The complex nature of education processes, and their central part in modern societies’ development and equilibrium justifies a constant search for improvement. This search for better school education, better results from our students and the achievement of their growth and development as students, citizens and professionals has led to an infinite number of interventions and changes in education. Nations all over Europe have been reforming their educational systems. Taking Portugal as an example, in the last 20 years several measures have been taken and implemented in education, from administrative changes, such as: territorialisation (Leite, 2005), autonomy contracts (Barroso, 2004), creation of schools as Educational Territories of Priority Intervention (TEIP), to changes related with curriculum development, disciplinary programs reorganization, student’s evaluation, amongst others. Nonetheless, the issue remains as to what approach is better suited for achieving the particular educational purpose of promoting students’ academic success and, furthermore, to achieve the major purpose of preparing students for their adult life as citizens and professionals, providing them the necessary set of disciplinary knowledge and transversal skills. Despite the various attempts to improve school education in order for students’ success, it seems that little has been achieved.

Many European organizations and bodies have conducted studies and formulated recommendations on the subject. The European Commission (2012), the OECD (2010), European Union Council (2011; 2013) and others have many times argued in favour of a more conscientious posture in both planning and developing school education. A posture based on the respect and consideration of students’ idiosyncratic nature, their cultural and social backgrounds, their cognitive and behavioral characteristics, and even the acknowledgement of local features. The main argument behind this suggestion is that students are more likely to succeed and their learning is enhanced when they feel a connection with what they are learning.

Likewise, many educational researchers (Gillespie, 2002; Yamauchi 2003; Sahasewiyon, 2004; Leite 2005; Smith, 2005; Cook-Sather, 2006; Kalbach and Forester, 2006; Paliwal and Subramaniam, 2006; Doyle, 2009), have been claiming that a different approach should be taken in school education, a more comprehensive and humanistic approach that considers students as active elements within their own learning process, looking upon students’ interests, characteristics and environment when planning and developing teaching and learning. In this line of thought, recent research has shown that students’ learning is enhanced when teachers resort to what is defined as curricular contextualization (CC) (Fernandes, et al, 2012). Curricular contextualization is a «didactical-pedagogical strategy that aims to promote the students school success and the improvement of their learning. This can be done by adapting curricular contents in order to bring them closer to students and to the environment where teaching and learning occurs and, therefore, as a result, making them more significant and understandable» (Fernandes et al, 2012: 6).

It seems only fair that educational research, as a discipline devoted to understand and contribute to the development of education, should shed some light into this matter. For this reason, a research project focused on curricular contextualization, aimed to understand and identify the relation between CC practices and students’ learning and results, by listening to both teachers’ and students’ opinions. With this presentation we look forward to add to the knowledge production on this subject, by exploring students’ opinions on the following: the kind of impact that CC practices have on their learning; which CC approach has more impact; and to what extend is this impact.

Barbour, R. & Kitzinger, J. (1999) Developing focus group research: politics, theory and practice. London: Sage Publications Barroso, J. (2004) A autonomia das escolas: uma ficção necessária. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, 17(2), 49-83 Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence, and power: ‘‘Student voice’’ in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(4), 359–390. doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2006.00363.x. Doyle, W. (2009). Situated practice: A reflection on person-centered classroom management. Theory into Pratice, 48(2), 156–159. doi:10.1080/00405840902776525. European Commission (2012) Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes – Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, http://ec.europa.eu/education/news/rethinking/com669_en.pdf European Union Council (2011) Council conclusions on the role of education and training in the implementation of the ‘Europe 2020’ strategy, pp. 1-3 European Council (2013) Council Conclusions on investing in education and training — a response to ‘Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes’ and the ‘2013 Annual Growth Survey’, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/educ/135467.pdf Fernandes, P. et al (2012) “Curricular Contextualization: Tracking Meanings of a Concept”. The Asia-Pacific Educational Researcher. DOI: 10.1007/s40299-012-0041-1 Gillespie, M. (2002). EFF research principle: A contextualized approach to curriculum and instruction. EFF Research to Practice Note, 3, 2–8. Retrieved from http://www.edpubs.gov/document/ed001934w.pdf. Kalbach, L., & Forester, L. (2006). The world and the world: A lesson in critical literacy and its impact on student achievement and self-esteem. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 8(1–2), 69–82. Krippendorf, K. (2003). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage. Leite, C. (2005) A territorialização das políticas e das práticas educativas. In C. Leite (Org.), Mudanças curiculares em Portugal: Transição para o século XXI (pp. 15–32). Porto: Porto Editora. OECD (2010) Ministerial report on the OECD Innovation Strategy Innovation to strengthen growth and address global and social challenges – Key Findings, http://www.oecd.org/sti/45326349.pdf (6/11/2013) Paliwal, R., & Subramaniam, C. (2006). Contextualising the curriculum. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 4(1), 25–51. Sahasewiyon, K. (2004). Working locally as a true professional: Case studies in the development of a local curriculum. Educational Action Research, 12(4), 493–514. doi:10.1080/09650790400200265. Smith, G. (2005). Place-based education: Learning to be where we are. Clearing, 118, 6–43. Yamauchi, L. (2003). Making school relevant for at-risk students: The Wai’anae High School Hawaiian Studies Program. Journal of Education for Students Placed At-risk, 8(4), 379–390. doi:10.1207/S15327671ESPR0804_1