Reconceptualists

​The concept of reconceptualizing the curriculum has me stumped, as I read I kept searching for a singular definition, but as I read through William F. Pinar’s article, the only thing I understood about reconceptualizing the curriculum was what it is not.  After reading Pacini-Ketchawbaw and Pence’s article I realized that I would not find this singular definition, because the whole theory in itself focuses on the criticism of a singular truth, as Pacini-Ketchawbaw and Pence put it “reconceptualist...scholars question the existence of a singular truth…they have problematized the fact that the field of ECEC has constructed a true child…”.  Unlike some of the other models we’ve looked at so far, the reconceptualized approach is not a prescribed method of curriculum design rather it is a viewpoint from which to address curriculum.  This viewpoint reflects an existentialist position, as Pinar puts it “reconceptualization…is fundamentally an intellectual phenomenon, not an interpersonal-affiliative one”.  While there is no definitive definition to reconceptualizing curriculum, there are overarching themes, such as the promotion of social justice.  While it is clear that Pinar was at the forefront of the reconceptualist movement (Flinders and Thornton 2013), others, such as Maxine Greene, were on the track before.  As I come to understand this theory, I ask, is enough being done to reconceptualize the curriculum and are the movements of change happening fast enough?  

Pinar, W.F., The reconceptualization of curriculum studies (Flinders and Thornton)

Green, Maxine Curriculum and Consciousness, (Flinders and Thornton)

Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., & Pence, A. (2005). Contextualizing the reconceptualist movement in Canadian early childhood education. In V. Pacini-Ketchabaw & A. Pence (Eds.), Canadian early childhood education: Broadening and deepening discussions of quality (pp. 5-20). Ottawa, ON: Canadian Child Care Federation.