Tyler Rationale

In the article Curriculum theory and practice, Smith talks about the different ways in which we can approach curriculum, including the Tyler rationale. In my experience I never heard of the Tyler rationale until this class, but throughout high school especially it was somewhat clear that things were done in a systematic way. Teachers did things in a specific order, and in some cases, it was a good thing and in others it would have been better if it had been done differently. The rationale tends to leave little room for flexibility and creativity. It creates the mindset that everything must be done in a certain way and may not work for everyone or be effective for teaching all students.

One nice thing about the rationale is that it provides some stability and consistency, some students do best with that. I think this rationale has its place but I don’t think it should be written in stone as something that all teachers should follow all the time. Sometimes it just isn’t possible to plan and organize everything that happens down to every little thing. And one thing that I have been thinking about when it talks about “selection of learning experiences” in step 5, because you can’t always predict what students are going to learn from, there’s always going to be a kid that will come out of a what you think is a great learning experience and not get anything, which is why you have to continually asses your students and adjust from there.

One of the drawbacks of the rationale is that it puts assessment at the end, which seems to be the way that many teachers still do it, but it might not be the most effective way to do it. You might want to asses at the beginning of a class and all the way through instead of relying on that one assessment point. For example, if you were teaching math at the beginning of the year you might want to assess your students to see what they already know and what they need help on, this would give you a better idea of what you should be teaching.

4 Comments

  1. Leanne Reiman

    Thank you for your post Sarah, and I also did not know of the Tyler rationale prior to reading this article.
    I noticed quite a few positive areas in the rationale such as a teacher knowing what they need to guide their students on (Step 1: Diagnosis of need) along with knowing what they want to achieve regarding that need (Step 2: Formulation of objectives).
    With the Tyler rationale, I do not know if Step 3: Selection of content is rigidly set out; if so, this ideology could negatively affect the teaching/learning process through passing along teachings that may be biased, which would not be one of our goals or objectives as future teachers.
    I agree with your point: “…you can’t always predict what students are going to learn from, there’s always going to be a kid that will come out of a what you think is a great learning experience and not get anything,” and also agree that ongoing assessment throughout the school year would help both students and teachers as the teachers would have tangible results with how their students are doing, and would then know which students to spend more time with, or which areas in their lesson plan needed to be revised to be more effective in reaching their students.
    “The rationale tends to leave little room for flexibility and creativity. It creates the mindset that everything must be done in a certain way and may not work for everyone or be effective for teaching all students.” I agree with your viewpoint, as students absorb knowledge in many different ways, including by “doing” what they are learning, and the surroundings that they are learning in. If the rationale does not permit for using our natural surroundings to teach and learn in, we may be missing out on a good opportunity for learning. In an article titled “The Surprising Benefits of Teaching a Class Outside” written by Jill Suttie, May 14, 2018, she writes that: “Results showed that when the students received outdoor biology lessons, they were significantly more engaged in their next instructional period on all measures than if they’d received biology lessons indoors. This held true for different teachers, different times of day, and different times of year.” I think this is an important finding but without flexibility/creativity in our lesson plans, it would be difficult to implement into a structured curriculum.
    Thank you again for your post as it taught me to see the rationale in a step-by-step process, rather than just concentrating on one feature as I had written in my post.
    Take care, and best wishes for you as you continue along your educational journey. Leanne

    • Leanne Reiman

      Sarah, I apologize as I commented on your post in error. Leanne

      • Leanne Reiman

        Sarah, I was a bit confused about the wording on whose post we are to respond to, though I think that we are still partners for this post. Leanne

  2. Drew Cheers

    Hi Sarah!
    I had not heard about the Tyler Rationale or anything about the different types of curriculum. I agree that a benefit of the rationale is that it is consistent and and straight forward making it easy to follow. Although it is easy to follow I personally do not think this rationale is the best way to approach curriculum. The traditional way of teaching and assessment only works for a percentage of the students leaving the other ones to essentially teach themselves. I think a combo of each different method of curriculum would be the best way to approach it. Letting teaching have the freedom if choosing how they would like to teach and assess their children, as long as they are meeting the outcomes.

Leave a Reply to Leanne Reiman Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *