Having the opportunity to look at Curriculum Theory and Practice, it highlights and engages in many different larger concepts relating to the curriculum. Looking through this, we are introduced to new perspectives and approaches by different educators that bring benefits but also drawbacks. Reading this article showed me that curriculum understanding has been adjusted and changed throughout history and is always evolving.
When answering the first question and thinking about the ways in which I may have experienced the Tyler rationale in my schools, I realize that I have seen different components of this approach. Many of the classes I took followed a lecture-oriented approach with a focus applied to examinations throughout the semester. In classes that approached curriculum through a traditionalist perspective, I experienced the different points highlighted in Tyler’s rationale and technical procedure such as steps 1-7 ( Smith, 1996, 2000, pg. 4). In Step 1: Diagnosis of need, many teachers explained what it is that needs to be memorized throughout the class. Step 2: Formulation of Objectives: teachers would establish objectives in understanding the topic and in step 3: Selection of content, educators would apply material from one source such as the textbook for the course. For step 4: Organization of content, the teachers I experienced would often have weekly plans established and discussed at the start of the week. Step 5: Selection of learning experiences, would be done through one format of lecturing, and for step 6: Organization of learning experiences teachers would sometimes struggle yet settle on different lessons each day. Finally step 7: The determination of what to evaluate was done through exams. Many teachers liked this approach and structure to learning because it organizes power. All of these different steps can fall within the larger points of Tyler’s theory such as; What educational purposes should schools seek to attain, the experiences provided to attain these purposes, how experiences are organized, and determining whether purposes are being attained ( Smith, pg. 4).
Answering the second question of what are the limitations of this rationale we see there are multiple. The first is that the plan assumes great importance ( Smith, pg. 4) The different plans and programs of the curriculum exist prior to and outside of the learning experiences. This takes away from learners and develops into a loss of voice, simply being told what to learn and how they will do it ( Smith, pg. 4). This can also stem into loss of interaction between students and teachers. The second limitation involves the nature of the objective and implying that behaviour can be objectively measured ( Smith, pg. 4). This can cause judgment to be sidelined. Third, is it limits how we can examine what educators do in the classroom and finally there is limitation of unanticipated results ( Smith, pg. 4).
In the third question, when looking at this approach we can see there are also different benefits that it brings. The first is that for educators it allows for systematic understanding and has organizable power ( Smith, pg. 4). Secondly, is the approach in understanding behavioral objectives and providing a clear notion of outcomes so that content can be organized and evaluated (Smith, pg.4).
Having the chance to examine different approaches highlighted in these readings helped me further understand the scale of the curriculum. Every aspect has different benefits as well as drawbacks for teachers and students. When using these approaches it is vital to make sure they work for students.
Smith, M K. (1996, 2000). ‘Curriculum Theory and practice’, the encyclopedia of informal education, What is curriculum? Exploring theory and practice – infed.org: