عنوان مقاله [English]
Educational planning has traditionally taken the form of determining how to inculcate literate capabilities in as wide a segment of the population as possible. The key planning dimension of education, then, has been to determine first, the definition of literacy and second, how best to provide as much literacy training as possible within the resources available to the country. Then, curriculum planning shapes the literacy and determines how to convey it among the people in the society. Literacy has many different definitions. These definitions are influenced by the “autonomous” and “ideological” approaches to literacy. The “autonomous” approach to literacy disguises the cultural and ideological assumptions that underpin it, so that it can then be presented as though they are neutral and universal. On the other hand, the alternative, ideological approach to literacy, offers a more culturally sensitive view of literacy practices as they vary from one social-cultural context to another. This approach posits that literacy is a social practice, not simply a technical and neutral skill. In this paper, the theoretical approach underlying the definition of literacy in the curriculum of two developing countries (Indonesia and Senegal), four developed countries, i.e., America (the state of New Jersi) , Canada (the state of Alberta), England and Singapore, and finally the curriculum of Iran is discussed. We tried to clarify that the curriculum of these countries especially Iran’s are to what extent influenced by the “autonomous” and “ideological” approaches to literacy.