MAE522 Module 4: The Curriculum Development Process
4 likes499 views
This document presents a literary review of the curriculum development process, tracing its history and evolution since ancient Greece and defining curriculum as a dynamic and progressive entity. It outlines the primary stages of curriculum development, including planning, implementation, and evaluation, and discusses various curriculum models that are most commonly used today, such as product and process models. Key contributors to the field, like John Franklin Bobbitt and Ralph Winfred Tyler, are noted for their significant impact on modern curriculum theory and practices.
MAE522 Module 4: The Curriculum Development Process
- 1. Running head: CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 1 The Curriculum Development Process A Literary Review Trident University International Orlanda Haynes Author Note This paper was prepared for MAE 522 Module 4 SLP Summer 2012 Taught by Professor Louise M. Williamson
- 2. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 2 Curriculum development dates back to the fourth century B.C. (Greek Civilization). Although no single definition exists, most scholars agree that curriculum development is not a static process. Programs are continuously updated to address the diverse needs of learners. Therefore, the process is progressive. The term curriculum describes course content. This essay is an overview of literature that focuses on the curriculum development process. Information is presented by responding to the following questions. 1. How is “curriculum” defined? 2. Where does the term originate? 3. What are the components of well-developed curriculum designs? 4. Which curriculum models are most common? Curriculum development is a continuous process that involves creating and modifying lesson plans to reflect variations in teaching philosophies, methods, approaches, and materials. How Is "Curriculum" defined? The definition of curriculum depends on the context in which it is used. For example, it may refer to all courses taught at schools or organizations and/or specific courses, including prerequisites, credentials, licenses, or degree programs as well as individualized courses designed to achieve specific goals such as obtaining a general education development certificate (GED), among others. John Kerr (Education Philosopher) defined curriculum as, “All the learning which is planned and guided by the school, whether it is carried on in groups or individually, inside or outside the school” (as cited in Smith, 1996, 2000, para 1). In education, the most widely quoted definition of curriculum is that of David Pratt (1997), “curriculum is a plan for a sustained process of teaching and learning" (p. 5).
- 3. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 3 Where Does the Term Originate? The term curriculum has its origin in Latin; it referred to a racing chariot course (currere-to run). In 1918, John Franklin Bobbitt (university professor and writer) published the first textbook on curriculum development—The Curriculum. He believed that curriculum was the foundation for preparing students for adult responsibilities. Bobbitt advocated for replacement of classical subjects to those that corresponded to social needs. In his work The Elimination of Waste in Education (1912), he emphasized that curriculum should reflect the needs of individuals and societies rather than teaching that which has little or no relevancy. He explained his view when he stated,” Educate the individual according to his capabilities. This requires that the material of the curriculum be sufficient . . . to meet the needs of every class of individuals in the community and that the course of training and study be sufficiently flexible that the individual can be given just the things that he needs" (as cited in Kliebard, 2004, p. 84). His contributions paved the way for an official specialization (curriculum) in education sciences (Smith, 1996, 2000; Ross, 2000; Curriculum Terms and Concepts; Bobbitt, 1918). What Are the Components of Well-Developed Curriculum Designs? Most effective curriculum development processes consist of primary stages, including planning, developing, implementing, and evaluating. In the planning stage, a committee is created. Members usually consist of educators and education administrators, members of the public, and students, among others). Their roles involve overseeing the complete curriculum development process, which includes a review of research findings that depict key issues and trends in specific areas of study (local, national, and global). For example, what education resources could meet the needs of multicultural learners? Which assessment instruments
- 4. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 4 are appropriate? Which learning, development theories, and curriculum models should be used? What does research say about students’ expectations regarding education programs and services? Such insights help to guide the need assessments process and the development of the teaching and learning philosophy. Needs assessment, for example, focuses on how to improve students’ learning and development, desired collegiate outcomes, roles of assessments, students’ achievement factors, concerns, and attitudes of teachers, administrators, parents, and students, among others. During this process, issues are more than likely to arise. Teachers, for example, may experience discontent with older course contents and techniques—in light of current research findings. On the other hand, there could be training and technology issues (knowledge deficits). In addition, students may express a need for greater curriculum flexibility (content choices) and instructional options, and parents may be concerned about implementation issues and their roles in the overall curriculum development and learning process. In essence, needs assessments combined with research findings (trends and issues) as well as other relevant findings become the foundation upon which the entire curriculum development process evolves. Moreover, in the developing stage, a program philosophy is created. As with most philosophies statements, specific questions guide the process. For example, why learn the specific discipline? What are the overall principles that guide the program? What are the core teaching and learning beliefs? How will assessments improve students’ learning? In essence, program philosophies provide a cohesive framework that justifies and give directions on all elements of teaching and learning. A philosophy statement for an adult education programs, for example,
- 5. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 5 may include comments about lifelong learning; contributions of adult education theorists; relevancy of adult education programs, personal growth, and literacy awareness. Goals, objectives, and outcomes are clearly defined, achievable, and manageable. They answer questions such as: what are the program goals? What objectives are sort? What outcomes are expected, and what are the time frames? In addition, characteristics of effective philosophy statements include accuracy of content, linkages (consistent with school districts’ education philosophy and valid foundation for goals and objectives), breadth and depth (aligned with best practice teaching and learning theories), usefulness (easily understood by non- educators), and philosophy statements provide a sound justification for its programs (http://www.ascd.org/professional-development.aspx; Phillips, et al., 2008; Ross, 2000; McNeil, 1990). Moreover, well-developed curriculum also identifies instructional resources. Today, emphasis has shifted away from the single textbook approach to one that is more reflective of educating diverse student populations—different instructional models, teaching approaches, methods, and education resources, among others. Additionally, assessments emphasis has also shifted. In that, assessments are expected to demonstrate learners’ actual ability to solve problems (performance) rather than alluding to academic competence by completing standardized tests (traditional assessments-multiple choice, true or false, and/or fill in the blanks). For example, some employers, educators, and education policy makers emphasized the need for direct assessment outcomes or authentic assessment. That is, a move away from the traditional rational that passing standardized exams is the best indicator of how individuals will preform in real-life situations—careers, education, socialization, problem solving, etc. (Ross,
- 6. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 6 2000; Rowland, 2010; Ornstein et al., 2004). In addition, authentic assessments offer an updated approach to structuring educational environments that reflect more learn-centered settings (encourages: autogamy, educators as facilitators, integration of learning theories, prior knowledge, and experiences) verses teacher- centered environments (controls the learning process, no acknowledgement of different learning styles, prior knowledge or experiences). It also provides multiple formats (essays, exhibits, portfolios, among others) to demonstrate knowledge proficiency. In contrast, critics claim that standardized exams are “bias.” That is, they give great test-takers a competitive edge— by allowing only one-way to demonstrate knowledge proficiency: standardized exams. Authentic assessment (also called alternative assessment) is a cognitive foundation that bridges the gap between knowledge and skills (Bond, 1998; Mueller, 2004; Romer, 2003). A basic premise of authentic assessment is to gage how well students can apply knowledge. It incorporates concepts of teaching, learning, and assessing as a holistic approach rather than assessing after learning has supposedly occurred. For example, when students are asked to explore relevant issues and to present well-grounded solutions or suggestions—their responses demonstrate how well they have grasped the literature (Bond & Cohen, 1991; Mueller, 2004). It is worth noting, however, that an emphasis on authentic assessment is not meant to discount the relevancy of traditional assessments but rather to show contrast; because when addressing different issues or objectives, for instance, multiple assessments are usually used (Bond & Cohen, 1991; Mueller, 2004). In terms of putting the curriculum into practice, the roles of most committees end during this stage; however, research suggests that committees should remain in
