The purposes of this study were twofold. The first was to trace the development of curriculum guides from Germany to American educational practices of today. The second was to analyze a set of older and a set of contemporary curriculum guides. The historical section was prepared through extensive library research, analysis of old and rare guides and consultations with curriculum scholars. The analysis of guides utilized a data collection instrument developed for the study. Two sets of curriculum guides were analyzed: twenty-six older guides dated 1871-1928, obtained from a collection at Columbia University and fifty-one contemporary guides from the 1981 ASCD conference.
The analysis was divided into three categories: (1) older versus contemporary guides, (2) contemporary elementary versus secondary versus combination guides, and (3) contemporary \"basic\" versus \"supplementary\" guides. Frequency distributions were tabulated using the SPSS. The findings are in two areas: a description of the historical path which led to the development of American courses of study and comparative data resulting from the analysis of guides. Roots of American courses of study can be traced back to German educator, Johann Friedrich Herbart, 1776-1841. His ideas were passed to his disciple, Wilhelm Rein, who developed an eight-volume course of study for German schools. In 1886 two Americans, Charles and Frank McMurry traveled to Germany to study with Rein. They developed courses of study for American schools modeled after German documents. Although the analysis of guides revealed numerous findings, the major results are as follows.
Older versus Contemporary Guides More specialization was found in contemporary guides and more reference to arts was found in older guides. The concept of individual differences was given more attention in older guides.
Contemporary Guides Only half referred to evaluation procedures. Internal consistency among components was also found in half the guides.
All Guides Input from parents and students was largely omitted from the development process and guides were written primarily for \"regular\" students. Locally developed documents were suitable for use throughout the country and little reference was made to state or national guidelines.
Based on the findings, recommendations were made for future practices.
","abstract_html":"<p>The purposes of this study were twofold. The first was to trace the development of curriculum guides from Germany to American educational practices of today. The second was to analyze a set of older and a set of contemporary curriculum guides. The historical section was prepared through extensive library research, analysis of old and rare guides and consultations with curriculum scholars. The analysis of guides utilized a data collection instrument developed for the study. Two sets of curriculum guides were analyzed: twenty-six older guides dated 1871-1928, obtained from a collection at Columbia University and fifty-one contemporary guides from the 1981 ASCD conference. </p> <p>The analysis was divided into three categories: (1) older versus contemporary guides, (2) contemporary elementary versus secondary versus combination guides, and (3) contemporary "basic" versus "supplementary" guides. Frequency distributions were tabulated using the SPSS. The findings are in two areas: a description of the historical path which led to the development of American courses of study and comparative data resulting from the analysis of guides. Roots of American courses of study can be traced back to German educator, Johann Friedrich Herbart, 1776-1841. His ideas were passed to his disciple, Wilhelm Rein, who developed an eight-volume course of study for German schools. In 1886 two Americans, Charles and Frank McMurry traveled to Germany to study with Rein. They developed courses of study for American schools modeled after German documents. Although the analysis of guides revealed numerous findings, the major results are as follows. </p> <p>Older versus Contemporary Guides More specialization was found in contemporary guides and more reference to arts was found in older guides. The concept of individual differences was given more attention in older guides.</p> <p>Contemporary Guides Only half referred to evaluation procedures. Internal consistency among components was also found in half the guides.</p> <p>All Guides Input from parents and students was largely omitted from the development process and guides were written primarily for "regular" students. Locally developed documents were suitable for use throughout the country and little reference was made to state or national guidelines.</p> <p>Based on the findings, recommendations were made for future practices.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Winters, Marilyn B."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Education, PhD","degree_level":"Open Access Dissertation","degree_discipline":"School of Educational Studies","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":1984,"date_issued":"1984-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"1984-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:41:09Z","subjects":["Curriculum and Instruction","Education","History"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgu_etd/925","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Winters, Marilyn B."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2025-04-16T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["School of Educational Studies"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Open Access Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Education, PhD"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Curriculum and Instruction","Education","History"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgu_etd/925"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["The purposes of this study were twofold. The first was to trace the development of curriculum guides from Germany to American educational practices of today. The second was to analyze a set of older and a set of contemporary curriculum guides. The historical section was prepared through extensive library research, analysis of old and rare guides and consultations with curriculum scholars. The analysis of guides utilized a data collection instrument developed for the study. Two sets of curriculum guides were analyzed: twenty-six older guides dated 1871-1928, obtained from a collection at Columbia University and fifty-one contemporary guides from the 1981 ASCD conference.
