Sociocultural adaptation

Although empirical studies usually present and explain these two forms of adaptation using the same theoretical assumptions, there are reasons to believe that they are conceptually different. This distinction is made on the grounds that psychological adaptation can be analyzed better within a psychopathological approach whereas sociocultural adaptation would be better dealt with by the social skills theories (Ward, 1996). 

Sam, D. L., Vedder, P., Ward, C. Horenczyk, G. (2006). Psychological and sociocultural adaptation of immigrant youth. In J. W. Berry, J. S. Phinney, D. L. Sam and P. Vedder, eds., Immigrant Youth in Cultural Transition Acculturation, Identity, and Adaptation Across National Contexts. Mahwah, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, pp. 117-41. 

Ward, C. Kennedy, A. (1999). The measurement of sociocultural adaptation. Inti. J. Intercultural Relations, 23(4), 659-77. 

These three curriculum representations closely cohere. Also, there is never a linear, top-down transformation from curriculum intentions via implementation in teaching and learning settings to students outcomes. It is a complicated process in which much elaboration and adaptation may be needed and may occur. Also a lot of noise may arise. Original intentions can be blurred, distorted, or even devastated. Also other, often more powerful variables than only the intended curriculum may have an effect on the implemented and the attained curriculum (Figure 1 based on van den Akker, 1998). Some of the variables in this curriculum transformation or curriculum dilution process may also be non-curricular in nature, like sociocultural context (home, media, peers) and student characteristics (aptitude, motivation, gender). 

---