I have experienced the Tyler rationale in my own schooling in many different ways. Primarily in the grading system. In Saskatchewan, they have reading tests with grades that you get based on the level that you should be at in each grade of school that you are in. I always failed these tests because they were based on speed and not comprehension. I was and still am a very slow reader however I could pass any test of knowledge quiz after reading any book. So, because I did not reach the speed goal of reading my teachers said that I was behind in my reading skills. It was because of these standardized tests that I believed that I was a horrible reader growing up. When I was in grade 3 my parents had a choice to make. They either had to hold me back a grade or had to get me a personal tutor because I was not passing the standardized tests that accessed grade level. This is a conscience of the Tyler rationale. Because grade 3 reading level was a purpose that was to be attained and then the standardized tests was the way to determine whether the purpose had been attained.

The Limitations of the Tyler rationale are as followed. Because of the way that the Tyler rationale is created it has a set curriculum and lesson plan that is followed with not a lot of room for fluctuation. The teachers are then required to follow the lesson plan and get the students to be able to pass a test at the end of the semester to prove what they ‘learned’ so that they can move on to the next grade. All teachers in each grade are given a list of what they are to teach and that is the curriculum. The issue with this is that there is not a focus on learning but rather a focus on passing the test. The Tyler rationale has a mentality of “when all the items are ticked, the person has passed the course or has learned something” (Page.5). This is not setting students up for success in the future because they will not fully understand a concept or even they may have forgotten it all together because the goal was now learning it was memorizing to be able to pass the test. With the goals that teachers have to obtain it leads both the teachers and the students to not focus on learning the material and thus this has absolutely zero benefits for their future.

The benefits of the Tyler rationale very slim in my opinion. One of the benefits is that in any grade the students will be at the same level in any school. This is good because when switching schools students are easily able to pick up on what is being taught because it is the same in all schools. Also, the focus on specified learning helps students learn what they would need to know for their job in the future. Students are taught for the job that they will need to do. Tyler rationale was started in a time when people were expected to do one job and would only need to know how to do that one job. “One of the attractions of this approach to curriculum theory was that it involved detailed attention to what people needed to know in order to work, live their lives and so on” (Page. 3). This helps people to be able to specialize in things that interest them and focus on that in detail. I do not believe that the strict Tyler rationale is beneficial however I think that it is still in the school system in a less strict way.

Kumashiro describes “commonsense” in many ways in his Writing The problem of Common Sense. He mentions that “commonsense” is something that we do not need to learn but something that we all already know. It is the unwritten ways that we do things, that everyone does but no one is every taught. To him, it is the ‘status quo’ in the world. In talking about “commonsense” he describes how it is different in all areas. In different parts of the world, different cities, even different areas in a city. “Commonsense” can often not be seen unless you are coming in as an outsider.

It is important to pay attention to the “commonsense” and to be able to point them out so that we can root out and change them. He mentioned that it is very common for a bias in race, class, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disabilities, language, age, and other social markers to be overlooked if a “commonsense” is present in those areas. Meaning that if it is “commonsense” that you speak English in the classroom it can be seen as disrespectful to speak any other language. However, if you can recognize the “commonsense” then that construct can change, and we will be able to understand that speaking a different language is not disrespectful it is beautiful.

My “commonsense” that I bring to this class is a westernized idea. I have always known that the teachers are the barres of knowledge and they give that knowledge to the students. Class times are from 9-3 in the morning because that’s when people work the best. The most important subjects are Math, English, and the sciences. And when you are good at these classes it means that you are smart. However, if you are good at Gym, Art, Drama, or any other elective then you are not recognized as being smart. Already in this class, however, I have been able to start questioning these “commonsenses” and begin to look at other options that are true as well.