, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 503–525 | Cite as

Principles for learning and competences in the 21st-century curriculum

  • Clementina Acedo
  • Conrad HughesEmail author
Open File


This article addresses the core competences, attitudes and knowledge that the authors believe will promote transformative learning in the 21st century and should, therefore, feature in curriculum design. It first defines the purpose of curriculum, stressing the need for a coherent worldwide understanding of what is meant and intended by curriculum, and then focuses on learning as the cornerstone of curriculum, before turning to the guiding principles that should guide curricula in the 21st century.


Curriculum Competences Learning Knowledge 21st century 


  1. Baumfield, V. M., Hall, E., Higgins, S., & Wall, K. (2009). Catalytic tools: Understanding the interaction of enquiry and feedback in teachers’ learning. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32(4), 423–435. doi: 10.1080/02619760903005815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bertram Gallant, T. (2011). Creating the ethical academy: A systems approach to understanding misconduct and empowering change in higher education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., & Freedman, M. (2007). Bilingualism as a protection against the onset of symptoms of dementia. Neuropsychologia, 45(2), 459–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruner, J., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1967). A study of thinking. New York: Science Editions.Google Scholar
  5. Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CIE [Cambridge International Examinations] (2013). Implementing the curriculum with Cambridge: A guide for school leaders. Cambridge: CIE.Google Scholar
  7. Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review. Trowbridge, Wiltshire: Cromwell Press.Google Scholar
  8. Costa, A. (2013). What is habits of mind? Singapore: The Art Costa Centre for Thinking.
  9. Dehaene, S. (2013). Les quatre piliers de l’apprentissage, ou ce que nous disent les neurosciences [The four pillars of learning, or what we can learn from neuroscience]. Paris Tech Review.
  10. Delors, J., et al. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  11. Dunn, R. (1990). Rita Dunn answers questions on learning styles. Educational Leadership, 48(2), 15–19.Google Scholar
  12. Dweck, C. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Erickson, H. L. (2007). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  14. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231–235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  16. Gardner, H. (2007). Five minds for the future. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  17. Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glaser, R., & Baxter, G. P. (1999). Assessing active knowledge. Paper presented at the 1999 CRESST conference, Benchmarks for Accountability: Are we there yet? September 16–17, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  19. Halpern, D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. Journal Directions for Teaching and Learning, 80, 69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hattie, J. (1999). Influences on student learning. Inaugural lecture. University of Auckland, August 2, 1999.
  21. Heritage, M. (2008). Learning progressions: Supporting instruction and formative assessment. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.Google Scholar
  22. Herman, E. S., & Chomsky, N. (1988). Manufacturing consent. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  23. Hughes, C. (2012). Child-centred pedagogy, internationalism and bilingualism at the International School of Geneva. International Schools Journal, 32, 1.Google Scholar
  24. Hughes, C., & Acedo, C. (2014). Guiding principles of learning in the twenty-first century. Geneva: UNESCO IBE and International School of Geneva.Google Scholar
  25. IB [International Baccalaureate] (2013). Sample document from Primary Years Programme planner. Geneva: IB.
  26. IBM [International Business Machines] (2010). IBM 2010 Global CEO Study: Creativity selected as most crucial factor for future success.
  27. Jones, K. (2009). Culture and creative learning: A literature review. Newcastle: Creativity, Culture and Education.Google Scholar
  28. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  29. Kolb, D. A. (2000). Facilitator’s guide to learning. Boston: Hay/McBer.Google Scholar
  30. Land, R., Cousin, G., Meyer, J. H. F., & Davies, P. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3)*: Implications for course design and evaluation. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning: Diversity and inclusivity. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.Google Scholar
  31. McWilliam, E. (2008). The creative workforce: How to launch young people into high flying futures. Sydney: UNSW Press.Google Scholar
  32. Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ohler, J. (2011). Digital citizenship means character education for the Digital Age. Kappa Delta Pi, Centennial issue.
  34. Pearson (2011). Pearson to develop frameworks for OECD’s PISA student assessment for 2015.
  35. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  36. Popham, J. W. (2007). The lowdown on learning progressions. Educational Leadership, 64(7), 83–84.Google Scholar
  37. Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson and Co.Google Scholar
  38. Short, K. G., Schroeder, J., Laird, J., Kauffman, G., Ferguson, M. J., & Crawford, K. M. (1996). Learning together through inquiry. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.Google Scholar
  39. Silver, N. (2012). The signal and the noise: Why so many predictions fail—But some don’t. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, M. C. (1996). Differences in adults’ reading practices and literacy proficiencies. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(2), 196–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tawil, S., & Cougoureux, M. (2013). Revisiting learning: Revisiting the treasure within. UNESCO occasional paper. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  42. UNESCO (2013). UNESCO principles on education for development beyond 2015. Paris: UNESCO.
  43. UNESCO IBE [International Bureau of Education] (2013a). Key curricular and learning issues in the post-2015 education and development agenda. Document prepared for the UNESCO IBE International Experts’ Meeting, 23–25 September, Geneva. Geneva: UNESCO IBE.Google Scholar
  44. UNESCO IBE (2013b). Statement on learning in the post-2015 education and development agenda. Geneva: UNESCO IBE.Google Scholar
  45. Verner, I. M. (2004). Robot manipulations: A synergy of visualization, computation and action for spatial instruction. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9, 213–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wallace, S. A., McCartney, R., & Russell, I. (2010). Games and machine learning: A powerful combination in an artificial intelligence course. Computer Science Education, 20(1), 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. WHO [World Health Organization] (2013). Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. Geneva: WHO.
  48. Wiggins, J., & McTighe, G. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  49. Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.Google Scholar

Copyright information


Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Webster UniversityBellevueSwitzerland
  2. 2.International School of GenevaGenevaSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations