology, namely the explicit curriculum, the implicit curriculum and the null curriculum. All three of these curricula have a value for the curriculum specialist.
Eisner described the explicit curriculum as the curriculum document that states all overt educational goals and objectives, be it skills or content. This curriculum is known to all parties who engage in the educational process, be it the government, teachers, students and parents.
In contrast to the explicit curriculum, Eisner recognises that the school is located as a part of a broader community and as such, states that the implicit curriculum (that which is hidden from the curriculum document) is a product of that. Eisner suggests that curriculum study should look at how a culture is created in
…show more content…
This however fails to recognise the agency of the learner in their ability to contribute to the “culture” of the classroom and this too must be considered. Furthermore he fails to recognise that the content selection or subject selection also contain implicit meanings within, especially when considered curricula like curriculum for social adaptation and social reconstruction and curriculum for academic rationalism which are chosen for the skills and values that they offer to learners (Eisner 1985). Often these curricula have been designed specifically for their implicit curriculum and ability to produce what society deems valuable and necessary.
Ultimately the implicit curriculum, perhaps because of its potential of inadvertent damage, must be considered when engaging in curriculum study, simply because it is so important in the education of a child in terms of becoming a functioning adult in