Content I. Introduction II. Main part Approaches of Curriculum 4

Structural theories, which she claims have dominated the first 50 years of the field, focus on identifying elements in curriculum and their interrelationships, as well as the structure of decision making.

Generic theories center their interests on the outcomes of curriculum, concentrating on the assumptions, beliefs, and perceived truths underlying curriculum decisions. It sometimes referred to as critical theories, they tend to be highly critical of past and present conceptions of curriculum. They seek to liberate the individual from the constraints of society, using political and sociological frameworks to examine issues of power, control, and influences.

• 
  The substantive theories speculate about what subject matter or content is most desirable, what knowledge is of the most worth.
  

To Huenecke’s typology seems very useful, it seems to err in omitting one major domain—those theories such as Schwab’s that are concerned primarily with the processes of curricular decision making (Schwab, 1970:1-23). While Huenecke would probably argue that Schwab’s work is primarily structural in its emphasis, the distinction between structure and process seems to be one worth maintaining.
It therefore seems most useful to divide curriculum theories into the following four categories, based upon their domains of inquiry according to Glatthron (1980,78):

• 
  Structure-oriented theories are concerned primarily with analyzing the components of the curriculum and their interrelationships. Structure-oriented theories tend to be descriptive and explanatory in intent.
  
• 
  Value-oriented theories are concerned primarily with analyzing the values and assumptions of curriculum makers and their products. Value-oriented theories tend to be critical in nature.
  
• 
  Content-oriented theories are concerned primarily with determining the content of the curriculum. Content-oriented theories tend to be prescriptive in nature.
  
•