Traditionally, like most members of the teaching profession, special educators have tended to see a “curriculum” as being a document: a document which specifies the kinds of content that needs to be taught to pupils, and is usually quite free of statements about methods and materials to be used in teaching those contents. Most special schools have produced such documents, and a large number of them have been enshrined in collections such as the Fearon Reference Systems’ Curriculum development library (1978, ff). In earlier days such documents in the language area listed by school year the parts of speech which pupils should learn during that year; in later days they tended to talk about patterns of sentences and the order in which they could be acquired (that of Alice Streng, 1972, is a good example of this latter type). More recently, books such as those of Blackwell, Engen, Fischgrund and Zarcadoolas (1978), Kretschmer and Kretschmer (1978) and McLean and Snyder-McLean (1978) have begun to reflect changes in general language teaching theory, and hence emphasise the teaching of functional communications with less emphasis on the structures of English syntax, although this has not disappeared entirely. Increasingly also, the influence of general language theory and method is being reflected in such documents, and one finds frequent reference to such general theorists as Crystal, Fletcher and Garman (1976), Breen and Candlin (1978), Schiefelbusch (1978a, 1978b) and Tough (1976).