CHAPTER 5

MODELS OF
CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT
 Models of Curriculum Development
Any significant change specifically in the
society’s system always requires a model.
Henson (2009) defines it as a set of logical
relationships, either qualitative or quantitative,
that will link together the relevant features of
the reality. Functionally, models are used to
represent events and events interactions in a
highly compact and illustrative manner.
Remember a model is not a reality, it is like a
painting or a story, it is visual or written
description of someone’s perception of reality.
 The most simple and clear model is the AIM. It
starts with objectives and moves in the single
direction shown by the arrows. It consists of both
student activities and teacher activities, but no
foundation elements and no philosophy
statement.
 Figure 5.1

Teacher Student Test

Objectives Content Materials
Activities Activities Activities
 Tyler’s End’s-Means Model
This ends-means model of tyler introduced a
revolutionary idea to curriculum planning. According to
Tyler, the curriculum developer should start by deciding
what purposes the curriculum is to have and then plan
accordingly. Today, this approach seems embarrassingly
simple, but it was revolutionary at the time, since no
curriculum developer had ever presented such model. He
suggested that several ends, which he called goals,
educational objectives, and purposes, be identified by
examining five elements: the learners, life in the
community, subject matter, and psychology.
 Figure 5.2 TYLER’S MODEL

Ends Means
Philosophy, Curriculum
Aims, Goals, Content and
and Objectives Activities
 The Student as a Source
Tyler considered that a broad and
comprehensive analysis of the student should
be completed. The curriculum developer
should determine the learner’s needs and
wants, since that information can help
educators in motivating the student to learn.
The students abilities must also be counted.
 Society as a Source
Tyler explained that the process of
generating was central to all learning.
Because the learner needs to understand
the environment, interacting with others is
essential. This makes the local community
and the society at large the students’
learning laboratory. By studying the
community and the society, the students
can find problems to solve and ways of
solving them.
 Subject Matter as a Source
Tyler was seriously influenced by John Dewey, who
emphasized learning by doing. He was also inspired by
Jerome Bruner who wrote about the structure of
knowledge. They said (and Tyler agreed) that, to
master a subject, one must understand its underlying
structure.
 Philosophy as a Source
Tyler said, sound curriculum development
begins with sound thinking, and sound thinking
begins by formulating a philosophy. He believed
it is necessary to define a shool’s philosophy. In
case Tyler were to guide others in curriculum
development, he would assert that teachers spell
out both their own individual philosophies and
that of their school. In this respect, Tyler’s
model reflects the realization that to
understand others you must first understand
yourself. To serve others you must understand
both the serving agency (the school) and
yourself.
 Psychology as a Source
Tyler believed that effective curriculum requires
understanding the learners’ levels of development and
the nature of the learning process. This understanding
helps to refine the list of objectives. Curriculum
workers should use philosophy and psychology as
“screens,” filtering out objectives that are beyond
students’ capacity to attain and those that run counter
to the faculty’s philosophy (Oliva, 2009).
Aligning content with expectations reflects the
constructivist philosophy. Tyler’s philosophy involved
beginning with what we want the students to know
and be able to do, and then designing the content and
activities accordingly. Might we say that teachers
should begin designing every lesson by examining
their own philosophies? Each of us can use our unique
philosophy and expectations to design goals, content,
and activities.
 THE SAYLOR AND ALEXANDER MODEL
Galen Saylor and William Alexander (1974)
introduced a model consisting of four steps (Figure
5.5). According to them, curriculum is “a plan for
providing sets of learning opportunities to achieve
broad educational goals and related specific
objectives for an identifiable population served by
single school centre” .
Figure 5.5 SAYLOR AND
ALEXANDER’S CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT MODEL
a. Goals, Objectives and Domains
The model indicates that curriculum planners start by
specifying the major educational goals and specific objectives
they wish to accomplish. Every major goal represents a
curriculum domain and they advocate four major goals or
domains:

1. Personal development, 2. Human Relations, 3. Continued

learning skills and 4. Specialization.

The goals, objectives and domains are chosen after careful

consideration of several and external variables such as
findings from educational research, accreditation standards,
views of community groups and others.
b. Curriculum Designing

When the goals, objectives and domains have

been established,
planners move into the process of designing the
curriculum.
Here, decision is made on the appropriate
learning opportunities for each domain and
how and when these opportunities will be
provided.
c. Curriculum Implementation
Once the designs have been developed, the next step
is implementation of the designs by teachers. Based
on the design of the

curriculum plan, teachers would specify

instructional objectives and then select relevant
teaching methods and strategies to

achieve the desired learning outcomes among

students in the classroom.
d. Evaluation
Lastly, curriculum planners and teachers engage in evaluation. It
is proposed the evaluation should be comprehensive using a

variety of evaluation techniques. Evaluation should involve the

total educational programme of the school and curriculum

plan, the effectiveness of instruction and the achievement of

students. Through the evaluation process, curriculum planners

and developers can determine whether or not the goals of the

school and the objectives of instruction have been met.
THE OLIVA MODELS

1976 MODEL

Statement Statement
Statement Design of Implemen
of of Evaluation
of Goals Plan -tation
Philosophy Objectives
 Specify
Specify
students
need in
society I – IV and VI – IX: Planning Phases
needs
general V: Planning and Operational Phases
X – XII: Operational Phases
Specify
particular
student needs
1992 EXPANDED MODEL
Specify Specify
educational aims/ Specify Specify Organize and Specify Specify
particular
philosophy and curriculum curriculum implement instructional instructional
beliefs about community curriculum
goals objectives goals objectives
learning needs

Specify
particular
subject needs

I II III IV V VI VII

Preliminary
Organize and Final selection
Select selection of Evaluation of Evaluation of
implement of evaluation
strategies evaluation instruction curriculum
curriculum techniques
techniques

VIII IXA X IXB XI XII

USE OF THE MODEL
1.Offers a process for the complete development of a
school’s curriculum .
2.Faculty can focus on the curricular components of the
model to make pragmatic decisions.
3.Faculty can concentrate on the instructional
components
Macdonald perceived teaching as a
personality system (the teacher)
acting in a professional role and
learning as a personality system
(the student) performing task related
(learning) behaviors.
He defined the intersecting parts of the
diagram as follow:

V. Concomitant learning CURRICULUM

VI. Behavior modification through I
teacher feedback
VII. In-service experiences VII IX
Teaching Learning
VIII. Supervision experiences VIII X
II IV
IX. Pupil-teacher planning experiences VI V
X. Pupil-teacher planning experiences
Instruction
II
This artistic approach to curriculum
planning by Eliot W. Eisner was
developed with combination of his
interests in art and education
curriculum. It comprises seven
components which are follows:

 The goals and their priorities.

 The content of curriculum.
 The types of learning opportunities.
 The organization of learning
opportunities.
 The organization of content areas.
 The mode of presentation and the
mode of response.
 The types of evaluation procedure.
This model involves five stages.
According to Robert Diamond,
 Assessment
 Goals
 Design of Curriculum
 Implementation
 Revision
Diamond mentioned several benefits of his model.
According to him:
 The model is easy to use, sequential and cost-
effective.
 It can be used for the design of redesign of
courses, curricula, workshops and seminars in
every subject area.
 The programs developed will meet demands for
clear statement for learning outcomes with an
associated quality student assessment process.
It is politically sensitive.
 It also ensures that all important questions are
asked and all option are explored before key
decisions are made. (Diamond, 2007)
This model used the deliberative
approach in curriculum planning.
Walker begun studying what people
actually do when planning curricula.
Walker’s Naturalistic Model is a descriptive
model. Let us discuss his step.

 The first phase of the model is called the

platform.
 The second phase is the deliberation.

 The final stage ii the design phase is the

creation of the planned curriculum
Walker’s model provides guidelines to
follow in the planning curriculum. However,
there are more criticism about this model.
First, Walker studied only large-scale
curriculum planning. Secondly, the
deliberative approach is directed only to the
planning of the curriculum. After the
curriculum is designed, there is no
description about implementation,
evaluation and possible revision of the
curriculum. (Marsh, 2007)
 PARTICIPANTS IN
CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT and
PLANNING
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
• Students
• Principals
• Parents
• Curriculum Specialists
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
Teachers
Teacher must fill the main position in curriculum decision
which parts of the curriculum, newly developed or on-
going to implement or stress in a particular class.
Teacher determine how much time to spend in
developing basic or critical – thinking skills.
Teacher must also be involved in every level of curriculum
development. As Michael Fullan and his colleagues have
stated, teachers can function not only as co-designers of
expert curricular and instructional system but also co-
researchers into the effectiveness of implement
curricula. Many schools are starting to allow teachers to
choose or develop the program for which they are
responsible.
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
• Students
Students
Students too must have a voice in curriculum
development. Their input is significant in its
own right, accepting them to participate in
curriculum development also inspires them and
encourages them to take responsibility for
matters that concern them.
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
• Students
• Principals
Principals
For a successful curriculum planning in a school
system, the principal(s) must be involved. Yet, many
principals are solely lacking in curriculum and
instructional expertise. When principals give
attention to curricular activities, they often do so
from a largely managerial perspective. Recently,
most college programs that teach and train
principals devoted little time to curriculum. Mostly
their were stressed on personnel matters, education
law, school budget, and organizational models, to
the detriment of curriculum and instruction.
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
• Students
• Principals
• Parents
Parents
On the other hand, the parents support and influence the
implementation of the curriculum by means of financial
resources, an example is by their contribution for the public
schools while in private schools is by means of payment of
school fees. Moreover, the parents may help in monitoring
and evaluating the implementation of the curriculum by
keeping a close check at the lessons learnt in school and
monitoring their children’s school task(homework). Hence,
the parent ,ay stand in the gap between the student and
school administration by providing the student with resources
that may help teacher to monitor the behavior and social
development of the students especially for students with
special education needs. The parents can get consistent
information on curriculum development by asking from their
children or by asking from the teachers or school
administrators.
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
• Students
• Principals
• Parents
• Curriculum Specialists
Curriculum Specialists
The curriculum specialists play a major role in curriculum development and
development and implementation while curriculum coordinators or directors
usually are known as curriculum generalist have same function. These people
have a broad knowledge of curriculum and are experts in creating and
implementing curricula. They usually do not have a major in specific content.
In school curriculum, other generalists are known as department heads or
chairs of elementary or secondary education. They have some background in
curriculum, but they posses a major in a content discipline and are often
more concerned with supervising instruction.
These specialists are responsible for ensuring that programs are
conceptualized, designed, and implement. They are also expected to have
considerable understanding of curriculum and skill in managing people.
Curriculum specialists need to know how to design and develop curriculum
and how to supervise and evaluate instruction.
Participants in Curriculum Development and
Planning
• Teachers
• Students
• Principals
• Parents
• Curriculum Specialists
• Superintendents
GOAL-BASED MODEL OF
CURRICULUM
PLANNING,
THE PHILIPPINE
EXPERIENCE
 Outcome Goals of the K to12 Basic Education Program

The K to 12 Basic Education Program seeks to realize the following:

