Curriculum and Instruction

Introduction

              Now that I am reaching the end of the Master of Science in Education program, I have had time to reflect on how much my understanding of curriculum theory has evolved. Initially, I viewed curriculum as a fixed guide or checklist, something aligned with standards and used to organize classroom lessons. Over time, through reading, writing assignments, and my own professional experiences, I have come to see curriculum theory as far more complex and layered, shaped by history, culture, politics, psychology, and lived experiences.

              In this essay, I will explore how key theorists, such as Kliebard, Bruner, Freire, Greene, and others, have influenced my evolving understanding of learner development. Drawing on both academic study and professional practice, I will illustrate how their theories have shaped my approach to curriculum design and student-centered instruction. This journey has not only transformed how I view curriculum but has also guided the future direction of my work, including the founding of Rekla Learning Studios, an initiative grounded in the pedagogical theories examined in this essay.

Theoretical Foundations and Their Influence

              One of the most influential thinkers for me was Kliebard (1995). Learning about his work showed me that curriculum models like developmentalism and social reconstructionism often conflict. These competing philosophies highlight how education has been shaped by changing social needs and shifting cultural values. Kliebard argued that the American curriculum is the result of an ongoing struggle among interest groups, each advocating for their own vision of what schools should teach. For example, some emphasized subject-matter mastery, while others prioritized training students in practical skills for workforce readiness. Developmentalists focused on child-centered education aligned with natural growth and cognitive stages. Dewey, on the other hand, saw education as a vehicle for democratic reform and social progress.

Bruner’s Impact and Inquiry-Based Practice

              I also found Bruner’s (1960) ideas very meaningful, especially because I recognized many of them in my own teaching long before I knew what they were called. For example, he emphasized giving students opportunities to discover ideas for themselves and introduced the concept of a spiral curriculum. A spiral curriculum allows students to revisit key concepts at multiple stages, each time engaging with them at a deeper and more complex level (Bruner, 1960, p. 33). This reminded me of how I used to instruct my own children at home, encouraging them to revisit ideas repeatedly in new ways, which deepened their understanding. Bruner stated, “any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development” (Bruner, 1960, p. 33), and that quote really stuck with me. It affirmed my belief that even young learners can explore complex ideas when we meet them where they are.

              One of the best examples of Bruner’s theories in action came from my work as Academic Director and Summer Club Director at HEI Schools in Saudi Arabia. These programs gave me the opportunity to design curriculum from the ground up, with full flexibility to respond to student interests. For instance, during the first summer, I created a theme-based program around “Inventors and Explorers.” Students chose their own challenges, researched historical figures, created prototypes, and presented their inventions at a mini expo at the end of the summer. The freedom and ownership they felt over their projects was exactly what Bruner advocated for: active, discovery-based learning. These ideas now form the foundation of the programs I offer through Rekla Learning Studios, where I support schools and educators in designing child-centered, inquiry-based learning environments rooted in equity and global best practices.

Supporting Diverse Learners: Vygotsky and Finnish Pedagogy

              I also developed and led a reading intervention program that still stands out as one of my most rewarding experiences. We began the summer with a group of students who were either struggling readers or complete non-readers. Many of them lacked confidence and had little motivation when it came to reading. Drawing on Bruner’s (1960) ideas about developmental learning, which emphasized that instruction should be matched to a child’s cognitive readiness and supported by Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of the zone of proximal development, our team started small, with phonics games, picture books, and one-on-one support. This closely mirrors the principles of Finnish pedagogy, which emphasizes meeting each child where they are, recognizing their individual strengths, interests, and abilities as the foundation for their growth. We used information technology (IT), videos, hands-on practice, and games to motivate and engage the young students. Vygotsky once said, “What a child can do today with assistance, she will be able to do by herself tomorrow” (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 87), and that is exactly what we saw happen. By the end of the program, each student was able to confidently read a selection to parents and staff. Several read beginner books, others read short stories they had written themselves. It was a powerful reminder that with the right support and a well-designed, student-centered curriculum, true transformation is possible.

Curriculum for Empowerment: Freire’s Critical Pedagogy

              Freire’s (1970) work on critical pedagogy also influenced the way I approached these summer programs. He believed that education should help students become agents of change in their world. Inspired by this philosophy, I designed experiences that encouraged students to think critically and act meaningfully within their communities. During the second summer, we focused on sustainability and environmental action. We did not just teach about recycling; we had students collect waste around the school, build sculptures from repurposed materials, and create a recycling program the school could use daily. This was not just hands-on learning; it was socially conscious and empowering. This experience demonstrated how even young children can begin thinking critically about the world and see themselves as capable of making a difference. As Freire (1970) famously said, “Education either functions as an instrument... to bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom” (p. 34). This quote underscores the importance of education that empowers students. This project represented the latter: it gave students the freedom to act on real-world issues, make decisions, and lead change in their school. Rather than simply absorbing information, they became active participants in shaping their environment, which is exactly what Freire meant by the practice of freedom.