- 7. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 7 place to oversee the full implementation process (updating and evaluation of the new or revised curriculum). The rational is that—curriculum programs take time and support to become fully implemented. In terms of the evaluation stage, curriculum development ends and begins anew. Data is collected and analyzed to determine and to address possible issues relating to efficiency, effectiveness, and overall relevancy of all interlocking elements of the program (Phillips, et al., 2008; Ross, 2000; Rowland, 2010; Ornstein et al., 2004). Which Curriculum Models Are Most Common? Ralph Winfred Tyler (1949) presented a theory of Curriculum Rational, a teaching philosophy that encouraged educators to create useful curriculum. That is, curriculum that not only addressed historical needs but also current ones. Tyler’s Curriculum Rational included four steps (original design): (1) defining appropriate learning objectives, (2) establishing useful learning experiences, (3) organizing learning experiences to have a maximum cumulative effect, and (4) evaluating the curriculum and revising those aspects that did not prove to be effective. Today, through the introduction of the product design models (subject-centered, technical- scientific), his curriculum concept, and principles dominate the development of instructional models, in the United States and some foreign countries. The product design model is technical (scientific, blueprint, cognitive), linear (efficiency based), user friendly (k-12 and higher education-standardized tests), and it is the foundation for learning outcome curriculum. A variation of this approach is the Backward Design Model (attribute and competence principles integration), a favorite among professional programmers (O'Neill, 2010; Curriculum Terms and Concepts, 1999, 2000; Ornstein & Hunkins, 1998; Wiggins & McTighe, 2010).
- 8. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 8 By contrast, the process model is neither technical nor scientific (collaboration between teachers and students). For example, curriculum is developed around learning that occurs from addressing or solving problems (problem based model), and learning that stresses the personal subjective nature of curriculum—questions are formed by objectivity of course content— learning is viewed as holistic. In addition, unlike product models curriculum development process that excludes students—the development process for the process model included them. As such, the process model is learn-centered; that means outcomes are secondary concerns when compared to addressing students’ overall learning and development needs (knight, 2001). Lawrence Stenhouse (1975) created the theory and practice for the process model. These models, usually, requires independent learning and judgment skills; therefore, they are popular among higher education institutions. It is relevant to note, however, that no one model is the ideal solution for all curriculums. Instructional models used concepts and principles of the product and process models as foundations (Wiggins & McTighe, 2010; O’Neill, 2010; Fink, 2003; Ornstein & Hunkins, 2004 Smith, 1996, 2000, Curriculum as Process). As such, the most commonly use curriculum models are: (1) content-based instruction (transference of knowledge—facts, concepts, and theories, etc.), (2) shell based instructions (process and manipulation—practice and ordering of applications), (3) inquiry approach (awareness, interest activities, sampling, and investigating), (4) conceptual learning (understanding activities—ideals, views, conceptions, etc.), (5) interdisciplinary learning ( making connections across disciplines—liberal studies, humanities, psychology, biology, etc.), (6) cooperative learning (group activities and social skills development), (7) problem solving (research activities, and group collaboration, among others), and critical and creative thinking
- 9. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 9 involving building and designing, creation of new ideals and concepts as well as development of imaginative skills (Caffarella, 1994; 2010; O’Neill, 2010; Kolb, 2011; Nygaard et al., 2008; Knight, 2001; Kral, 2008). As research informs us, curriculum development is a planned systematic process that seeks to create an organized schematic through which learning and development commence, a flexible and ongoing process that continuously updates course contents to reflect emerging learning and development needs of multicultural students. In brief, curriculum development dates back to the fourth century B.C. (Greek Civilization). Today, the process evolves around primary stages, including planning, developing, implementing, and evaluating. The term “curriculum” has its roots in the Latin word for racecourse. Although no single definition exists, most scholars agree that curriculum development is progressive rather than static. John Franklin Bobbitt published the first textbook on curriculum in 1918, The Curriculum. Moreover, research informs us that Tyler and Stenhouse made significant contributions to the field of curriculum development. Curriculum development, therefore, has expanded to include an array of models from technical- scientific to student-centered. However, Tyler’s Curriculum Rational concept and principles dominate the development of instructional models in the United States and some foreign countries.
