Main Article Content


Curriculum Development in Zambia is highly centralized, with the Curriculum Development Center (CDC) being charged with developing the curriculum through consultative and participatory approaches through the course and subject panels where teachers are engaged. Nevertheless, there has been no empirical evidence to show how teachers are actively involved in the development process. This study aimed to investigate the phenomenon of teachers' involvement in the curriculum development process in Zambia. This study was qualitative and used a case study design approach. Data was collected using a semi-structured interview guide from secondary school teachers and headteachers. Raw data were collected through semi-structured interview forms from secondary school teachers and headteachers. The researcher analyzed the data using MAXQDA qualitative software to identify initial codes and generate emerging themes quickly. The results showed that secondary school teachers were dissatisfied with the present way of curriculum development, which insignificantly neglects them, and also, the majority of them have never participated in the development of the curriculum. Further, the results revealed that most of the secondary school teachers in Lusaka were willing to participate at any stage of the curriculum development in Zambia. This study concludes by arguing that secondary school teachers are significantly neglected to participate in the curriculum development in Zambia and recommends that the Ministry of General Education (MoGE) broaden the scope of secondary school teachers' participation in the curriculum developed through the Curriculum Development Center (CDC).


curriculum development teacher involvement teachers’ voice

Article Details

How to Cite
Luo, J., & Muyunda, G. (2021). Teachers’ Voice in Zambia: How to Make Them Involved in Curriculum Development. International Journal of Asian Education, 2(3), 388–397.


  1. Alsubaie, M. A. (2016). Curriculum development: Teacher involvement in curriculum development. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 106-107.
  2. Apple, M. (2004). Ideology and curriculum. Routledge. Available from:
  3. Bantwini, B.D. (2010). How Teachers Perceive the New Curriculum Reform: Lessons from a School District in the Eastern Cape Provincial South Africa. International Journal of Education Development. 30, 83-90.
  4. (2) (PDF) Teacher Collaboration in Curriculum Design Teams: Prospects and Challenges in the Zambian Education System. Available from:
  5. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Writing it up. Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed., pp. 186-196). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  6. Bolstad, R. (2004). School-based curriculum development: Principles, processes, and practices. J Curr Stud, 31(1), 83-97.
  7. Carl, A. (2005). The" voice of the teacher" in curriculum development: a voice crying in the wilderness?. South African Journal of education, 25(4), 223-228.
  8. Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into practice. Juta and Company Ltd.
  9. Cincioğlu, A. (2014). Why to involve teachers in the process of Language curriculum development. Turkophone, 1(1), 26-39. Available from:
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. London: Sage Publication.
  11. Dogan, S. (2012). The views of teachers about curriculum mapping process. Unpublished master thesis) Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul. Available from:'_PERCEPTIONS_ON_THE_EFFECTIVENESS_OF_CURRICULUM_MAPPING_THE_CASE_OF_TURKEY
  12. Dori, Y. J., Tal, R. T., & Peled, Y. (2002). Characteristics of science teachers who incorporate web-based teaching. Research in science education, 32(4), 511-547.
  13. Havelock, R. G. (1971). The Utilization of Educational Research and Development. British Journal of Education and Technology, 2(2), 84-98.
  14. Handler, B. (2010). Teacher as curriculum leader: A consideration of the appropriateness of that role assignment to classroom-based practitioners. International Journal of Teacher Leadership, 3(3), 32-42.
  15. Kirk, D., & MacDonald, D. (2001). Teacher voice and ownership of curriculum change. Journal of curriculum studies, 33(5), 551-567. Available from:
  16. Kubitskey, B., & Fishman, B. J. (2006). Professional development design for systemic curriculum change. In Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Available from:
  17. Lawton, D. (2012). The politics of the school curriculum. Routledge. Available from:
  18. Lewis, B. (1968). The Emergence of Modern Turkey 2d. Ed: Issued Under the Auspices of the Royal Institute of International Affairs. Oxford University Press. Available from:
  19. Lune, H., & Berg, B. L. (2017). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Pearson. Available from:
  20. Marsh, J.C. & Willies, G. (2002). Curriculum Alternative Approaches, Ongoing Issues. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pretence Hall.
  21. Ministry of Education (2013). Focus on learning. Lusaka: Government Printer
  22. Ministry of Education (2017). Educational Reform: Proposals and Recommendations. Lusaka: Government Printer.
  23. Ministry of Education (2013) Curriculum Framework. Lusaka: Curriculum Development Centre
  24. Mulenga, I. M. (2015). English language teacher education curriculum designing: a mixed-methods analysis of the programme at the University of Zambia (Doctoral dissertation, University of Zambia). Available from:
  25. Mulenga, I. M. & Mwanza, C. (2019) Teachers' Voices Crying in the School Wilderness: Involvement of Secondary School Teachers in Curriculum Development in Zambia. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching. 8 (1), 32-38.
  26. (2) (PDF) Teacher Collaboration in Curriculum Design Teams: Prospects and Challenges in the Zambian Education System. Available from:
  27. Munazza, A. (2004). Analysis of curriculum progress and development of a model for secondary school level in Pakistan. University of Arid Agriculture: Rawal Pindi.
  28. Mwanza, C. (2017) Teacher Involvement in Curriculum Development in Zambia: A Role Analysis of Selected Secondary School Teachers in Lusaka District. Lusaka Province, Zambia. Masters Dissertation. The University of Zambia. Available from:
  29. Mokua, B. (2010). An evaluation of the curriculum development role of teachers as key agents in curriculum change (Doctoral dissertation, North-West University).;sequence=2
  30. Ndum, V. E., & Okey, S. M. (2015). Teachers' involvement and role in climate change curriculum development and implementation in Nigerian secondary educational system. Modern management science & engineering. Available from:
  31. O'Donnell, K. (2005). Japanese Secondary English Teachers Negotiations of Educational Roles in the face of Curricular reform; Language, Culture and Curriculum 18, 300-30.
  32. (2) (PDF) Teacher Collaboration in Curriculum Design Teams: Prospects and Challenges in the Zambian Education System. Available from:
  33. Oliva, P. F. (2008). Developing the curriculum (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Available from:
  34. Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2012). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Available from:
  35. Ramparsad, R . (2000). A strategy for teacher involvement in curriculum development. South African Journal of Education. Available from:
  36. Robson, C. (2002). Real-World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Available from:
  37. Sherin, M. G., & Han, S. Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 163–183. Available from:
  38. Voogt, J. M., Pieters, J. M., & Handelzalts, A. (2016). Teacher collaboration in curriculum design teams: effects, mechanisms, and conditions. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22(3-4), 121-140. Available from: