NEW APPROACH TO CURRICULUM ORGANIZATION: THE ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS OF CASSIRER'S THEORY OF SYMBOLIC FORM

It is the purpose of this study to explore the administrative implications of an alternative to the rationale of the subject-centered organization used by many nonpublic secondary schools. The literature review shows that the planning and assessment of education goals involves assumptions which administrators are being challenged to reexamine. The study proposes and tests a new conceptual framework based on Cassirer's theory of symbolic form as a suitable base for the development of administrative plans and programs. The study itself is exploratory and descriptive. It is limited to nonpublic schools and directed to the secondary level. Following Katz, theses are set out and tested against preset criteria. The study presents three major findings: (1) The symbolic nature of knowledge is a suitable substitute for the logic of the disciplines in organizing a curriculum; (2) The object of knowledge is superior to the disciplines for organizing the curriculum; (3) An organization based on symbolic skills and the object of study provides an analytical tool for judging the appropriateness of educational goals and programs. In terms of the prespecified criteria the superiority of the proposed conceptual framework provides the theoretical justification for expanding the organization of curriculum experiences beyond the structure of a discipline to the structure of human knowledge. Based on the affirmation of the theses eight conclusions are presented. For example, it is concluded that programs and services provided by nonpublic schools should be built on the definition of man as a symbol using animal, i.e., "animal symbolicum." Another conclusion is that under the proposed conceptual framework the problem of organization and the problem of syntax are merged. Based on the findings and conclusions, administrative implications are presented for the following topics: (1) theoretical concerns, (2) program planning, (3) program implementation, (4) program evaluation, (5) instructional leadership.