SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Issues and Problems Related to

Science Curriculum
Implementation in Pakistan:
Perceptions of Three Pakistani
Curriculum Managers

PETER JOHN AUBUSSON, KEVIN WATSON

School of Teaching and Educational Studies, University of Western Sydney, Nepean,
P.O. Box 10, Kingswood NSW 2747, Australia

Received 7 April 1997; revised 3 March 1999; accepted 18 August 1998

ABSTRACT: This article reviews recent curriculum implementation in Pakistan through

the eyes of three members of a science curriculum review and implementation team. Dif-
ferent views of curriculum implementation, ranging from cooperative to authoritarian, are
considered. In this context, perceptions of past, present, and future science curriculum
implementation are examined to reveal the changing patterns of science curriculum im-
plementation in Pakistan. Influences that may act to encourage or discourage change in
curriculum management are identified. The relative merits of different views of curriculum
implementation are assessed with reference to the cultures of developing countries such
as Pakistan. The need for curriculum and its implementation to grow in sympathy with
the culture of which it is to be part is emphasized. 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed
83:603 620, 1999.

INTRODUCTION
It is an enigma that curricula and their associated teaching methods, although well
founded in theory, pedagogy, and even empirical research, at the trial stage, often flounder
when implemented across a nation (Fullan & Stiegelbauer, 1991). This predisposition to
failure may be exacerbated when the curricula and teaching approaches are imported from
different cultures or notably transferred from a developed into a developing country (Aspin,
1993; Sarre, 1995; Watson, Aubusson, & Baumgart, 1994). Nevertheless, the globalization
of education has led to school curricula becoming standardized worldwide such that there
are few differences between the official curricula of developing and developed countries,
according to Pinar, Reynolds, Slattery, and Taubman (1995). This globalization of edu-
cation was intended to widen access to education, raise the quality of education, and

Correspondence to: P. J. Aubusson; e-mail: p.aubusson@nepean.uws.edu.au

short
1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0036-8326/99/050603-18 standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
604 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
support mobility of ideas in teaching, learning, and curriculum (Halse, Ismail, Jaleel, Akh- Base of text
meema, & Ahmed, 1996). It has also resulted in cultural imperialism as new curricula
in developing countries are often based on existing curricula in developed countries and
resources, such as texts, are imported from large multinational companies usually based
in, and designed for students in, Great Britain, the United States, Germany, or France
(Pinar et al., 1995). This exporting of education across cultures to promote educational
development in many diverse countries has consequences for cultural identity and cultural
diversity (Halse et al., 1996; Harris, 1990; Jordan, 1988). Peshkin (1992) contends that
there is a need for a close fit between curriculum and culture if education is to serve the
individual, society, and nation. Curriculum designers endorse their culturally oriented
sense of what is good . . . and should be perpetuated [and] of what is missing and should
be included . . . (Peshkin, 1992, p. 250). The importing of curriculum may serve the
latter but is unlikely to serve the former. Thus, the importing of curriculum is likely to
result in a curriculum that poorly fits culture. Peshkin (1992) uses an analogy to consider
the consequences of a poor fit arguing that a pair of gloves may fit poorly and still function
effectively to keep hands warm but a poor fit between medication and illness or curriculum
and culture can be costly. Yet, the desire for curriculum change in developing countries,
particularly in relation to science education, cannot be denied.
The etiology for curriculum change seems to stem, initially, not so much from a per-
ceived weaknesses in the philosophy or theoretical basis of science education, but rather
from a dissatisfaction with students science achievement (Fensham, 1988) and the all-
pervading assumption that achievement in schooling is causally linked to scientific pro-
gress and technological development (Fensham, 1992). This assumption, which according
to Fensham (1992) is in no way based on research findings, leads to recurring pattern for
schooling to be seen both as the panacea for the problems societies face and the reason
for the various ills of society that burst into prominence at various times (Fensham, 1992,
p. 791). Not surprisingly, this dissatisfaction with school and national achievement in many
countries has resulted in reviews of both curriculum content and teaching methods and a
conclusion that these lack relevance for students (Brunkhurst & Yager, 1986; Claxton,
1991).
The poor implementation of past science curricula, and their associated teaching prac-
tices can, in part, be attributed to curriculum managers ignoring the existing conceptions,
beliefs, views, and attitudes of teachers (Hewson & Hewson, 1988; Mitchener & Anderson,
1989; Richardson, 1989). In the same way that teachers are being exhorted to reflect on
their personal beliefs and theories, curriculum managers need to examine their conceptions,
understandings, and interpretations of curriculum development, implementation, and as-
sociated teacher change, as well as their perceptions of the nature of science and science
education. These beliefs have a critical bearing on the decisions they make in curriculum
implementation at both the planning and the execution stages.

SETTING THE SCENE

During the postfoundation era in Pakistan (1947 1990), expenditure on education was
minimal. Consequently, Pakistan faced the complex problem of expanding and improving
its education programs in a very short time with minimal funding, 2.1% of Gross National
Product in 1993 (Akbar, 1993). By 1990, the average literacy rate had increased between
1947 and 1990 from less than 10% to 47.3% in males and 21.1% in females (AGPS, 1990,
cited in Akbar, 1993). This is a significant improvement in a short time. However, Tobin, short
standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 605 Base of RH

Top of text
Kahle, and Fraser (1988) make the point that as far as science education is concerned, Base of text
in developing countries, business and industry have found it difficult to recruit em
ployees with the necessary knowledge of science to meet the countrys needs. Indeed,
they cite this as something of a crisis in an age of scientific and technological advance
ment.
Even now the education system in Pakistan is characterized by a heavy reliance on
textbooks, rote learning, the lecture method of teaching (even to the very young), and other
similar practices that are not considered to be conducive to learning (Hill & Tanveer,
1990). There is a perception that there is a poor standard of education in Pakistan, in
general, and in science education in particular, compared with systems in other countries
(Biggs, 1990; Seng & Tee, 1978). Educationists have been emphasizing change in the
prevailing educational theory and practices but the institutions of family, school and
religion play very significant roles in any attempted innovation (Curriculum Bureau, 1989,
p. 87). In the past, recommendations for educational reforms from various government
commissions have proved difficult to implement because of financial constraints, re-
sistance of field staff, and the nature of innovation as an abstract novelty (Curriculum
Bureau, 1989, p. 87).
It is a widely accepted view that science education should encourage active learning
through interaction and investigation (e.g., Hand & Prain, 1995) rather than the transmis-
sion and exposition methods employed in Pakistan over the last 40 years (Hill & Tanveer,
1990; Ilyas, 1985). This transmission and exposition may be viewed as a more efficient
mechanism for the transmission of cultural beliefs and values. As Donmoyer (1989) noted:

Cultures whether tribal, modern, or post-modern, inevitably attempt to reproduce them-

selves. They inevitably try to transmit to a new generation the most fundamental values
and beliefs of the old. And they will inevitably attempt to use formal education to accom-
plish this purpose. (p. 157)

To meet this conservative imperative in schooling, Western theories and practices in sci-
ence education need to take into account and serve cultural traditions. Akbar (1993), for
example, argued that teachers, students, and the community expect traditional methods of
teaching and would resist any change unless it is implemented in a sensitive manner in
order to encourage ownership and acceptance of change.
The initial impetus for curriculum change in Pakistan developed from a dissatisfaction
with school science achievement and the growing recognition of the need to become a
scientifically and technologically successful country in order to achieve success econom-
ically (Dani, 1986). This gave rise not only to a review of the science education curriculum
but also to the way in which it was developed and implemented, according to Hill and
Tanveer (1990). The problem then became how to achieve educational change to promote
economic success.
In Pakistan, the ministry and key senior figures in education established a network
administered by the Science Education Project (SEP). SEP then established an autonomous
body, the Institute for the Promotion of Science Education and Training (IPSET) to de-
velop, implement, and monitor the implementation of science curricula. In Pakistan, IPSET
was part of a new management structure charged with the task of promoting change
through this tripartite approach to installing a new science curriculum. An assumption in
Pakistan, as with many developing countries, was that access by curriculum managers to
the curriculum and methods of teaching science in a developed country would permit short
standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
606 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
Base of text

Figure 1. The authoritarian cooperative continuum.

expeditious curriculum change, resulting in the desired improvement in student achieve-

ment.
The new science curriculum, developed in Pakistan with support from overseas con-
sultants, resource materials, and established curricula, required science subject matter to
be made more relevant to students and to the demands of a modern society. As part of the
implementation phase for the new syllabus, initiated by IPSET, a group of 14 senior
Pakistani educators participated in an international study tour that included a 2-week train-
ing workshop at the University of Western Sydney, Nepean, Australia.
While in Australia, the Pakistani curriculum managers reflected upon and analyzed their
own beliefs and views of science, science education, curriculum implementation, and eval-
uation. Initially, participants individually identified their personal views. Workshops fol-
lowed that allowed participants, now more confident in the knowledge of their own beliefs,
to work cooperatively to clarify, review, and develop new ideas. Different views of cur-
riculum implementation emerged as the 14 participants analyzed and reflected on curric-
ulum implementation, theory, and practice. These views were represented by us as points
along a continuum ranging from cooperative to authoritarian (Fig. 1).
The models shown in Figures 2 and 3 describe the extreme views on this continuum
identified by us from discussions with 14 curriculum managers from Pakistan. (For further
discussion of these models, see Watson, Aubusson & Baumgart [1994].)
In the authoritarian model, the consultant or, for that matter, the foreign training pro-
vider, has expertise that is perceived to be valuable in terms of the authority and the power
to influence significantly the curriculum and its implementation. Because the consultant is
in a position of perceived authority, the curriculum managers devalue the inherent expertise
they possess about science education in their country. At the next stage, in the authoritarian
model, the curriculum managers are in a position of authority over the teachers and are
further empowered as they develop additional expertise through interactions with the con-
sultant. Such a perception gives rise to a top down model of curriculum development
and implementation. It promotes an authoritarian implementation strategy which, in turn,
is reinforced by attempts to ensure the fidelity of curriculum in its implementation. In this
model, the teachers views are perceived as hurdles to be leapt.
In the cooperative model, the consultant, curriculum implementation managers, and
teachers examine their conceptions, understandings, and interpretations of their experi-
ences concerning curriculum implementation and teacher change, as well as their percep-
tions of the nature of science and science education. Collectively, they determine the
decisions they take in curriculum implementation both in planning and in execution. In
this model, the teachers views are important, relevant and play a role commensurate with
the pivotal position that teachers occupy within the system. The curriculum managers still
have authority, but their responsibility is to implement strategies derived cooperatively
from the participants in the process.
The fact that cooperative strategies were being developed and incorporated in a fun-
damentally authoritarian, Pakistani system needs to be examined and explained. The in-
corporation of these strategies has resulted in changes at all levels of the system (the
Education Ministry, curriculum managers, and teachers). short
standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 607 Base of RH

Top of text
Base of text

Figure 2. Authoritarian model for curriculum change.

Figure 3. Cooperative model for curriculum change. short

standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
608 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
PURPOSE Base of text
The purpose of this research was to investigate the issues and problems related to science
curriculum implementation in Pakistan. In addition, given the distinctive nature of the
culture of Pakistan, the extent to which the chosen implementation approach was appro-
priate is analyzed and discussed.

METHODOLOGY
This study adopts a phenomenographic approach in that it investigates the limited num-
ber of qualitatively different ways in which various phenomena are experienced, concep-
tualized, understood, perceived, and apprehended (Marton, 1981, 1988, 1994). It seeks to
detect forms of thought according to how people interpret aspects of reality obtained in
their experiences. Through phenomenography, an empirical approach has been developed
that makes sense of the experiences that people have concerning a particular phenomena
in a selected context.
The focus in this study is on describing curriculum managers ways of thinking about
curriculum implementation. This approach does not attempt to look into the curriculum
managers minds, but rather attempts to see what they see and experience when thinking
about curriculum implementation. The different conceptions, perceptions, and understand-
ings that are identified represent different ways in which curriculum implementation appear
to individuals and are known as categories of description and are logically related to
each other forming a hierarchy in relation to a given criteria.
In phenomenography, it is the categories of description that demonstrate the relation-
ships among conceptions of a phenomenon, such as curriculum implementation, that con-
stitute the main results of the research. In this study the intention was to examine views
of curriculum implementation. Curriculum development and the nature of the science
curriculum, however, were so entwined with views of curriculum development that all
three feature in the discussion of the results.
Three people, whom we shall call Jan, Gul, and Yasmine, were involved in the devel-
opment and implementation of a new science curriculum in Pakistan. They were 3 of the
14 participants in a science education curriculum development and implementation pro-
gram at the University of Western Sydney, Nepean. Although it may have been desirable
to interview more participants, these three volunteered and were able to make time to be
interviewed, because they continued their stay in Australia after the other curriculum man-
agers had left. The interviews, which were 60 90 minutes in duration, took place in a
large office that had often been the venue for discussions between the researchers and
participants during their stay at the university.
The phenomenon they were asked to give their perceptions about was curriculum im-
plementation in Pakistan. To anchor their perceptions at the concrete level, which serves
as a focus for questioning (Marton & Saljo, 1984), the participants were given copies of
the authoritarian and cooperative models (see Figs. 2 and 3), which were described and
explained to them. Their understanding of the models was checked. The participants were
then asked to mark a place on the continuum (see Fig. 1) to indicate the way science
curricula had been implemented in the past, would be implemented in the future, and how
they felt it should be implemented. The participants were then asked to explain the dif-
ference between their three responses. As this research was taking place at a time when
the approach to curriculum implementation was being changed in Pakistan, the participants
were asked about their view of curriculum implementation in the past, the present, and the short
future. This served to further anchor their thinking in the concrete and encourage them to standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 609 Base of RH

Top of text
reflect on the reasons for their view. The interview therefore tried to facilitate participants Base of text
thinking deeply about what they considered curriculum implementation to be and about
why they may hold their views (Marton, in Husen & Postlethwaite, 1994). After identifying
the position of curriculum development of Pakistan on the continuum (see Fig. 1) the
participants were asked questions to ascertain their reasons for this perception. The ques-
tions investigated ideas held by exploring particular statements made by participants.
Hence, specific questions asked of each participant depended on the responses and vocab-
ulary they used. Sample questions included: What makes you say that curriculum imple-
mentation is/was/will be cooperative/authoritarian? How is it that this makes
implementation cooperative rather than authoritarian? Can you give an example [to illus-
trate or explain a point further]? Are there some ways in which the implementation was/
is/will be authoritarian rather than cooperative? Are there some ways in which the
implementation was/is/will be cooperative rather than authoritarian? This interview tech-
nique is similar to that employed in interviews about instances research conducted in
Learning in Science Project (see, e.g., Happs, 1981).
The interviews were transcribed verbatim with the transcripts being analyzed for simi-
larities and differences between the ways curriculum implementation appeared to the par-
ticipants. The data were analyzed according to the following steps (after Gerber,
Boulton-Lewis, & Bruce, 1995; Marton, 1990, 1994; Marton & Saljo, 1984; Walsh et al.,
1993):

Data were first reduced by ignoring data not relevant to the study.
Distinct ways the participants understood or experienced curriculum implementation
were identified and grouped.
Evidence was gathered by taking excerpts from the interviews and grouping them
accordingly.
Borders between individuals were temporarily abandoned so that different individual
interviews together made up undivided data for analysis.
Quotes were grouped to establish the critical attributes of each group and distin-
guishing features between the groups, thus producing categories of description.
Because the categories of description represent different ways of conceptualizing
and understanding curriculum implementation, a hierarchy of relationships between
the categories was established. In this study, categories of description were arranged
according to their authoritarian or cooperative nature.
Data were repeatedly reviewed to develop as deep an understanding as possible of
what the participants said and to test interpretations against transcript records.
A draft of the categories of description and later a draft of this paper were sent to
participants for comment. The comments were used to modify the categories of
description and this report.

Throughout the data analysis the various statements were seen in two contexts. The first
was the pool of meanings that was derived from what all participants said, their view
about curriculum implementation. The second was what each individual participant said
about curriculum implementation in the context of other phenomena, such as the history
and culture of Pakistan, curriculum development, and the nature of the science curriculum.
The criterion used to develop the hierarchy, from the categories of description, was their
place on a bipolar scale from authoritarian to cooperative.
The categories of description and hierarchy form the results for this study as recom- short
mended by Gerber et al. (1995), Marton (1990, 1994), Walsh et al. (1993), and Marton standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
610 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
and Saljo (1984). The hierarchy identified from the participants views of curriculum im- Base of text
plementation in Pakistan is:

1. Curriculum implementation viewed as authoritarian.

2. Initiating cooperation.
3. Consolidating cooperation by a redistribution of power.
4. Problems with implementation.

This hierarchy reflects the participants perception of change, the promise and the difficul-
ties change generates. Each category of description is described in terms of the view
expressed by the participants. This view is illustrated by examples from the transcripts. In
addition, each category of description is analyzed to find out why the participants hold the
view expressed. Participants reasons are also illustrated using examples from the tran-
scripts.

CATEGORIES OF DESCRIPTION
1. Curriculum Implementation Viewed as Authoritarian
Jan, Gul, and Yasmine all indicated that past implementation of science curricula in
Pakistan has been authoritarian. Their views indicated that curriculum development and
implementation has been authoritarian in the following ways.
First, the development and implementation of curricula was authoritarian in that people
occupied set positions of rank, which gave them a status from which authority was derived.
It was not appropriate for people of lower rank and status to offer ideas:

Once, I was the youngest and I made a very good suggestion and my supervisor said: What
are you doing? . . . Why are you talking about these things? You do not know! (J)

Second, the views of those not holding positions of authority were not valued because
knowledge was seen as being possessed and transmitted hierarchically:

They said, our knowledge is greater . . . They [the teachers] are just very good teachers
but they dont have the knowledge of curriculum processes. (J)

Third, teachers have been expected to implement a science curriculum without any op-
portunity to contribute to its development:

They only involve teachers saying, now you implement it . . . it comes from the top to
the bottom. (J)

Curriculum objectives were developed and teachers were then told this has been de-
cided . . . Most of the things were predecided . . . (Y)

These views suggest that an authoritarian system operated in the past: a system in which
teachers and administrators had prescribed and limited functions. The system was author-
itarian, rather than simply one in which people had authority. Authority was derived from
rank and position, and knowledge and expertise were associated with that rank rather than short
the knowledge and expertise giving rise to authority. Hence, those of lower rank were standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 611 Base of RH

Top of text
perceived as not able to contribute to decisionmaking, beyond that which was appropriate Base of text
to their station.
When Gul and Yasmine were asked to reflect on why they held this view they said that
the authoritarian system developed as a natural product of their authoritarian culture:

[Its] the nature of the whole society. It had a bureaucratic type of rule. . . . First they
were ruled by the kings, now they are ruled by the generals. (G)

An authoritarian system is present not only in curriculum implementation but it is present

in almost every walk of life. It is a reflection of our social set up. (Y)

These responses imply that, in the past, a conscious decision was not made to develop and
implement curriculum in Pakistan in an authoritarian way. Rather, an authoritarian system
arose spontaneously from, and in sympathy with, the culture. A science curriculum em-
phasizing student-centered learning and the construction of knowledge by the learner may
be at odds with peoples views at all levels of society views, which place greatest em-
phasis on the authority of existing knowledge and the decisionmaking of those perceived
to possess it.

2. Initiating Cooperation
When the focus of the discussion about curriculum development and implementation
shifted from the past to the present, it became evident that the system was perceived to be
shifting from an authoritarian toward a more cooperative approach:

For the first time they are involving teachers in the process. (J)

Now we can sit down together and work together for the same goal. (G)

They will have a clearer understanding of the need for change. Maybe then it will be easy
for them to change and work together. (Y)

When Jan, Gul, and Yasmine were asked to reflect on why cooperation was initiated they
suggested many reasons.
First, there was a readiness for change in the Ministry among curriculum managers and
science teachers:

The Science Education Project was masterminded by an educational administrator. It pro-

vided a forum for a cooperative educational system where the teachers from the college
cadre and school cadre can sit and think together. (G)

Second, science teachers were given a chance to voice their dissatisfaction with the past
curriculum and the way in which curricula were developed and implemented. Such dis-
satisfaction with the status quo has long been regarded as an important condition for change
(Fullan, 1993):

At grassroots level all the time they complain, we are not involved in this thing [the short
curriculum]. All the decisions are made there at the center. (J) standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
612 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
Third, exposure to ideas in other countries appeared to promote the desire to initiate Base of text
change. It prompted curriculum managers to investigate curriculum development and im-
plementation strategies in several other countries to identify approaches applicable in Pak-
istan. These alternatives generally included cooperative approaches:

. . . because of exposure to other countries. They go out of the system, they see things
and change has to come. (G)

Fourth, personal reflection on curriculum development and implementation was influenced

by this exposure. For some it has developed into a dissatisfaction with science education,
its development and implementation: a realization that there may be better ways and, in
time, a fundamental change in individuals personal beliefs and theories. It is these personal
beliefs and theories that provide the commitment and potential for genuine change, as Jan
explained by drawing a parallel with constructivist approaches:

Its like childrens science. I think my ideas are excellent. Then I think some of my ideas
are not excellent. We just think some of our ideas are not correct so we have to change
those ideas. Correct means what it means in childrens science. Just what they are thinking
is what they are thinking but then you come to know it does not actually work like that.
When we come across different theories and modern trends, we realize that we have some
up-to-date knowledge now. (J)

