The Curricular Policies and How they are Translated in Secondary Education

Abstract

Our starting point is understanding the curriculum as a complicated conversation (Pinar, 2011) which connects past, present and future experiences. Since it is a symbolic construct, it should be historically, socially and autobiographically defined in order to be studied. In this sense, the curriculum-society relationship is inherent to the curricular investigation. We place this relationship in the context of the Generalized Structural Crisis (De Alba, 2007), which is presented as a “melting pot of unprecedented opportunities to contribute in different ways to the task of transforming reality towards a better world” (De Alba, 2007, p. 104). From a post-critical perspective, we study the institutional development of the curriculum in the secondary school in connection with the different curricular policies’ decision levels and what this translates into (Casimiro Lopes, et. al., 2013). To achieve this, we intend to investigate which are the inclusion discourses and the meanings of secondary education that are present in the curricular policies from the supra level to the nano level (Stirling Network for Curriculum Studies, 2016) and how are these translated focusing the analysis on the local/global tension (Ball, 2001). Based on a first approach to the field, it is possible to discern that the interdisciplinarity in teaching and its connection with local social issues constitute one way of approaching the mentioned dislocation. Its relevance lies in retrieving dimensions satanized by positivism: imagination, creativity, intuition, uncertainty (Torres Santome, 1994). Key-words: Curriculum as complicated conversation; Translation, Secondary education; Curricular policies.