LECTURE 3

CURRICULUM DESIGN
3.1 Introduction
Curriculum design is described as one of the three major content areas in curriculum studies.
It generally refers to the way in which the component parts or elements of the curriculum have
been arranged in order to facilitate instruction. Hence, curriculum design is about the
structure, pattern or organization of the curriculum. The scope of this topic will include:
Definition of Curriculum Design
Elements of Curriculum
Models of Curriculum Design
3.2 Lecture Objectives
3.2.1 Explain the meaning of curriculum design
3.2.2 Discuss the elements of curriculum design
3.2.3 Discuss the various models of curriculum design

1.2.1 THE CONCEPT OF CURRICULUM DESIGN

Curriculum design refers to the process of organizing or arranging subject matter in a
programme of instruction. According to Bishop (1985) curriculum design refers to building
the instructional programmes which involve:
i. A survey of the chosen curriculum area by panels of teachers and others leading to a
precise statement of the subject objectives.
ii. The selection and organization of learning experiences, content and building the teaching
–learning units
iii. The consideration of teaching techniques, methods and approaches

1.2.2 ELEMENTS OF CURRICULUM DESIGN

The general elements of curriculum design cut across all the models of curriculum design. These
elements are derived from the Tyler’s four fundamental questions for curriculum planning (See
the discussion under the models of curriculum design). Tyler proposes four main elements of
curriculum design namely:
i. Selection of learning objectives
ii. Selection of learning experiences
iii. Organization of learning experiences
iv. Evaluation

1.2.2.1 Selection of learning objectives

 Providing learning objectives to students can promote learning with loosely organized and
less structured activities such as lectures. Bloom’s (2001) taxonomy of learning objectives
came up with three domains; cognitive, affective and psychomotor.
Cognitive Domain
The cognitive objectives are listed in the Bloom’s Taxonomy of thinking which has six basic
types arranged in hierarchy
i. Knowledge: Remembering or recognizing something without necessarily
understanding, using or changing it.
ii. Comprehension-understanding the material being communicated without necessarily
relating it to anything else.
iii. Application- using general concept to solve a particular problem
iv. Analysis- Breaking something down into its parts
v. Synthesis- Creating something new by combining different ideas
vi. Evaluation- Judging the value of materials or methods as they might be applied in a
particular situation

Affective domain
The objectives of this domain run from the least committed to the most committed emotional
responses. There five basic objectives of this domain:
Receiving-being aware of or attending to something in the environment
Responding- Showing some new behaviour as a result of experience.
Valuing -showing some definite involvement of commitment
Organization- integrating a new value into one’s general set of values, giving it some ranking
among ones general priorities.
Characterization by value - acting consistently with the new value

Psychomotor domain
Until recently, the psychomotor domain has been overlooked by teachers not directly involved
with Physical Sciences. The domain had four levels
Observing- ability to pay keen interest to someone making a demonstration of a skill
Imitation - copying someone else on the demonstrated skill
Practicing/Mechanism - The intermediate stage in learning a physical skill and responses that are
habitual with a medium level of assurance and proficiency.
Adaptation - Movements can be modified for special situations.

1.2.2.2 Selection of learning experiences

This refers to the identification, list and sorting of the experiences that learners will be
engaged in during the learning process. It involves the identification of both learning
activities and the content to be learnt in class
1.2.2.3 Organization of learning experiences
At this stage the teachers identify the appropriate teaching strategies, approaches and methods of
instruction that will be used to deliver the content and stimulate learning among the learners

1.2.2.4 Evaluation
The process of evaluation is used to gauge the extent to which the learning objectives have been
achieved or actualized. There are four types of evaluation which are commonly used in
curriculum evaluation; situational analysis, formative, summative and impact.
1.2.3 MODELS OF CURRICULUM DESIGN
The way we set about designing curriculum follows logically from what we think
curriculum is. A narrow definition of curriculum, to mean content or subject matter, is
still found in the academic disciplines of the present education systems. Curriculum
scholars have developed models that can be used to analyze and understand better the
nature and process of curriculum. These Include
i. The Tyler Model
ii. The Taba Model
iii. Kerr Model
iv. Wheeler Model
v. The Skilbeck Model
vi. Oluoch model

1.2.3.1 The Tyler Model

One of the traditional curriculum texts that is most widely remembered today is the Basic
Principles of Curriculum and Instruction or the Tyler Model as it is popularly known. It
attempts to explain a rationale for viewing, analyzing and interpreting the curriculum and
instructional programme of an educational institution.
Tyler starts by raising four fundamental questions which have to be answered if the process of
curriculum planning is to proceed. These basic questions are:
i. What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?
ii. What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these purposes?
iii. How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?
iv. How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained? (Tyler, 1949)

The four questions raised by Tyler may be formulated into a simple four-step process by which a
curriculum is planned and developed.
 STEP 1: Objectives
↓
 STEP 2: Selection of learning experiences
↓
  STEP 3: Organization of learning experiences
↓
 STEP 4: Evaluation

