A Comparative Analysis of the Steam-Based National Curriculum (2022–23) and the 2006 Curriculum for College-Level Physics in Pakistan

Authors

  • Dr. Muhammad khan FG Degree College Attock Pakistan, Email: hashirdanial@yahoo.com
  • Dr. Farkhanda Rasheed Choudhary Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad, Pakistan Email: farkhunda.rasheed@aiou.edu.pk

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70670/sra.v3i1.584

Keywords:

STEAM, Curriculum, Content Organization, Hands-on Activities, Resource Requirement

Abstract

The concept of Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM) provides a framework for structuring science education by integrating core disciplinary knowledge with interdisciplinary themes. In Pakistan, the National Curriculum 2022–23, designed using the STEAM framework, has replaced the 2006 curriculum. This study compares the National Curriculum (2022–23) with the 2006 Curriculum for college-level physics, focusing on dimensions such as content organization, relevance to current and future needs, hands-on activities, student engagement, flexibility, and resource requirements. It is a mixed method approach where both qualitative and quantitative data were collected. A survey involving 50 college-level physics teachers used a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire to gather feedback. Semi structured interviews were conducted for in-depth analysis of the various dimensions of curriculum. Results indicated that the National curriculum (2022–23) outperformed the 2006 Curriculum in flexibility, student engagement, and relevance, while the 2006 curriculum was rated higher in content organization. It is recommended to revise the content and organization of the 2022–23 National curriculum to address this gap and include foundational knowledge at college level.

Downloads

Published

30-03-2025

How to Cite

Dr. Muhammad khan, & Dr. Farkhanda Rasheed Choudhary. (2025). A Comparative Analysis of the Steam-Based National Curriculum (2022–23) and the 2006 Curriculum for College-Level Physics in Pakistan. Social Science Review Archives, 3(1), 2758–2768. https://doi.org/10.70670/sra.v3i1.584