• Philippine education standards to be at par with international standards
• More emotionally mature graduates equipped with technical and/or
vocational skills who ae better prepared for work, middle level skills
development and higher education
• Significantly addressed shortages or gaps in educational inputs (teacher
items, school head items, classroom, instructional materials)
• Broadened and strengthened stakeholder’s
support in the improvement in the basic
education outcomes
• Improved internal efficiency
• Improved system of governance in the
Department
• Improved quality of teachers
 Process Goals of the K to 12 Basic Education
Program
• Decongest and reform the basic education curriculum in
coordination with CHED, TESDA, and other educational
stakeholders
• Develop culture-sensitive, culture responsive and developmentally
appropriate print/print online learning resources for K to 12
• Conduct in service training for teachers relative to the
implementation of the K to 12 curriculum
• Focus on integrated instruction to equip learners with skills for
future employment , critical and creative thinking in life skills
• Universalize kindergarten by 2012
• Institutionalize school-based management for school
empowerment
• Institute reform in assessment framework and
practice for a learner-centered basic education
• Address basic input shortages in classrooms,
teachers, textbooks
• Promote good education governance in the entire
Department of Education
• Pursue legislation to institutionalize K to 12
Basic Education Program
• Formulate transition management plan for K
to 12 implementation by including modeling
per region per specialization
• Identify K to 12 model schools per region and
per specialization tracks that will model senior
high school by SY 2012-2013
Determine the Focal Point of Planning Decision
• The three most important sectors of society that give direct
input to the improvement of the curriculum are the :
• Academe (Institution)
• The industries (both public and private companies)
• And the government and its agencies
 The Organizational Structures
– The country’s educational structure for the primary education as
clearly defined by the Republic Act 10533, stated that,
‘‘To achieve an effective enhanced basic education curriculum, the
DepEd shall undertake consultation with other national government
agencies and other stakeholders including, but not limited to, the
Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE), the Professional
Regulation Commission (PRC), the private and public schools
associations, the national student organization, the national teacher
organizations, the parent-teachers associations and the chambers of
commerce on matters affecting the concerned stakeholder”
– Furthermore, this law also described the role and
function of the government agency which will
implement the educational reform and it states
that; ‘‘The DepEd shall adhere to the following
standards and principles in developing the
enhanced basic education curriculum.
a) The curriculum shall be learner-cenetered,
inclusive and developmentally appropriate;
b) The curriculum shall relevant, responsive and
research-base;
c) The curriculum shall be culture-sensitive;
d) The curriculum shall be contextualized and
global;
f) The curriculum shall adhere to the principles and
framework of Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual
Education (MTB-MLE) which starts from where the
learners are and from what they already knew
proceeding from the known to the unknown;
instructional materials are capable teachers to
implement the MTB-MLE curriculum shall be available;
g) The curriculum shall use the spiral progression
approach to ensure mastery of knowledge and skills
after each level; and
h) The curriculum shall be flexible enough to enable and
allow schools to localize, indigenize and enhance the
same based on their respective educational and social
contexts. The production and development of locally
produced teaching materials shall devolve to the
regional and division education units.
 Rationale for The Curriculum Review and Planning
Towards K to 12 Program
• The Philippine, Basic education system is composed of 6 years of
elementary and four years of secondary education- a total of ten
years. Only two other countries have the same 10 year education
system in the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural
Oragnization’s (UNESCO) 155 member countries in the Asian region
such as Brunei, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Lao PDR,
Malaysia, Mongolia, South Korea, Thailand, Timor-Leste and
Vietnam (which have 12 years of basic education), or Myanmar and
Singapore (which have 11 years). Developed and developing
countries in Europe such as England have a 14 year basic
education; Scotland has 13, Russia has 11, and the United States of
America also has 12.
Indeed, this enhance program is rooted on sound
educational principles and geared towards
excellence. It is anticipated that graduates of K to
12 basic education program will be an
empowered individual. They are expected to have
learned the foundations of learning throughout
life, the competence to engage in work and be
productive, the ability to co exist in fruitful
harmony with local and global communities, the
capability to engage in autonomous critical
thinking and the capacity to reconstruct others
and one’s self and others.
 Implications
• In curriculum development planning, it is important that we need
to determine the focal point of planning decision.
• The initial task of curriculum developers is identification of an
educational vision or philosophy which will form basis of planning
• Curriculum development starts with understanding of the major
challenges involved
• Those creating a master curriculum planning, designs, curriculum
guides for a particular course of study, or lesson plan for a
particular year or even a day whether educational administrators or
educators, are essentially engaged in all stage discussed in this
chapter