ABSTRACT
In such a manner, the conflicts over the definition of the written curriculum offer visible, public and documentary evidence of the continuing struggle over the aspirations and purposes of schooling. For this reason alone it is important to develop our understandings of this kind of curriculum conflict. But as has been noted conflict over the written curriculum has both ‘symbolic significance’ and also practical significance-by pub-
licly signifying which aspirations and intentions are to be enshrined in written curriculum criteria are established for the evaluation and public estimation of schooling. In this sense, ‘ground rules’ are thereby publicly established by which practice is evaluated or to which it is related. Financial and resource allocation is similarly linked to these ground rules of curriculum criteria.