Step 1: Objectives
The first step is the most crucial one in this model since all the others proceed from, and are
regulated by, the statement of objectives. If we are to study an educational programme
systematically and intelligently, we must first be sure of the educational objectives, this model is
sometimes referred to as the ‘Objectives’ model and is a prototype of all other subsequent
models that stress the objectives, as well as those which do not emphasize objectives.
Tyler’s elaboration on educational objectives is a description of the three sources of these
objectives.
1. Study of the learners. Education is a process of changing the behaviour patterns of
people, their thoughts, feelings, attitudes as well as overt behaviour. Hence, educational
objectives represent the kinds of changes in behaviour that the school seeks to bring
about in the pupils. A study of the learners themselves would seek to identify needed
changes in the behaviour pattern of the pupil which the school should seek to produce.
The needs of the learner should be perceived both in terms of his individuality and
society at large so that we can talk of physical needs.

2. Study of contemporary life in society. As a social institution, the school is supposed to

prepare the youth for life in the society. Therefore, the school curriculum should closely
reflect what goes on in society outside the school. The idea of job analysis as developed
by Wrett Charters is a method of analyzing the activities carried out by a worker in a
particular field. These activities are then incorporated into the school curriculum to
prepare those youth who may opt for such trades as a productive activity on leaving
school. The problems that will interest the curriculum planners are those important ones
that appear to have continuing or persistent concerns to most of the people in the society.
3. Suggestions from subject specialists. This is the source commonly used in typical
schools and colleges especially where subjects still form the main basis of the curriculum.
School courses are usually prepared by subject specialists and these represent their
conception of objectives that the school should attempt to attain. Specialists also
dominate the writing of books and most of these books largely reflect their views. Since
we still depend very much on the subject matter to design the school curriculum, the
expertise of the subject specialist becomes vital.

The objectives arrived at from the three sources should be filtered through philosophical and
psychological ‘screens’, in order to arrive at the final, refined objectives. Once the crucial first
step of stating the objectives is accomplished, the model proceeds through the steps of selection
and organization of learning experiences as a means of achieving the already stated objectives
and finally evaluating whether or not the objectives have been achieved.
Step 2: Selection of Learning Experiences
Tyler defines and outlines the types of learning experiences and also proposes the general
principle or criteria for selecting such experiences.
Step 3: Organization of Learning Experiences
Similarly, he defines what he means by organization and provides criteria, principles and
structures for organizing learning experiences. These refers to the teaching strategies used in
schools; direct and indirect approaches.
Step 4: Evaluation
Evaluation according to Tyler is essentially the process of determining to what extent the
educational objectives are actually being realized by the programme of curriculum and
instruction (Tyler, 1949 p. 105). Based on this definition, he provides the basis or notions
regarding evaluation and proposes the need, process and the use of evaluation results.
To Tyler, then, evaluation is a process by which one matches initial expectations, in the form of
behaviour objectives, with outcomes.
NB.
All through Tyler’s model, objectives stand out as very basic. Statements of objectives not only
serve as the basis for selection and organization of learning experiences, but also as the standards
against which the programme is assessed. What is, however, important with such conception of
curriculum planning is its practicality and the component for appraising the success of a
curriculum venture.

3.2.3.2 The Tyler Model

Hilda Taba (1962) perceives the curriculum as containing certain basic elements. These include
aims and objectives, content, learning experiences and evaluation. In any curriculum design,
these must be selected on the basis of certain considerations such as the principles of learning
and ideas about the nature of the learners and of knowledge. Taba’s ideas can be presented
conceptually as shown in the Figure below:

Objectives

Evaluation Learning experiences

Content

Fig. The Taba’s model for curriculum development

The model is basically the same as that of Tyler, because Taba also emphasizes the vital
importance of objectives, when she categorically states that:
It is impossible to make good decisions about the method of learning and teaching apart
from considering objectives that students should attain… (Taba, 1971, p. 140).
One notable difference is that Taba makes content very conspicuous probably subsuming
Tyler’s element of ‘organization of learning experiences’.
The Taba model also emphasizes the fact of interrelatedness or relationships among the
elements. She insists that:
It is especially important for a curriculum design to make clear how the various elements
and the criteria or considerations connected with them are related to each other. A
decision made about any one element out of relationship to others is bound to be faulty,
because each element of curriculum requires meaning and substance in the pattern that
encompasses all others (Ibid, p. 141).
A simple relationship between the elements in this model is that aims and objectives will
determine what type of content and learning experiences to select and it will influence the nature
and process of evaluation.

3.2.3.3 The Wheeler Model

Wheeler (1967) seems to react to the simplicity of the Tyler model and especially to its linear
nature. He converts Tyler’s original ideas into a cyclic form and offers a five-stage model of the
curriculum process. This is a cyclical rather than a linear model and links up evaluation with the
formulation of objectives to create a continuous cycle.
The first step of Wheeler’s model is the statement of aims, goals and objectives. He gives a
detailed account of this part of the ‘Curriculum Process’, what is involved in this procedure of
breaking down aims and goals into behavioural objectives. The general aims of the school are
analyzed and written as types of behaviour which illustrate the general aims and pin-point the
end product of schooling.

Aims, goals and objectives Selection of learning experiences

Evaluation Selection of content

Organization and integration

of learning experience

Fig: The Wheeler Model for curriculum development

These are further broken down into goals which are applicable at different stages of learning and
further, into goals achievable in a shorter period of time and lastly, into specific -instructional
goals.
Wheeler uses the four terms - ultimate, mediate, proximate and specific classroom objectives - to
describe the goals in this process. Wheeler requires that while planning the curriculum we work
through a system of different levels of aims from the general to the specific.
Like Tyler, he then moves on to the selection of learning experiences, but he differentiates
between ‘learning experiences’ and ‘content’.
The next two stages in this process are the organization and integration of learning
experiences, and evaluation. The model describes a process which is continuous, and does not
end at the ‘evaluation’ stage.
Except for the cycle nature of the curriculum process, there is no significant conceptual
difference between this model and that of Tyler. The first step in the Wheeler model is the
statement of aims, goals and objectives and as in the Tyler model, the subsequent stages in the
curriculum process all hinge on this first step. The Wheeler model does not, however, bring out
the dynamic interrelatedness. Evaluation appears to be standing last in the model and yet many
would claim that the influence of evaluation on curriculum planning should be a continuous
process rather than being delayed until the exercise is over.
3.2.3.4 Kerr’s Model
John Kerr’s work is one of the earliest attempts in Britain to analyze and map out the field of
curriculum. In his paper The Problem of Curriculum Reform (Kerr 1968), he was particularly
concerned with the following issues:
i. How far is it possible to develop a curriculum theory?
ii. What are the most appropriate models to start with?
iii. How can we arrive at a consensus of view about educational objectives?
iv. How should we take account of individual differences in children?
v. What are the contributions of philosophy, psychology, sociology and history to
curriculum development?

Curriculum objectives

Knowledge Curriculum evaluation

Learning experiences

Fig: A simplified form of Kerr’s curriculum model

These questions influenced Kerr as he came up with a rather complicate model. In its simple
form, he divides the domain of curriculum into four areas: objectives, knowledge, school
learning experiences and evaluation. This simpler model can be conceptualized as shown in the
above figure.
Kerr proposes that, first, an attempt at a synthesis of a model in brief outline dealing with
objectives, knowledge, learning experiences and evaluation in turn should be made. This should
then be followed by a consideration of the implications of the model, for educational practice.
Kerr, therefore, went beyond the basic quadratic model to develop a more complicated
model in specific operational terms rather than in conceptual terms as illustrated in the figure
below.
Keer singles out objectives as very important and advises starting with the objectives
section of the model as the most logical, although he emphasizes that in his model, everything
influences everything else and it is possible to start an analysis at any point. It is, however,
imperative that the objectives should de identified first for the purpose of curriculum planning as
we cannot and should not decide ‘what’ or ‘how’ to reach any situation until we know ‘why’ we
are doing it (Kerr, 1971, p. 184).
Like Tyler, & Wheeler, John Kerr also emphasizes the objectives, understands them in
the same way ‘as changes in pupil behaviour’ (Ibid, p. 185), and specifies the learner, society and
disciplines as the source of objectives. This enhances the pupils’ needs and interests, the social
conditions and problems which the learners are likely to encounter, the nature of subject matter
and the views of subject specialists. The discussion of objectives, thus, plays a major part in
Kerr’s model.
Kerr’s model, like any other model on curriculum may not be of great help to the
ordinary practitioner. It is rather complicated and it seems as if the selection of the various
components was done arbitrarily. It is generally similar to the Tyler and Wheeler models, but at
least it tries to show the interrelatedness of the components and indicates all the different
pressures that one is usually under when seeking to change or revise the school programme.
Fig: A model for curriculum theory
So far, the models that we have discussed do not differ significantly from what Tyler
offered. These ‘objective’ models or what Paul Hirst (1967) called ‘procedures’ are associated
with ‘progressive’ education and the form of curriculum which we see in most elementary
schools. The models are mainly concerned with the change of behaviour in the learner, the
methods of learning e.g. the project work method, the inquiry method and the discovery method.
They have been criticized for paying very little attention to the content of what is to be learnt.
And above all they are still simplistic in nature and fail to provide explicit criteria for various
curriculum processes. To meet this problem, curriculum scholars have continued to develop
more sophisticated and guiding models for curriculum planning.

3.3 Further Activity – Assignment

1. Discuss some of the reasons why the Gibert Oluoch (1982) model of curriculum
design may be the most applicable to the Kenyan situation.
 2. Visit the Machakos university library website and compare and contrast the Tyler
(1949) and Denis Lawton models of curriculum design.
3.4 Self-Test Questions
1. Explain any three elements of curriculum design
2. Discuss any of the following models of curriculum design
i. Professor Skilbeck(1973)
ii. Denis Lawton(1975)
iii. Gilbert Oluoch (1982)
3. Discuss how the models of curriculum design have influenced the curriculum
development process in Kenya