Activity-19 Cur Dev.docx

Activity 19. REFLECT ON AND ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING: 1. Review the linear curriculum development models.

Linear Models of Curriculum Development -prescribe a rational step-by-step procedure for Curriculum Development starting with objectives A. Tyler’s Rational Linear Model    

Ralph Tyler at the University of Chicago developed the first model of curriculum development. This model was presented in his book Principles of Curriculum and Instruction published in 1949 He argued Curriculum Development should be logical and systematic. Presents a process of curriculum development that follows a sequential pattern starting from objectives to content, learning experiences, and evaluation.

Society

Students

Philosophy of Education

Subject-Matter

Psychology of Learning

Selecting Objectives

Selecting Learning Experiences

Organizing Learning Experiences

Evaluation Figure 3. Tyler’s Rational Model



Curriculum workers should respond to four basic questions: 1. What educational purposes should the school seek to attain? 2. What educational experiences are likely to attain these objectives? 3. How can these educational experiences be organized 4. How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained? Tyler identified three curriculum sources 1. Society 2. Students 3. Subject Matter Curriculum workers need to study these sources carefully in order to develop a curriculum. He also pointed out the importance of philosophy of education and psychology of learning to screen the objectives that are included in the curriculum.



 

B. Taba’s Grassroots Rational Model 

Hilda Taba presented her model in her book Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice in 1962.  Her model is a modified version of Tyler’s Model.  Curriculum Development should follow a sequential and logical process, she suggested for more information input in all phases of curriculum development.  She claimed that all curricula are composed of fundamentals elements.  Seven steps that should be followed when developing a curriculum: 1. Diagnosis of Needs 2. Formulation of objectives 3. Selection of contents 4. Organization of contents 5. Selection of learning experiences 6. Organization of learning experiences 7. Determination of what to evaluate and ways and means of doing it.  Taba suggested that curriculum development could be made successful if there was a diagnosis of needs. - Helps curriculum workers in understanding the needs of the learners. - Help in the selection of the goals and objectives; selection of contents.  She pointed out that the nature of the objectives determines what learning is to follow. C. Standard-based Curriculum Development Model 

Developed by Allan Glatthorn

 

Intended for developing curriculum standards for any discipline from basic education to higher education Glatthorn identified three phases to be followed in developing a standards- based curriculum. PHASE 1. Develop standards. 1. Develop a comprehensive set of content standards, using multiple sources. 2. Refine the comprehensive list by eliminating and combining. 3. Secure teacher input to identify teacher priorities. 4. Use data to develop final draft of standards, divided into Essential Standards and Enrichment Standards. PHASE 2. Develop benchmarks. 1. Review decisions about content emphases. 2. Identify standards for continuing development (standards that will not be benchmarked). 3. Decide how benchmarks will be identified- by taskforce or by teachers. 4. Develop initial draft of benchmarks, evaluating with criteria provided, and secure teacher review; revise benchmarks if needed. PHASE 3. Develop final products. 1. Use standards and benchmarks to produce scope and sequence chart. 2. Decide on curriculum guide content. 3. Analyze benchmarks into learning objectives.

  

Is an example of a linear model. Includes prescribed sequenced of curriculum development activities to develop standard. Is an example of linear and rationale curriculum development model.

D. Understanding by Design Model (UBD)  

  

Was developed by Wiggins and McTighe (2002). Become a byword in the Philippine educational system because it was used to design the basic education in School Year 2010-2011 before the K-12 Education Curriculum was implemented. Is also called “Backward Design” for putting emphasis on starting with the goals and objectives in designing curriculum. Puts emphasis on designing curriculum to engage students in exploring and deepening their understanding of important ideas of assessments. Three stages in backward design process: Stage 1. Identify the desired result. Stage 2. Determine acceptable evidence.

Stage 3. Plan the learning experiences and instruction.

Stage 1: Identify desired result Stage 2: Determine acceptable evidence.

Stage 3: Plan the Learning experiences and instruction.

Figure 4. Stages in Backward Design Process

E. Systematic Design Model  

     

Developed by Robert Diamond in the early 1960s. The model has two basic phases: 1. Project selection and design. 2. Production, implementation, and evaluation. Like some of the previous model, it follows a linear process of curriculum development. Diamond (1998) explained that ideally, some actions must precede others, and certain decisions should not be made until all relevant facts are known. It is important that all the data must be complete before preceding to the next. It is prescriptive and rational. It presents a systematic and linear view of curriculum development. The used of diagrams is an excellent way of helping curriculum workers to visualize the entire curriculum development.

F. Murray Print Model for Curriculum Development  



Murray Print published his model in his book Curriculum Development and Design in 1988. His model prescribes a sequential and logical approach to curriculum development to provide a useful and easy to understand process in developing curriculum. The first phase of Print’s Model recognizes the nature of the curriculum workers involved in the development of the curriculum.  Accordingly, in this phase it is important to pose the following questions that may influence curriculum development. 1. Who are involved in this curriculum development, and what, if anything do they represent?





