However, process and praxis models of
curriculum also present problems in the context of informal education. If
you look back at at our models of process and compare them with the model of
informal education presented above then it is clear that we can have a similar
problem with pre-specification. One of the key feature that differentiates
the two is that the curriculum model has the teacher entering the situation with
a proposal for action which sets out the essential principles and features of
the educational encounter. Informal educators do not have, and do not need, this
element. They do not enter with a clear proposal for action. Rather,
they have an idea of what makes for human well-being, and an appreciation of
their overall role and strategy (strategy here being some idea about target
group and broad method e.g. detached work). They then develop their aims
and interventions in interaction. And what is this element we have been
discussing? It is nothing more nor less than what Stenhouse considers to
be a curriculum!