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:

Beginning ECS 203 I have been introduced to new concepts and terms which play a key role within society, as well as education, cultures, and different traditions. At first, I was unaware of different themes, such as ‘common sense’ and how it impacts every part of our life, along with pedagogy and the different definitions that could be used to describe it. Although, by working in class with others, having class discussions, and engaging in different readings, common sense can be understood further.

To answer the first question of how Kumashiro defines ‘commonsense’ we see that it could be seen as something that everyone knows through different perspectives. This could be traditional beliefs and values upheld by people living within different environments, as well as common routines followed by different people. For example, in Kumashiro’s work it is mentioned that students in Nepal have adjusted to the lecture-practice-exam method of teaching, although when different forms of pedagogy that challenge this common sense are applied, it may result in confusion and questions on behalf of the students. Common sense affects the shape of education, although it needs to be challenged to go against the unquestioned practices of society.

The second question looks at why it is so important to pay attention to common sense and it can be seen that common sense directly impacts education. A major point that needs to be understood is that common sense hides the fact that schools contribute to different forms of oppression. This oppression is then further embedded within schools as common narratives have been considered neutral throughout society. This concern is not just confined to a certain location as Kushmashiro highlights current narratives assume that Nepal’s education is behind America’s and there is a pressing need to catch up. This brings to light that what may serve as common sense to some, could not make any sense to others. Being aware of common sense means realizing it spans across geographical locations, cultures, and inside and outside of the classroom.

Looking into the final discussion question and the common sense understanding of curriculum and pedagogy I bring, comes from experiences as a student and a university student. I initially understood the curriculum as a document; a set of words that needed to be practiced and applied. Through the lens of a student it could be seen that pedagogy varied between different teachers and instructors, for example some used teacher-centered and lecture oriented, while other teachers had different approaches to pedagogy being more learning-centered.  Being located within an educational environment and linking to Kumashiro’s work, it is vital to know that everyone may experience different emotions to the curriculum based on a series of personal factors, perspectives, and experiences. The curriculum to some may be beneficial, while to others it reinforces the common narratives in place. Another understanding I have been able to see is that common sense can be a product of repetition practiced by many.

The journey through ECS 203 will assist me in understanding more about the presence of common narratives and the need to always be aware and pay attention to it. Kumashiro shows us that common sense spans across different locations, and education throughout society. Change is needed to challenge common sense.

Works Cited: Kumashiro, K, Kevin. Against Common Sense: Teaching and Learning Toward Social Justice, 2009, Pg. xxix-xli, The Problem of Common Sense.pdf – Google Drive.