Conflicts in Curriculum Theory

Abstract

I tried to see education, specifically curriculum, through different lens, and on this, Paraskeva follows my lead. (Huebner-Foreword Second Edition) xxi xxii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS SECOND EDITION my life. Unfortunately, they did not live enough to see the completion of this 2nd edition, which resulted from many of our interesting discussions that are quite visible in this volume. The reader will inevitably identify in this work silences, omissions, and oversimplifications, for which I take absolute responsibility. This book would not have been possible without a great deal of help from many people. I owe a great deal to

Preliminary Material

“…But using the spiritual lens, the itinerant curriculum theory, and theorists-championed by João M. Paraskeva (2011)-must wrestle with a more challenging question, namely, 'where are we going…now?' In Paraskeva's (2016Paraskeva's ( , 2021aParaskeva's ( , 2021bParaskeva's ( , 2022 proclamation, such 'now' implies a decolonial turn towards a non-derivative non-abyssal theory, one that responds to the world's different and diverse epistemes-a declaration of epistemological independence (Paraskeva, 2016(Paraskeva, , 2018(Paraskeva, , 2021a(Paraskeva, , 2021b(Paraskeva, , 2022.…”

“…To the teaching of Itinerant Curriculum Theory (ICT), the existential is/has a cognitive and empirical referent; we must go beyond the Eurocentric cognitive and empirical (and the critical) and commit to deterritorialize and to de-link from the epistemicidal Eurocentric matrix as Paraskeva (2016Paraskeva ( , 2017Paraskeva ( , 2021aParaskeva ( , 2021bParaskeva ( , 2022 implore, however, and reflect upon during our spiritual journey (as the itinerant traveler tends to do) our presence in the world, and state what we know to be true. This is not a contradiction, and in Chapter 2 Venturini says so when he notes:…”

Anibal Quijano: (Dis)entangling the geopolitics and coloniality of curriculum

“…This means there was a gap of 13 years during which education scholars in anglophone contexts did not refer to the concept of coloniality. Not long after, a more serious engagement is taken up by Andreotti (2011), De Lissovoy (2010), Jaramillo & McLaren (2008), McLaren & Jaramillo (2006, 2010) and Paraskeva (2011). ii It is not surprising that they were the first to draw on decolonial theory in general and Quijano's work in particular since they were already in dialogue with the knowledge production from the Global South, which took a radical decolonial theoretical turn to shift the geographies of reason within the broad field of education research (Gordon, 2011).…”

“… ii ii Paraskeva (2011) takes a deep theoretical dive to advance the notion of coloniality and epistemicide in curriculum studies. …”