Introduction

What of the future for the subject-based curriculum? There remains much concern about balance in the school curriculum, what it means and how to achieve it. Time allocation via timetables can, as Thomas (Chapter 2) notes, be the ‘single means of prescribing and analysing the curriculum’. Such an approach can lead to subjects being viewed in isolation to the detriment of children’s learning. Yet timetables can be organized in numerous ways depending on how learning is seen to occur. Underlying the current emphasis on subjects in the primary curriculum is a belief that ‘children learn best when use is made of separate subject teaching’ (Pascall, 1993). However, such beliefs have not been justified by evidence nor indeed is ‘best’ ever specified. HMI publications (Aspects of Primary Education), on the other hand, have demonstrated that topic work or integrated work can be powerful vehicles for children’s learning. However, such an approach has been brought into disrepute and blame apportioned to teachers and teacher educators. This has led to a concern about teachers’ subject knowledge which resulted, in the UK, in a series of funded INSET programmes aimed at teaching teachers about subjects. What is absent from the debate about the primary curriculum and its implementation is any examination of what kind of knowledge should be aimed for in primary education. This understanding is essential before decisions can be made about how best to achieve it. Statements of learning objectives which begin ‘understands that…’ ‘knows about…’ say nothing about what understanding and knowing mean.