These categories have helped to shape the present curriculum today. Old right advocates held the first perspective during that time. They asserted that the purpose of education is to divide students into a group of elites and underclass. Education was supposed to teach the underclass how to become submissive to the upper class. On the contrary, the elite were the rulers of land. They were supposed to acquire some managerial and social skills necessary for leadership. Additionally, the two groups had distinct cultures that separated them from one another.
According to this perspective, the curriculum should focus on traditional subjects, which are to be examined regularly. However, the manner of implementation would differ according to student type. The elite were supposed to be taught in separated environments in an efficient manner while the underclass was to receive mediocre knowledge. One should note that some members of the civil service and traditionalists hold this belief.
Education experts also hold another view with regard to the purpose of education. They believe that education should be tailored to meet the needs of the population. Consequently, a country will be able to sustain itself if their students meet this objective. Such an approach may not necessarily be compatible with traditional values and may require adjustments. This is because the economy is constantly fluctuating. In instances where there is a decline, then there should be greater flexibility to meet present needs.
The implication of such an approach on the present curriculum is a focus on science and technology. Besides this, a curriculum needs to practical in nature hence the need for vocational training. Furthermore, students should not learn independently in schools; there should be a link between the school environment and the corporate world. Consequently, the curriculum should accommodate greater levels of internships and attachments. (Ross, 2000)
Neo conservatives believe that the purpose of education is to inculcate traditional beliefs that had held society close over the years. Such adherents propose that education today has been plagued by diversity and fragmentation. Consequently, there is a need to bring back these values to the education system in order to stabilize it. The implication for the curriculum in this regard is the pursuance of traditional subjects with emphasis on the grammar school subjects. Such a curriculum is highly conservative in that there is little room for discussion on the kind of content taught. In addition, the public should not critically analyze such a curriculum. Margaret Thatcher was a known proponent and so were some new right conservatives in parliament.
Neo liberal proponents believe that the purpose of education is to provide individuals with a means of satisfying their needs just the same way that other commodities in the market do. In this regard, education can be treated as a good in the market place; the more value it possesses, the higher the demand. Proponents of this view strongly adhere to the belief that education has a price and that the market will determine this price. By treating education like this, adherents to this principle believe that they can establish higher levels of performance because schools will promoted to perform well in order to sustain competition. Consequently,