The analysis was divided into three categories: (1) older versus contemporary guides, (2) contemporary elementary versus secondary versus combination guides, and (3) contemporary \"basic\" versus \"supplementary\" guides. Frequency distributions were tabulated using the SPSS. The findings are in two areas: a description of the historical path which led to the development of American courses of study and comparative data resulting from the analysis of guides. Roots of American courses of study can be traced back to German educator, Johann Friedrich Herbart, 1776-1841. His ideas were passed to his disciple, Wilhelm Rein, who developed an eight-volume course of study for German schools. In 1886 two Americans, Charles and Frank McMurry traveled to Germany to study with Rein. They developed courses of study for American schools modeled after German documents. Although the analysis of guides revealed numerous findings, the major results are as follows.
Older versus Contemporary Guides More specialization was found in contemporary guides and more reference to arts was found in older guides. The concept of individual differences was given more attention in older guides.
Contemporary Guides Only half referred to evaluation procedures. Internal consistency among components was also found in half the guides.
All Guides Input from parents and students was largely omitted from the development process and guides were written primarily for \"regular\" students. Locally developed documents were suitable for use throughout the country and little reference was made to state or national guidelines.
Based on the findings, recommendations were made for future practices.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Course of Study in American Education: Past, Present and Future"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Winters, Marilyn B."],"dc:date.available":["2025-04-16T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["The purposes of this study were twofold. The first was to trace the development of curriculum guides from Germany to American educational practices of today. The second was to analyze a set of older and a set of contemporary curriculum guides. The historical section was prepared through extensive library research, analysis of old and rare guides and consultations with curriculum scholars. The analysis of guides utilized a data collection instrument developed for the study. Two sets of curriculum guides were analyzed: twenty-six older guides dated 1871-1928, obtained from a collection at Columbia University and fifty-one contemporary guides from the 1981 ASCD conference.
The analysis was divided into three categories: (1) older versus contemporary guides, (2) contemporary elementary versus secondary versus combination guides, and (3) contemporary \"basic\" versus \"supplementary\" guides. Frequency distributions were tabulated using the SPSS. The findings are in two areas: a description of the historical path which led to the development of American courses of study and comparative data resulting from the analysis of guides. Roots of American courses of study can be traced back to German educator, Johann Friedrich Herbart, 1776-1841. His ideas were passed to his disciple, Wilhelm Rein, who developed an eight-volume course of study for German schools. In 1886 two Americans, Charles and Frank McMurry traveled to Germany to study with Rein. They developed courses of study for American schools modeled after German documents. Although the analysis of guides revealed numerous findings, the major results are as follows.
Older versus Contemporary Guides More specialization was found in contemporary guides and more reference to arts was found in older guides. The concept of individual differences was given more attention in older guides.
Contemporary Guides Only half referred to evaluation procedures. Internal consistency among components was also found in half the guides.
All Guides Input from parents and students was largely omitted from the development process and guides were written primarily for \"regular\" students. Locally developed documents were suitable for use throughout the country and little reference was made to state or national guidelines.
Based on the findings, recommendations were made for future practices.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://scholarship.claremont.edu/cgu_etd/925"],"dc:subject":["Curriculum and Instruction","Education","History"],"dc:title":["The Course of Study in American Education: Past, Present and Future"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["School of Educational Studies"],"thesis:degree_level":["Open Access Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Education, PhD"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:41:09Z"}