Blog #2
Through my personal experience, the Tyler rationale was most evident in my high school years. Varying from class the class, the majority of the teachers I had gave lessons with a top-down approach. They lectured on content – with the intent of covering curricular outcomes – and we as students took notes. Intelligence, mainly for the core subjects, came down to memorization via paper exams. For most cases, scoring well did not mean understanding how to apply concepts but rather remembering how to define them via test time. From all of the scores on paper, intelligence was then measured as a numerical value. If the required classes were taken and all “behavioral objectives” were met, one could eventually graduate (Smith, 2000, p. 5).
Limitations of the Tyler Rationale:
- Limits the potential of those with individual needs
- Not made for all students to succeed (no adaptations, no alternatives, etc.)
- Limits the potential for creativity
- Limits the ability for students to explore their own curiosities
- Knowledge is typically represented through numerical values
- Top-down approach, students have “little or no voice” (Smith, 2000, p. 4)
- Teachers are viewed only as implementers of the curriculum
Benefits of the Tyler Rationale:
- The Tyler rationale set a precedent for educators and curriculum makers to see what works and what does not
- There is a “clear notion of outcome so that content and method may be organized and the results evaluated,” (Smith, 2000, p. 4)
Source
Smith, M. K. (1996, 2000) ‘Curriculum theory and practice’ the encyclopedia of informal
education, www.infed.org/biblio/b-curric.htm.