MICHELLE B.

BRITANICO BEED 3-A PROF ED 7

ACTIVITY #11
Reflect on and address the following:
1.Review the linear curriculum development models.
LINEAR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT MODELS
● the linear models of curriculum development prescribe a rational step-by-step procedure
for curriculum development starting with objectives.
A.Tylers Rational Linear Model(Ralph Tyler)
● developed the first model of curriculum development.
● argued that curriculum development should be logical and systematic.
● argued that to develop any curriculum,curriculum workers should
respond to four basic question.
● Also identified three curriculum sources:
1. Society
2. Students
3. Subject matter
B.Taba's Grassroots Rational Model(Hilda Taba)
● Presented her model in her book Curriculum Development
● Argued that curriculum development should follow a sequential and logical process and
suggested for more information input in all phases of curriculum development.
● Also claimed that all curricula are composed fundamental elements.
● Also suggested that curriculum development could be made successful if there was a
diagnosis of needs.
C.Standards-based Curriculum Development Model(Allan Glatthorn)
● Intended for developing curriculum standards for any discipline from basic education to
higher education.
● This has three phases to be followed;
1. Develop standards
2. Develop benchmarks
3. Develop final products
● Is an example of linear and rationale curriculum development model.
D.Understanding by Design Model/UBD(Wiggins and Mctighe)
● Also called as the Backward Design there are three stages:
1. Identify desired results
2. Determine acceptable evidence
3. Plan the learning experiences and instruction
E.Systematic Design Model(Robert Diamond)
● Developed the systematic design model in the Early 1960's.
● Has two basic phases:
1. Project Selection and Design
2. Production,Implementation,and Evaluation for each unit
● Prescriptive and rational
F.Murray Print Model for Curriculum Development(Murray Print)
● Prescribes a sequential and logical approach to curriculum development to provide a
useful and easy-to-understand process in developing curriculum.
2.Identify the possible strengths and weaknesses of each model when applied to the
Philippine context.

CURRICULUM STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

DEVELOPMENT
MODELS

TYLER'S RATIONAL ● provides an easy ● it overlooks the

LINEAR step-by-step in planning unpredictable nature
DEVELOPMENT and delivery process of teaching and
● provide a logical sequence learning.
of curriculum element ● the objectives model

TABA'S GRASSROOTS ● Gifted students begin
RATIONAL MODEL thinking of a concept, then
dive deeper into that
concept Focuses on
open-ended questions
rather than right/wrong
questions The
open-endedness requires
more abstract thinking, a
benefit to our gifted
students The questions
and answers lend
themselves to rich
classroom discussion Easy
to assess student learning
The Taba model
encourages higher-order
thinking skills in the
classroom
● It allows students to start
with a concept and dig
deeper into that particular
concept.
STANDARDS-BASED ● Students are completely
CURRICULUM aware of what they are
DEVELOPMENT expected to know or be
MODEL able to do.
● The standards are clear
and precise, often written
in kid-friendly language.
● Standards-based
instruction guides planning
and instruction and helps
teachers keep their focus
on the learning target.
UNDERSTANDING BY ● Enables student-centered
DESIGN MODEL(UBD) learning.
● Makes learning interesting
and multi-dimensional.
● Develops teacher's
creativity.
has flaws in terms of
the reality of
curriculum
development which is
rarely a fixed or linear
process.
● Can be difficult for
non-gifted students to
grasp Difficult for
heterogeneous
classrooms The Taba
model is not an easy
instructional method
to grasp, making it
more of a challenge to
students of all
backgrounds.
● This method of
teaching is harder to
use across the
curriculum.
● Taba's inductive
model may not appeal
to curriculum
developers who prefer
to consider the more
global aspects of the
curriculum before
proceeding to
specifics.
● standards should be
created for each
individual student.
those out of touch
with students, such as
businesspeople and
politicians, will remain
unreasonable, and
educational practices
will be reduced to
bean counting.
● By pursuing
achievement based
on a rigid set of goals,
children are missing
the pleasure and
motivation connected
with simply solving a
problem.
● Students who work
only for points do not
understand that
"knowledge matters"
and that "active
processing of
information is the only
reliable way to acquire
knowledge."
● Requires a lot of
teacher prep time.
● Works for students
who can think and
conceptualize on
higher levels.
 ● Provides better curriculum
plan.
● Opens door to different
learning modalities.
● Holds teachers responsible
for learning environment.
SYSTEMATIC DESIGN ● Creates curriculum that
MODEL focuses on how students
learn, as well as course
Content Continual
assessments are used to
see if the new curriculum is
doing what it was designed
to do Reduced number of
"Turf Wars" - People
fighting for their subject
area
● Involves many different
views (administration,
faculty, and other
stakeholders)
MURRAY PRINT ● Sequential and logical
MODEL FOR approach to curriculum
CURRICULUM development
DEVELOPMENT ● Recognizes the nature of
involved curriculum
workers
● Embraces the principles of
cyclical and dynamic
models. Embraces the
principles of cyclical and
models.
● Inclusion of instructional
evaluation, monitoring, and
feedback system
● Can be used in any level of
curriculum development.
● Renders confusion
and complexity when
issues arise in the
initial framework.
● Misconceptions arises
between
teacher-perceived
essential content
verses priorities of
state-based high
stakes testing.
● Challenges existing
classroom curriculum
structures set by
teacher's teaching
aesthetics.
● success depends on
teamwork within a
school's faculty.
● A school with a very
divided staff will not
work.
● Unclear where the
philosophy of the
institution and
philosophy of the
curriculum will come
into play.
● Weak link between
curriculum presage
and situational
analysis
● Lack of
contextualization of
curriculum
● Assumption that all
teachers & developers
understand curriculum
theory & elements.
● Reflection of reality