Resources

In response to a request from the UNESCO Executive Board in Spring 2019, the UNESCO Internal Oversight Service (IOS) Evaluation Office has undertaken this Review to provide a mapping and analysis of UNESCO’s activities in curriculum; to provide an overview of the roles typically played by other national, regional and international actors in the field of curriculum, and to assess the demand for services from UNESCO Member States and donors in the area of curriculum. The review found that curriculum is widely considered as the foundational building block of the education system, resulting from a pedagogical and political consensus with regard to what is important in learning and why, according to both the learner’s needs and societal visions. In light of challenges of the 21st century and the need to strengthen the role of the humanities in a context dominated by technology and data, the redefinition of curriculum has become one of the main concerns of national education authorities around the world. It is also widely accepted that quality curricula can support the attainment of Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4).

The review concluded that curriculum, particularly curriculum development and reform processes, should remain an area of UNESCO’s education programme as it addresses a clear need from Member States. As curriculum implies both technical and political dimensions, UNESCO can act as a neutral broker, to facilitate informed and inclusive policy dialogue. It also has a long-term tradition in facilitating complex curriculum processes in often difficult and sensitive contexts. In addition, UNESCO has the capacity to serve as a platform for international exchanges and comparative research, including through networks such as UNESCO Chairs, and coordinating knowledge hubs and communities of practice. To address curriculum with added value in the future, UNESCO should focus on providing methodological technical assistance, capacity development, standard-setting and policy advice to support the curriculum processes, products and competences in Member States while ensuring a coordinated and holistic perspective. Complementary to work on curriculum from a methodological point of view, thematic Sections at Headquarters should continue elaborating content on specific crosscutting topics. Looking to the future, the review recommends (i) maintaining a specialized category 1 institute as a lead entity on curriculum development; (ii) refining the offer of technical assistance and capacity development to Member States on curriculum development and reform; (iii) developing and maintaining a knowledge base of materials and a roster of experts on curriculum; (iv) providing a platform for policy dialogue and exchange of experience among Member States; and (v) systematizing the inclusion of curriculum in standard-setting and normative work.