Greene’s “Wide Awakeness” and Student Identity

              Greene’s (1995) call for “wide awakeness”, the idea that learners should be fully present, reflective, and engaged, has deeply influenced how I view curriculum. One of the most valuable things I have learned is that students need time and space to reflect on their own lives and how they connect to the content we teach. Greene’s work inspired me to structure learning spaces where students could bring their identities and experiences into the classroom, especially through storytelling, project-based learning, and community engagement. For example, one of the most engaging experiences we incorporated into the summer program was a weekly escape room challenge. Throughout the week, students practiced critical thinking and collaboration, culminating in Thursday’s challenge where they applied these skills to solve a unique escape room setup designed within the school. This activity helped students build confidence and develop their identities as capable, thoughtful learners. This emphasis on awakening student identity and voice is deeply embedded in the mission of Rekla Learning Studios, which aims to empower educators to nurture curiosity, agency, and creative thinking in every learner.

Differentiation and Local Adaptation: Tomlinson in Practice

              In more formal teaching settings, especially within Finnish-style schools in Saudi Arabia, I have seen firsthand how powerful inquiry-based and student-centered learning can be. Implementing these approaches effectively, however, has required intentional design, meaning clearly structured, thoughtfully scaffolded lessons with meaningful outcomes, and enough structure to ensure all students benefit. Drawing on the principles of Greene and other theorists, I found that applying these ideas in context required both flexibility and strong planning. One of the theories that has helped me achieve understanding with this concept is differentiated instruction, especially as outlined by Tomlinson. According to Tomlinson, “Differentiation is simply a teacher attending to the learning needs of a particular student or small group of students, rather than teaching a class as though all individuals in it were basically alike” (Tomlinson, 2001, p. 4). That statement helped me rethink how I design both curriculum and assessments to honor the diverse learners in front of me. Our schools in Saudi Arabia really struggled with this concept of differentiated instruction. The idea of allowing students to develop and guide their own learning path often conflicted with local expectations. Both parents and school leadership tended to favor a more uniform approach, one that is easy to grade, assess, and replicate, where all students are learning the same material at the same pace.

Eisner and Authentic Assessment

              Eisner’s (2002) quote, “Not everything that matters can be measured, and not everything that we can measure matters” (p. 578), continues to resonate with me, especially when it comes to assessment. These summer clubs I worked with did not end in tests; they culminated in exhibitions, performances, portfolio reflections, and student-led presentations. The learning was visible in their confidence, their voices, and the pride they showed in their work. I used observation, reflection journals, and student feedback, not multiple-choice tests, to assess growth. The results were deeper, more personal, and, in many ways, more lasting. Parents recognized the value of this learning style and planned to enroll their children in the fall because of how they were learning in the summer.

Looking Ahead: Curriculum as Living Practice

              Looking ahead, I plan to implement what I have learned through both academic study and hands-on experience. This also includes the continued development of Rekla Learning Studios, my educational consulting initiative focused on teacher training, curriculum design, and leadership mentoring inspired by Finnish pedagogy. Whether I am collaborating with schools, leading community programs, or training teachers, I aim to develop curriculum that is meaningful, flexible, and grounded in the real lives of learners. The perspectives I have gained from Kliebard, Bruner, Freire, Eisner, Greene, Vygotsky, Dewey, and Tomlinson have helped me see curriculum not just as a plan, but as a living, breathing part of education. Dewey’s (1938) words sum it up best: “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself” (p. 49). That philosophy has carried me through this program, and I know it will continue to guide my work in whatever educational spaces I find myself.

 

                                                                                                              References

​

Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.

​

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.

​

Eisner, E. W. (2002). What can education learn from the arts about the practice of education? 

 

             Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 18(1), 4–16.

​

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

​

Greene, M. (1995). Wide Awakeness and the moral life of teaching. In D. J. Flinders & S.J. Thornton

 

             (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (6th ed.) Routledge.

​

Kliebard, H. M. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum. In D. J. Flinders & S.J. Thornton

 

             (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (6th ed.). Routledge.

​

Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd 

 

              ed.). ASCD.

​

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological   processes.

 

              Harvard University Press.