- 10. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 10 Reference Bobbitt, J. F. (1918). The curriculum. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved on August 5, 2012, from http://archive.org/details/ curriculum00bobbrich Bond, L.A. (1998). Rethinking assessment and its role in educational reform. The North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from:http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/ areas/issues/methods/assment/as700.htm Caffarella, R. S. (1994). Planning programs for adult learners. A practical guide for educators, trainers and staff developers, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Clements, D. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for research-based curricula. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(1), 35-70. Retrieved March 2, 2012 from http://gse.buffalo.edu/fas/clements/files/Clements_CRF.pdf Curriculum Terms and Concepts. Retrieved July 7, 2012, from: http://cuip.uchicago. edu/wit/2000/curriculum/homeroommodules/curriculumTerms/extra.htm Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kliebard, H. (2004). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958. (Third Ed.). New York: Routledge Falmer Knight, P.T. (2001). Complexity and curriculum: A process approach to curriculum making. Teaching in Higher Education, 6 (3), 369-381. Retrieved July 8, 2012, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=d43e49a5-d916-4057-a6e0- 25e73033a66d%40sessionmgr11&vid=4&hid=14 Kral, E. A. (2008). Ralph Winfred Tyler: Curriculum, instruction, and evaluation reformer
- 11. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 11 ranked among world's fifty modern thinkers on education. Profile: Ralph Winfred Tyler, NSEA. Retrieved March 2, 2012, from http://www.nsea.org/news/RWTylerProfile.htm McNeil, John D., (1990). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction (4th ed.). New York: HarperCollins Mueller, J. (2004). Authentic assessment toolbox. Retrieved June 12, 2012, from http://jonathan.mueller.faculty.noctrl.edu/toolbox/index.htm from: http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/styles/kolb.html Nygaard, C., Hojlt, T., & Hermansen, M. (2008). Learning-Based Curriculum Development. Higher Education: The International Journal Of Higher Education And Educational Planning, 55(1), 33-50. Retrieved on July 7, 2012, from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=f844ff35-61fb-42ec-99df-eaf50def2e1b% 40sessionmgr12 &vid=10&hid=15 O'Neill, G. (2010). Initiating curriculum revision: Exploring the practices of educational developers. International Journal For Academic Development, 15(1), 61-71. Retrieved July 8, 2012, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=f39e 2045-6f66 -4fc4-bc7c- 031f5317d243%40sessionmgr14&vid=4&hid=14 Ornstein A. C. & Hunkins, F. P. (2004). Curriculum foundations, principles, and issues. (3rd Eds.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Phillips, A. S., Settoon, R. P., & Phillips, C. R. (2008). Enhancing a Curriculum: A Focus on the Development Process. College Student Journal, 42(4), 1070-1074. Retrieved on July 7, from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=8&hid=15&sid=f844ff35-61fb-42ec-99df- 2012, eaf50def2e1b%40sessionmgr12&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d% 3d#db= eric&AN=EJ817022
- 12. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 12 Pratt, D. (1997). Terrific teaching. Markham, Ontario, Canada: Pembroke Pub Ltd Romer, T. (2003). Learning and assessment in postmodern education. Educational Theory, 53(3), 313-328. Ross, A. (2000) Curriculum: Construction and critique, London: Falmer Press. Rowland, M. (2010). Curriculum development for adult learners in the global Community. Adult Learning. Arlington, 21(1) 42. Retrieved July 2, 2012, from: http://www.umi.com/ pqdweb?index= 0&did=2078386621&SrchMode=2 &sid=1&Fmt=6&VInst=PROD&V Type=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS= 13412545 27&clientId=14844 Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) 'Curriculum theory and practice' the Encyclopaedia of informal education, www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm. Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development, London: Heinemann. Tyler, R. W. (1949) Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2010). Understanding by design: A brief introduction. Center for Technology & School Change at Teachers College, Columbia University. Retrieved on July 9, 2012, from http://iearn.org/civics/may2003workshop/Understanding%20 by%20Design %20Teaching%20Ellen%20Meier%20CTSC.pdf Retrieved 10/1/2010.