In this study, the primary school curriculum of the course of Religious Culture and Ethical Knowledge (DKAB) was evaluated in the context of its theoretical approaches, especially according to constructivist approach which was applied in the new curriculum. The “Religious Culture and Ethical Knowledge” lesson has taken its recent shape after a long historical experience in Turkey. Beginning from late Ottoman period, religion and its education had been perceived as a problem and in republic period this issue caused many applications. In this context we can say that Turkey has a rich experience with regard to religious education. During the republican period Turkey has experienced many different options in religious education in schools such as non-existence, to be optional and finally a compulsory subject. It is argued that traditional approach to religious education is not adequate to meet the needs of contemporary world. For this reason, there is a search for what kind of religion can we teach in terms of content and presentation (Kaymakcan (2007a: 179). Consistent with the developments in the area of pedagogy in modern world, the curriculum subjects in Turkish schools have been changed and also the Primary DKAB Curriculum has been developed in 2006 and put into practice in 2007-2008 academic year by taking into consideration constructivism and multiple intelligences theories and learner-centered learning as the basic educational approaches. Within the context of the theological approaches of the new curriculum it is asserted that, scientific and research based knowledge have given particular importance both about Islam and other religions; that the knowledge which is not in the main religious sources has been set aside. In this study, the above mentioned new curriculum has been discussed in the context of constructivist approach. Kaymakcan (2007b: 20) draws attention that the following two points may lead to some problems when we are implementing constructivist learning in religious education. Firstly, the epistemological understanding of the construction of knowledge in religion is mainly different from the assumption of subjective construction of constructivist learning theory. Secondly, the followers of a religion believe the existence of objective religious principles, faith, and so on beyond the interpretation of individual believer of the religion. This can cause a contradiction with the constructivist principle of individual construction of knowledge. It is suggested that the constructivist learning theory can be used in the teaching of living dimension of religion (experiences and practices of the individual and the society) rather than the doctrinal dimension in religious education. Kaymakcan also emphasizes that there is no any information about the theological approach which is used in the new curriculum and it is not clear what it purely means. After these explanations we briefly can say the following as a conclusion about new curriculum in the context of constructivism: First of all, changing of school curriculums at certain intervals and re-preparing them according to new developments are necessary. In this sense, we can consider the new curriculum change as an important step. The new curriculum is considerably reflects a detailed and systematic curriculum approach rather than the former curricula. Educational and theological foundations have been stated in the new curriculum but it can be argued that the claims of these approaches have been purely substantiated. The new curriculum, as stated above, have taken constructivism into consideration, but in the preparation process of curriculum this approach was not adequately discussed and not given particular attention to reflections of this approach in the field of religious education. Rather than philosophical basis of constructivism, suitable dimensions of student centered approaches have been tried to adapt in the new curriculum. When we consider philosophical and educational dimensions, it can be said that the objectives and the attainments of the new curriculum is not correspond completely to constructivism. Besides, it reflects the assumptions of constructivist approach in teaching-learning process and measurement and assessment. Constructivist approach gives importance to assessment of learning process. But, it must be taken into account that teachers do not prefer to use this kind of assessment in practice in consequence of many reasons. Many field researches support this situation. Constructivist approach has some unique perspectives for teaching-learning process. But while subjective learning approaches are preferred like constructivism, it is also important not to put away objective teaching theories. Thus, it appears that objective and subjective teaching design theories put into practice together in new DKAB curriculum, but just constructivist approach is located as objective learning approach which the curriculum is based on. In this regard, it can be preferred as a method to give some satisfied information about potential risks and advantages of the educational and theological approaches in the curriculum.