According to Syomwene (2020:327), curriculum theory is a branch of education theory that explains and characterizes curricular phenomena. In this instance, curriculum phenomena include all of the curriculum components, including the aims and objectives, content for teaching and learning including learning experiences, and methods of assessment. In plainer terms, curriculum theory simply refers to the reason for the necessity of the curriculum system. Once the need for the curriculum system has been established, it is then necessary to determine what should be taught (the content). After experiencing the teaching and learning content and its outcomes, the issue of how it should be assessed (methods of assessment) arises. In agreement with this assertion, Scott (2001) asserts that curriculum theory is characterized as initiatives for teaching and learning that takes place in a formal setting. Aims or objectives, content or subject matter, techniques or procedures, and evaluation or assessment make up the four dimensions of curricular theory. Now that the concept of curriculum theory has been defined, this article will discuss the need to revisit the South African curriculum system and focus on the three critical curricular theory components; namely Aims and objectives, content, and assessment. This will be done in order to subject the CAPS curricular theory to constructive criticism from critical theorists approach to support Simnandi Solutions (Pty) Ltd’s extensive promotion of the personalized education curriculum system or PECS.

The curriculum theory definition above indicates that the curricular system is man-made, meaning that people plan and carry out its implementation. If so, it follows that a curricular system will undoubtedly be flawed. Critical theorists should question the implementation of a better curriculum system in light of these problems. The CAPS curriculum theory in South Africa is flawed, just like it is in other nations. First off, the democratic government’s failure to clearly define the goals and objectives of the new system when it replaced the racist education system distorts the purposes and objectives that guided the development and implementation of the CAPS curriculum. Secondly, the mark was also missed on the content for teaching and learning, which is the most fundamental aspect of curriculum theory (what should be taught and how it should be taught). And thirdly, the mis-structuring of the assessment methodology (how students should be assessed or evaluated and for what should they be evaluated) which is equally important in the curriculum system. This article is employing the critical theorists approach to shed light on these three critical curriculum theory issues raised. Critical theorists’ approach is concerned with shifting attention from curriculum development to curriculum understanding. It critiques the field of curriculum. Ornstein & Hunkins (1998:185) opine that critical theorists “maintain the view that intellectual and scientific distance from curriculum practice is required if those in charge of education are to effectively critique and theorize existing programs”. It drives a wedge between theory and practice. Amongst many characteristics, critical theorists adopt a critical and exploratory approach to the curriculum (Ornstein & Hunkins; Marsh & Willis, 2007). Consequently, this article employs the critical theorists approach as a useful and relevant tool to deliberate on the three major curriculum theory flaws committed in the existing curriculum system of South Africa.

The aims and objectives, or the reasons why and purposes for which the curriculum system is in place, is the first element of the curricular theory that is flawed. The Department of Basic Education (2021) states that the CAPS curriculum system’s goals include facilitating learners’ transitions from

educational institutions to the workplace, providing access to higher education, and presenting a complete profile of a learner’s competencies to employers. On paper, this appears to be a really promising idea. It is unfortunate that the majority of people who graduate from the CAPS curriculum system lack the necessary work-related skills, which is why companies are constantly complaining about unskilled graduates who are unemployed. Because of this unemployment, young people are unable to contribute to the economy of the country, instead, they become the contributors to the unemployment statistics. This then shows that the aims and objectives mandated under the CAPS curriculum theory is a dismal failure yet well articulated on paper – policy documents.

Content for teaching and learning is the second unsound component of curricular theory. It is no secret that South African education, especially basic education, is predominantly theoretical and sadly neglects practical learning. This, according to Xaba (2023), demonstrates that the CAPS curriculum is well-known for its theoretical content rather than for being a crucially important practical teaching and learning technique. This is another area where they fell short; the academic material provided to students for teaching and learning is largely theoretical and emphasizes proportional knowledge over practical knowledge. For example, graduates of the CAPS curriculum boast that they know that a car has an engine that makes it run, but they have never disassembled the engine to make sure the car drives smoothly. Another justification for the proposed review of the curricular theory in South Africa is the dearth of practical content teaching and learning system. If the curriculum is theoretical and not practical, how are the students educated for the future? Even Hutchings (1990:1) contends that the ability to execute or put one’s knowledge into practice is what is more significant about education. This conclusion supports the claim that the curriculum system will continue to impede progress as long as it ignores career-oriented teaching and learning techniques.

The technique of assessment is the final component of the curricular theory that the CAPS curriculum has serious problems with. The mistake made during the design of the assessment methodology for the CAPS curriculum was to theorize assessment (written tests and exams) rather than practicalized assessment, which gives students the opportunity to experience the world of work while they are in school. In “Practicalization of assessment mechanism-getting rid of exams and tests”, Xaba, (2023), cites Hady (2021), who is in favor of a practicalized assessment system and contends that schools should prepare students for the types of assessments they will encounter in the real world throughout their lives and careers. It is also noteworthy that the curriculum theory aspects are inseparable as it may have appeared above. The goals and objectives that led to the creation of the curriculum system will determine how the content, teaching, and learning material is organized. For instance, if the curriculum system has

been established to produce a competent workforce, the subject matter/content for teaching will be mainly competency driven. That is why after the CAPS curriculum system failed to practicalize content for learning, they were then forced to theorize assessment because the content for learning that is theoretical will automatically demand a theoretical assessment methodology. That is where the fundamental curriculum problems of South Africa lie

It is for such reasons the Personalised Education Curriculum System (PECS) was conceived as a curriculum system strictly rooted in quality curriculum theory aspects, foundations of competency-oriented education, and focused on practically assessing students for relevant skills, aptitudes, and values to maneuver modern-day society successfully. PECS was developed to be at the forefront of curriculum relevance issues. Just like the birth of postmodernism, PECS is the product of dissatisfaction with the modernist curriculum system in South Africa. PECS is meant to rescue students from the monstrous curriculum that fails to implement progressivism and provide differentiated learning that suits all students. Just like progressivism in the past, PECS is a disruptive and qualitative curriculum system that aims to end the confusion around the inconsistencies of the curriculum. PECS seeks to restore the value and dignity of our education system by making it responsive to the needs of society through the liberal education-based curriculum system. PECS aims to give students the opportunity to gain an insight into the world of work during their school years. This makes PECS unique and highly relevant in inspiring the education community of our country, South Africa, and Africa as a whole. And we believe that the education system can be improved in this way

Bibliography:

Scott, D. 2001.Curriculum Theory. In: Neil J. Smelser, Paul B. Baltes (eds),

International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080 430767024207

DBE, 2021. National curriculum statement (NCS). https://www.education.gov.za/Curriculum/NationalCurriculu mStatementsGradesR-12.aspx. Date of Access: 18 June 2023

Xaba, SS. 2023. Practicalization of assessment mechanism – getting rid of exams and tests. https://simnandisolutions.co.za/2023/06/11/practicalizati on-of-assessment-mechanism-getting-rid-of-exams-and-tests/. Date of Access: 19 June 2023

Hutchings, P. (1990). Assessment and the way it works: Closing plenary address, Association of Higher Education Conference on Assessment, Washington, DC.

Syomwene. A. (2020). Curriculum theory: Characters and functions. European Journal of Education Studies. Vol 7(1).