From a practical, eclectic, and teacher-centered vantage point, this paper reviews previous attempts to classify curriculum development processes, proposes an analytic schema for examing such processes, and explicates an alternative process which has been found to be effective in working with teachers. First, critical distinctions are drawn between three distinct levels of curriculum work: a program of studies, a field of study, and a course of study. Next, previous systems for classifying curricular processes and products are reviewed, to show how these systems are conceptually flawed. To compensate for these deficiencies, an open-ended system is proposed that includes all the important process elements, and that emphasizes description and analysis, rather than evaluation. This is followed by a description of a naturalistic alternative system for developing curricula that seemed to show promise in preliminary trials. This is first compared to the standard technological model; then the steps of the process are described in sequential order. Finally, the development of a high school course in career planning is used to illustrate the process. (TE)