Finally, some curriculum managers warmed to these initiatives as they looked for better
ways to develop and implement curriculum:

Some have got the desire, have got commitment, . . . and a devotion to peoples rights
and interests so they will not be authoritarian themselves. These people will be able to
maintain their commitment because they are people of authority. They are thinking 90%
have said that they want to change. The thinking is there now. (G)

3. Consolidating Cooperation by a Redistribution of Power

As the discussion about curriculum development and implementation continued, it be-
came evident that the respondents viewed the system as becoming more cooperative. New
procedures were put in place to develop and support the implementation of the new middle
school science curriculum. A greater range of people with a stake in education were being
consulted on the development of the new science curriculum. These included people oc-
cupying different ranks and roles within the system, such as parents, teachers, and lecturers
in tertiary institutions. There was also a wide range of representatives from all provinces,
including people from isolated villages and large cities:

Different people are sitting together, learning together. This is the first time . . . they are
sitting together. This gives them the same direction, one direction . . . They realize what
their combined task is . . . They realize what their common cause is . . . (J)

This consolidation of an education system that was more cooperative was highly valued
by Jan, Gul, and Yasmine. When asked to give their reasons for their view, that a more
cooperative approach to curriculum implementation was being accepted, they said it gave short
them the opportunity to have a say. They also reasoned that the curriculum produced would standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 613 Base of RH

Top of text
be better and its implementation more successful. In addition, Jan, Gul, and Yasmine said Base of text
that consultation with teachers had a range of potential benefits.
It leads to greater acceptance of the curriculum by teachers:

. . . they will be involved in this program . . . Teachers will take more interest. Other-
wise, they wont accept it. (Y)

It generates a better understanding of the curriculum and the principles which underpin it
and therefore facilitates a more faithful implementation:

They have involved teachers from the very beginning. If they [the teachers] decide the
objectives . . . they will be sure they are reflecting the objectives and the content in their
teaching . . .

They will have a clear understanding of the change. Maybe then it will be easy for them
to change. (Y)

It ensures greater relevance. Teachers can identify content that is relevant or irrelevant to
students in the provinces in which they teach:

. . . oceans, our students have no concept of oceans. We have no oceans, no rivers in our
province. Weve got mountains include mountains. (J)

It allows weaknesses and problems to be identified in the curriculum at early stages of its
development, prior to implementation:

When there is a cooperative model the weaknesses, the defects, the problems can be
eliminated [in trials by teachers]. (G)

In short, it provides not only a sense of ownership but both a filtering system for problems
and more brains thinking about solutions:

It is better, when we involve a person in some process, they will own this process. When
you involve me, I will own this work and I feel, just like you feel, that we control this
thing. So I will perceive that I am a part of this. So I should do better. I will work for the
betterment of this. So the teacher will own this. This is the curriculum in which [my]
suggestions are included. It is the curriculum which developed with my suggestions. So
they [the teachers] will take more interest. I think they will teach in a better way. (J)

These features emphasize the role that teacher involvement in curriculum development is
perceived to play in curriculum implementation. This involvement is seen to foster a sense
of ownership and build an understanding of the philosophy and pedagogy inherent in the
curriculum. Hence, a redistribution of power to allow cooperation among all stakeholders
is perceived to be essential in the promotion of change and acceptance of new ideas and
practices inherent in science curricula to be implemented.

4. Problems with Curriculum Implementation

(a) Integrating and embedding cooperation within the culture. Jan, Gul, and Yasmine short
said they developed a strong commitment to the present, more cooperative implementation standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
614 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
process despite the fact that, in Pakistan, their experiences have revealed that the coop- Base of text
erative strategies have not always provided the valued contribution and interaction that
was sought. They expressed the view that, as curriculum implementation became more
established, problems arose with associated contexts such as provincial administrative
structures. Some of the problems they cited are included in what follows.
Neither the parents, the teachers, nor the administrators at the provincial level were
perceived to have the necessary knowledge or expertise. Thus, curriculum managers may
have a superficial allegiance to cooperative strategies as they view themselves as authorities
to determine what is good and what is not:

Teachers dont have the knowledge of pedagogy and other things. They are just very good
teachers but they dont have the knowledge of curriculum processes. So when we went
and asked the science teachers, what do you want in this curriculum? we didnt get a
good response from them. Maybe as they are involved, time and time again, they will get
better at it. (J)

People in authority were unable to rapidly adopt cooperative approaches in which they
are required to listen to and accept the ideas of others within a culture that places an
emphasis on respect for authority:

Sometimes, we had conflicts with IPSET at meetings. What our people wanted they did
not include. We fought for a month and then they included most of our items. They said
their knowledge was greater than ours. I said that I just have the experience of a working
science teacher and I have got the ideas of that science teacher. So I fight only from this
base, because I dont have the theories. But, before this, nobody asked me anything. (J)

Although there was a willingness to consult there may have been a limited capacity to
accept and incorporate the outcomes of that consultation.
The capacity of the system to adopt cooperative strategies may have been limited be-
cause people are unwilling to relinquish power:

They know that change is needed, but if their own authority is undermined they may not
do it. (Y)

When we fought with our head administrations we wanted to change this and we wanted
to change that. But after a while, due to the resistance, we lost the spirit. (J)

People who have developed beliefs that are not authoritarian may have found them inap-
propriate in a social system that values authoritarian ways of operating.
The main problem is that cooperative strategies, while advantageous in theory, may be
inappropriate or difficult to impose on an existing organization, which is sympathetic to
wider cultural values, a culture that has experienced the success of, and values, its au-
thoritarian system.
The problems associated with the attitudes just identified relate to individuals within the
system but are a manifestation of sensible, widely held views inherent in their culture.
They are views of an effective, legitimate, efficient system of management from family
to government that has evolved over a long period of time. When asked to think deeply
about why these problems may have arisen the participants put the difficulties down to
coming to terms with change. However, an alternative suggestion is that it may be more short
efficient to work with and, within an existing system, to bring about change rather than standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 615 Base of RH

Top of text
change the system of educational management currently derived from, and in sympathy Base of text
with, the culture.
Such difficulties are only one of the obstacles to change in science education, even if
the most dominant. For example, there is also a perceived lack of knowledge of science
education, curriculum development, and implementation throughout Pakistan. At the same
time, Jan, Gul, and Yasmine appear to have developed some unrealistic views of coop-
erative approaches in that their statements indicate that cooperative approaches reduce
conflict. By contrast, the implementation of cooperative approaches is likely to generate
conflict and argument. This is because many people express their views and alternative
ideas that are communicated throughout all levels of the organizational system.
(b) Importing approaches to curriculum development and implementation. The main
reason for embarking on the reformation of science education was to drive economic
development by improving the nations performance in science and technology, something
in which, by definition, developed countries succeed. Jan, Gul, and Yasmine all perceive
that forces in developed countries outside Pakistan can play a key role in the achievement
of their desired outcomes for educational and systematic change. In particular, they believe
that exposure to alternative education systems and attendance at courses in other countries
may result in a change in the perceptions of those in authority and improved in-service
and preservice education:

They [curriculum managers] will try to involve more teachers because they have seen the
things the better results. They have seen all the details here [in Australia], all the teacher
training. They have seen it doesnt challenge your authority. It is all right for them to have
this type of teacher training [which involves teachers working cooperatively] . . . They
have the right to make decisions but it is better to involve teachers. They will see it is
easy to involve teachers. (Y)

Jan, Gul, and Yasmine could all see changes occurring in Pakistan. Jan and Yasmine are
optimistic about the future of science education, its development, and implementation.
However, they both recognize that there are many obstacles to overcome. As in all systems,
both curriculum managers and teachers have set beliefs that are resistant to change:

. . . it will take time because it is basically a change in attitude (Y).

The teachers are used to their method of teaching. They have been teaching a long
time. (J)

By contrast, Gul is more concerned about the consequences of bringing about cooperative
strategies of curriculum development and implementation. His concern is the result of his
perception that a very cooperative system is unlikely to thrive within an authoritarian
culture.
This suggests that programs encouraging curriculum managers to visit other countries
where they examine education systems, and reflect upon their experiences, need to rec-
ognize the legitimacy of different ways of knowing. The existing system may then be
viewed not as an obstacle but merely an alternative way of achieving educational goals.
The problem arises when the goals of inquiring and cooperative ways of science education
promoted by these programs conflict with a cultural norm in which knowledge is handed
down through authority structures.
Short-term visits to observe in other countries can result in the presentation of strategies short
seen in the best light where those committed to them place an emphasis on their achieve- standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
616 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
ments rather than their difficulties and failures. This can result in foreign science education, Base of text
curriculum development, and implementation being viewed through rose-colored
glasses, which may embellish perceptions of achievement and result in unrealistic beliefs
and expectations (Watson, Aubusson, & Baumgart, 1994).
If experts from other countries are to make a relevant and sensitive contribution to the
curriculum and its implementation, then there is a need to work in partnership, developing
an awareness of each others culture and the nature of education systems. Otherwise,
expertise becomes limited to the general or the foreign. In a true partnership each view
informs the other:

Next time some experts should come to Pakistan. Here . . . you have got in your mind
your own education system. You dont have the idea about how they are working in
Pakistan. When you visit our country you may find a better solution for that. (J)

Jan, Gul, and Yasmine recognize two different types of expertise: one in science curriculum
development and implementation, the other in the culture of Pakistan and its implications.
They appear to emphasize the value of the former, whereas, at least on the surface, they
devalue the latter. They expect solutions to their problems to be provided by outside
experts. Consultants have a role to play in providing suggestions and recommendations
based on their specialized expertise and knowledge. Equally, curriculum managers and
teachers have a role to play using their particular knowledge of their culture to evaluate
and modify plans that may be developed. In this way, science curriculum, its implemen-
tation, and development should interact synergistically with the target culture as part of
an evolutionary process rather than oppose cultural imperatives as part of a short-lived
revolutionary event. The nature of attempted revolutionary change in education, such as
a change from authoritarian to cooperative approaches, only becomes clear with the at-
tempt. What was sought in Pakistan was not merely a change in the way curriculum was
managed but a major shift in the way people think about each other and manage relation-
ships, as well as an appraisal of views about the creation of knowledge and what constitutes
valued, valid sources of knowledge.

IMPLICATIONS
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that modern views of science education and co-
operative approaches to curriculum management are philosophically consistent. It seems
logical to argue that it may be difficult to effectively implement a science curriculum that
places an emphasis on the active role of the learners as the creators of their own under-
standing within a culture that emphasizes respect for wisdom accumulated through expe-
rience and status. By contrast, it may be possible that curriculum and organizational change
are easier to achieve within more authoritarian cultures even when the changes are phil-
osophically inconsistent with those that underpin the culture itself (see, e.g., Lawson,
1990).
It is evident that, at present in Pakistan, elements of cooperation are being incorporated
in plans for curriculum implementation and development. Strategies have been developed
to involve people across different levels of education but many individuals were unable
to contribute because they lacked the experiences, education, or had attitudes about their
role within the system that prevented them from expressing their views effectively. If
teachers are to contribute to curriculum development and implementation then they need
further professional development, not only in terms of science subject matter but in their short
standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 617 Base of RH

Top of text
role in curriculum. This should include reflection on the nature of science education ap- Base of text
propriate for their students within their culture.
The new cooperative strategies in Pakistan represent significant change and place new
demands on the system to develop greater capacity to cope with and promote such change.
This capacity includes an openness to, and the ability to analyze and respond to, ideas
from both within and outside Pakistan. The perception that curriculum implementation
and development strategies and components of education systems can be lifted from one
culture and inserted in another is inconsistent with modern views of curriculum develop-
ment (Hill, Sadar, & Taveer, 1990).
The problem is that, in Pakistan, educators have sought to acquire a panacea from a
culture very different from their own. Hence, the planned new cooperative aspects of
curriculum development and implementation, derived from other countries, conflict with
ingrained cultural features of the existing system and individuals within it. There exists a
mismatch of complex, conflicting principles in the attempt to reform curriculum, its de-
velopment and implementation. For example:

there is a need for a close fit between culture and curriculum;

the culture attempts to reproduce itself through schooling and curriculum; but
schooling and curriculum are expected to act as agents of change.

In Pakistan, a conflict among these is being played out as curriculum managers attempt to
move from authoritarian to cooperative ways of knowing. The first two influences given
above have been generated within Pakistan and are supported by tradition. The third in-
fluence has been sought by leaders in education from within Pakistan, but is an export
from Western cultures supported by foreign consultants. It is a variant introduced into the
culture. This variant in curriculum development and implementation is characterized by
its cooperative approach, and the new science curriculum is characterized by the learner
generating ideas and critically appraising the views of others. It is yet to be seen whether
a variant with these characteristics can survive, yet alone thrive. Jan, Gul, and Yasmine
do not agree in their assessment of the likely success of the cooperative approach to
curriculum development and implementation. Jan and Yasmine predict its success, but Gul
considers its chance of survival slim. The history of curriculum development and imple-
mentation suggests that Guls assessment, at least in the short term, is most likely as,
according to Donmoyer (1989, p. 159), in the area of curriculum, conflicts are . . .
resolved not by exercise of power or of intellect, but by reliance on tradition.
One solution to this problem would be to review the system analyzing existing values
of both authoritarian and cooperative world-views to promote a partnership between these
and the construction of innovations resolving apparent conflicts. This will involve recog-
nizing the different frames of reference in which people operate. This involves the coop-
eration of equal partners, not the acceptance and trial of one participants view, even if
this may be the expectation. This research indicates that the review may need to concentrate
on the attitudes toward authority at all levels within systems so that individuals at all levels
believe they have a contribution to make without undermining valuable cultural authority
structures. This will help to ensure that teachers can have a genuine impact on curriculum
development and implementation consistent with the pivotal role they play in school ed-
ucation. However, the wholesale importation of such a cooperative curriculum develop-
ment and implementation model will be inappropriate in many developing countries as it
ignores the context into which it is to be introduced. A better solution would be to develop
a capacity to recognize differences across cultures and across learning contexts. short
standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
618 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
CONCLUSION Base of text
Planned change is a mugs game (Fullan, 1993, p. 138). The development of any
system will be an evolutionary process in which the final outcome cannot and perhaps
should not be identified from the outset. Experiences in other countries may help to bring
about change. These experiences may influence the system through individuals within it.
However, from this research and discussion two major dangers related to curriculum de-
velopment and implementation in developing countries can be identified. One is that ex-
perts from developed countries may think they know how to do it and think they should
tell others how to do it. The second is that people from developing countries may agree.
Because curriculum managers in Pakistan in this study value the academic expertise of
foreign experts more highly than the knowledge they have generated from experience in
their culture and education system, the opportunity for Western cultural imperialism
through the export of science curriculum and systems of curriculum development and
implementation is manifest. The culture in Pakistan, however, is complex and resistant to
change. Like a stone dropped in a pond there may be ripples, soon to fade and be forgotten.
To prevent such short-lived outcomes, we are proposing that the knowledge of the culture,
the education system, and the people within the developing countries, such as Pakistan,
need to be recognized and more highly valued not so much by foreign consultants but by
the endemic curriculum managers themselves. Then variants of curriculum development
and implementation might not just be imported foreign cultures (like some newly intro-
duced species that either quickly dies out or degrades the environment to accommodate
its survival) but be genuinely modified and developed evolve into a peculiar system
with a good fit between culture and curriculum and systems of curriculum development
and implementation.

REFERENCES
AGPS (1990). Country education profiles Pakistan a comparative study. Canberra, Australia:
AGPS.
Akbar, F. (1993). The use of demonstrations in science teaching and learning. Unpublished masters
thesis. University of Western Sydney, Nepean.
Aspin, D. N. (1993). Quality, teacher education and internationalisation a challenge for co-oper-
ation in teacher education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 19, 323333.
Biggs, J. B. (1990). Asian students approaches to learning: Implications for teaching overseas
students. Unpublished keynote discussion paper presented to the 8th Australian Learning and
Language Conference, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.
Brunkhurst, H. K., & Yager, R. E. (1986). A new rationale for science education 1985. School
Science and Mathematics, 86, 364 374.
Claxton, G. (1991). Educating the inquiring mind. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Curriculum Bureau, Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan. (1989). Reform in secondary
education in Pakistan. Bulletin of the UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Asia and the
Pacific, 29, 76 98.
Dani, H. D. (1986). Educational progress in Pakistan: Challenge and response (19451985). Bulletin
of the UNESCO Regional Office for Education in Asia and the Pacific, 27, 5167.
Donmoyer, R. (1989). Curriculum, community and culture. In J. T. Sears & J. D. Marshall (Eds.),
Teaching and thinking about curriculum: Critical inquires (pp. 154171). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Fensham, P. (1992). Science and technology. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on
curriculum (pp. 789 829). New York: Macmillan.
Fensham, P. J. (1988). Developments and dilemmas in science education. Sydney: Edward Arnold. short
Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer Press. standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) RIGHT BATCH

Top of RH
ISSUES AND PROBLEMS 619 Base of RH

Top of text
Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. London: Cassell. Base of text
Gerber, R., Boulton-Lewis, G., & Bruce, C. (1995). Childrens understanding of graphic represen-
tations of quantitative data. In R. Saljo (Ed.), Learning and instruction (pp. 77100).
Halse, C., Ismail, N., Jaleel, M., Akhmeema, A., & Ahmed, Z. (1996). Context, culture and the
curriculum: A case study. In N. Baumgart (Ed.), Changing the landscape: Cultures and environ-
ments in curriculum. Selected proceedings from the 20th annual conference of the Pacific Circle
Consortium, 19 22 May, Sydney. Kingswood: Pacific Circle Consortium for Education.
Baumgart, N. (Ed.) (1996). Changing the landscape: Cultures and environments in curriculum. Se-
lected proceedings from the 20th annual conference of the Pacific Circle Consortium, 1922 May,
Sydney. Kingswood: Pacific Circle Consortium for Education.
Hand, B., & Prain, V. (1995). Teaching and learning in science: The constructivist approach. Sydney:
Harcourt Brace.
Happs, J. C. (1981). Some aspects of student understanding of soil. A working paper of the Science
Education Research Unit. Hamilton, NZ: University of Waikato.
Harris, S. (1990). Two-way aboriginal schooling. Education and cultural survival. Canberra, Aus-
tralia: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Hewson, P., & Hewson, M. G. (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from
studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597614.
Hill, J. C., & Tanveer, S. A. (1990). Developing a program to improve science education in Pakistan:
A six year implementation cycle. Science Education, 74, 241251.
Ilyas, M. (1985). Science education development efforts in Pakistan. Islamabad: Technology Wing,
Ministry of Education.
Jackson, P. W. (Ed.) (1992). Handbook of research on curriculum. New York: Macmillan.
Jordan, D. (1988). Rights and claims of indigenous people and the reclaiming of identity. In T.
Skutnabb-Kangas & J. Cummins (Eds.), Minority education: From shame to struggle. Clevendon:
Multilingual Matters.
Lawson, A. (1990). Science education in Japan and the United States: Are the Japanese beating us
at our own game? Science Education, 74, 495501.
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional
Science, 10, 177 200.
Marton, F. (1988). Phenomenography: Exploring different conceptions of reality. In D. Fetterman
(Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluation in education: The silent revolution. (pp. 176205).
New York: Praeger.
Marton, F. (1990). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings
of reality. In R. R. Sherman & R. B. Webb (Eds.), Qualitative research in education: Focus and
methods. (pp. 144 161). London: Falmer Press.
Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international
encyclopedia of education (pp. 4424 4429). New York: Pergamon.
Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1984). Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle
(Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 3655). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
Novak, J. (Ed.) (1989). Proceedings of the second international seminar on Misconceptions and
Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (vol. II). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Mitchener, C., & Anderson, R. (1989). Teachers perspective: Developing and implementing an STS
curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 351369.
Peshkin, A. (1992). The relationship between culture and curriculum: A many fitting thing. In P. W.
Jackson (Ed.) (1992). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 248 267). New York: Macmillan.
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum.
New York: Peter Lang.
Richardson, M. (1989). Teachers-as-learners: Images from the past and implications of a (generative)
constructivist perspective for the future. In J. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the second international
seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (vol. II).
Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
Sarre, P. (1995). Towards global environmental values lessons from Western and Eastern expe- short
rience. Environmental Values, 4, 115127. standard
long
SCE (WILEJ) LEFT BATCH

Top of RH
620 AUBUSSON AND WATSON Base of RH

Top of test
Sears, J. T., & Marshall, J. D. (1989). Teaching and thinking about curriculum: Critical inquires. Base of text
New York: Teachers College Press.
Seng, C. P., & Tee, T. B. (1978). School physics education in South East Asia. Journal of Science
Education in South East Asia, 1, 38 44.
Tobin, K., Kahle, J. B., & Fraser, B. J. (1988). Windows into science classrooms: Problems asso-
ciated with higher-level cognitive learning. London: Falmer Press.
Walsh, E., DallAlba, G., Bowden, J., Martin, E., Marton, F., Masters, G., Ramsden, P., & Stephanou,
A. (1993). Physics students understanding of relative speed: A phenomenographic study. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1133 1148.
Watson, K., Aubusson, P., & Baumgart, N. (1994). Curriculum implementation: Consultancy, au-
thority and cooperation. Asia Pacific Education, 5, 2334.

short
standard
long