• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.79-97
• /
• 2015

Curriculum may be defined as everything students learn at school or the specific plan of a subject that students are supposed to learn. The purpose and goals of the curriculum or who is in charge of developing the curriculum may differ by country. This study aimed at comparing the mechanisms in which the Home Economics curriculum is implemented in Korea and the Unite States at different levels. Considering that Korean government now supports increased autonomy of schools, allowing them to execute curricula according to their educational environments, it is meaningful that the advantages and disadvantages of the implementation mechanisms of two countries are explored. Specifically, middle schools in a City of Kyung-gi Province in South Korea and three states(Wisconsin, Ohio, and Washington states) in the United States are examined. The curriculum documents at different levels as well as study plans used by actual teachers are compared for this purpose. In case of South Korea, the nation state is in charge of curriculum development and the curriculum document defines the educational contents to detail in order to provide standardized learning experience to students. This type of closely controlled system warrants standardized educational contents and thus allows nation-wide assessment using standardized measures. On the other hand, it is difficult to accommodate diversities among students in terms of aptitudes and learning styles, and also limits creativity enhancement or integrative approach to teaching and learning. In comparison, curriculum in the United States is rather loosely defined, and more autonomy is granted to schools and teachers. Each of these two different systems may have advantages and disadvantages of their own. The findings of this study is expected to provide implications to curriculum development as well as to the development of framework and guidelines to the curriculum implementation.