 

2. What conceptions of curriculum do they bring with them? 3. What underlying forces or foundations have influenced the developers’ thinking? The second phase in this model is the task of developing the curriculum.  The procedure is cyclical, which begins with a situational analysis, and continues with the aims, goals, and objectives, content, learning activities and instructional evaluation, and then continuing to situational analysis again. The third phase includes all the actual application that incorporates three major activities: 1. Implementation of the curriculum 2. Monitoring of, and feedback from the curriculum 3. Provision of feedback data to the presage group Print model is also prescriptive and rational. The model starts with identifying the aims, goals, and objectives in the curriculum. It embraces the principles of cyclical and dynamic models in its procedures.

2. Identify the possible strengths and weaknesses if each model when applied to the Philippines context A. Tyler’s Rational Linear Model Strengths   

Clearly stated objectives a good place to begin. Involves the active participation of the learner (Prideaux, 2003) Simple linear approach to development of behavior al objectives (Billings & & Halstead, 2009)

Weaknesses  

 

The objectives has flaws in terms of the reality of curriculum development which is rarely a fixed or linear process. It overlooks the unpredictable nature of teaching and learning. While the model prescribes specific objectives to achieved, learning occurs beyond these objectives due to factors that could not be foreseen (Print 1989). The model cannot account for the many complex outcomes of learning (Brady 1990). The other criticism that has been cited is that educational objectives need to precede the selection and organization of learning experiences (Brady 1990) Lastly, the exponents of the rational model, especially Tyler, have been criticized for not adequately explaining the sources of their objectives (Print 1989).

B. Taba’s Grassroots Rational Model Strengths  The one who have to teach curriculum will develop it.  Teaching- learning experience of the teacher will be considered  Non-traditional approach- as members of the teaching profession are given responsibility.  Needs of the students are given the utmost importance Weaknesses  Approaches, methodologies of different teachers are different.  Assumes that the teachers have the expertise.  TIME to engage in such extensive curricular activity.

C. Standard-based Curriculum Development Model Strengths 

The model extends itself up to the development of scope and sequence, which is important for planning instruction, and for deciding on specific contents and objectives. It is relevance and applicability in any educational institution in developing curriculum standards for various courses. It gives teachers tangible resources and goals, stimulates creativity, and enables self-reflection.

 

Weaknesses 

This model is rational and descriptive, stressing the development of standards as the first activity in the curriculum development. This model recognizes teacher’s inputs in the development of standards, which are often neglected in curriculum projects in the Philippines because of the topdown approach to curriculum development and implementation. In this model, developing curriculum standards is a separate activity from the overall curriculum development process, this makes the model incomplete. Specified the development of standards using multiple sources, it cannot replace the important function of situational analysis in the curriculum development process.



 

D. Understanding by Design Model (UBD) Strengths 

  

It can help the Commission on Higher Education, particularly the teacher education institutions, to revise their existing curricula to focus on higher understanding rather than just prescribing subjects and course descriptions. It makes the content of the teacher education curriculum more learner-centered. It calls for more relevant curriculum standards in the country. It recognized the importance of teachers in the curriculum development process.

Weaknesses  The model is fixed at accepting what standards are prescribed by the government agency on education.  Goals are most likely to follow the prescribed content standards set by the government

E. Systematic Design Model

Strengths  

Recognizes the importance of teachers It takes into account the individual differences when matching future occupations to the aptitude of students. Allows the research to influence curriculum processes and encourages a team approach to curriculum development. Some curriculum sources and influences are acknowledged in the process of curriculum development. These curriculum sources and influences are used to determine the objectives of the curriculum.

 

Weaknesses    

It places at the forefront the teacher as the reason for failing schools again failing to account for the role of the leaner. Relies heavily on data There’s no provision where curriculum workers can review their actions and decisions in relation to the factors identified in the first phase. Lack of research culture in our education institutions.

F. Murray Print Model for Curriculum Development Strengths 

  

This model can be used in any level of curriculum development –local, college-wide, or national. Very practical to apply this model in the Philippines The inclusion of instructional evaluation in the development process makes this model unique. The inclusion of a monitoring and feedback system in the curriculum development is useful when there is a need to do some revision. It also recognizes myriad of curriculum conceptions and ideas that various curriculum workers bring to the curriculum development process which may influence them in making important curricular decisions

Weaknesses 



This model describes the process of curriculum development on a macro level, however it is not clear where the philosophy of the institution and philosophy of the curriculum will come into play. Should establish a stronger link between the curriculum presage and the situational analysis. The model gives an impression that curriculum presage has no direct effect or relationship with situational analysis.