This thesis evaluates the usefulness of interest group theory as a theoretical framework through which to view the process of syllabus development. The controversy surrounding the mandating of targeted curriculum perspectives in the 1992 New South Wales Stages 4-5 Geography Syllabus is the particular instance of syllabus development to which the theory is applied. The study represents the first substantive account of the perspectives controversy and, as such, provides a number of important historical insights into what is now established educational practice across a range of New South Wales syllabus documents. While earlier subject-based studies relevant to the New South Wales curriculum context have explored the highly political nature of the syllabus-development process they have failed to fully account for the dynamics of the processes involved. Of particular interest is the manner in which the various participants in the syllabus 'policy community' - which, under the model of curriculum development prevailing in the early 1990s, were principally nominees of the major educational stakeholders or interest groups - sought to advance a particular agenda or thwart the agendas of those with which they disagreed. Interest group theory provides a theoretical 'lens' that clarifies the patterns of action and reaction central to these processes, and throws light on the way interest groups interact within an institutional framework during syllabus development. This case study shares with others of its genre the view that the issues addressed cannot be examined without reference to the cultural-political context in which they occurred. In this particular instance the context is not only complex it is multidimensional. At one level a belief in the transformative potential of schooling by both progressive and conservative interests contributed to education becoming one of the most keenly contested arenas of public policy. At another level, the election of a reformist conservative government in New South Wales and the appointment of Paul Keating as prime minister in 1991 resulted in an intensification of cultural conflict that simultaneously enraged and enthused activists on both sides of the cultural-political divide. It is argued that by the 1990s syllabus content, which is viewed as legitimised knowledge, became one of the main vehicles by which the preferred cultural visions of competing interests could be advanced. There are three main sources of data used in this qualitative case study investigation: the material artefacts of the syllabus-development process; the researcher's own participant-based observations; and the observations of the 'key actors' in the syllabus controversy. The main data-gathering tools were archival research, document analysis and open- ended interviewing. The triangulation of data sources and methodologies, together with member-checking, was used to ensure the credibility of the research findings. The outcomes of this study include a demonstration of the utility of interest group theory as an analytical framework for understanding the nature of syllabus development; an insight into the range of strategies deployed by interest groups in their attempt to influence syllabus content; a confirmation of the proposition that the selection of syllabus content is a socially-embedded process subject to challenge from those with competing world views; and an exploration of the ways institutional processes and different interests interact to produce compromise-based policy outcomes.