Components of the model can be easily used to shape a current curriculum. e.g.

● Objectives What do you want the students to learn?

● Selecting learning experiences - what is the course content and knowledge
to be taught?
● Organizing learning experiences - which teaching/learning methods will you
select?

● Evaluation - How will you assess the students and evaluate the overall
operation of the course?

1. Tyler’s model relies mainly on behavioral objectives

A behavioral objective is a clear, specific, and measurable statement of what a learner is expected to
achieve at the end of a unit of work. Give an example.

If we focus more on behavioral objectives it will limit our focus or lack of focus on cognitive skills. The
behavioral model primarily emphasizes observable behaviors and external stimuli. It may overlook the
development of critical thinking, problem-solving, and higher-order cognitive skills, which are essential for
long-term learning and academic success.

2. Too restrictive and covers a small range of students’ skill and knowledge.
Secondly, Tyler’s model is too restrictive and covers a small range of students’ skills and knowledge. It’s
been criticized because it portrays curriculum development process as involving rigidly four sequential
steps with evaluation coming at the last step. Critical answer to this criticism however would relate to
decisions bothering on what the child is desired to become within.

How would you push a student when there is restriction? A jack of all trades and master of none, or a
child who possesses a skill that he can prove and push to very high levels?

3. Does not give teachers the opportunity to manipulate the learning experiences.

Manipulation skills refer to the ability to move and position objects within one hand without the
help of the other hand. A learning experience is any experience a student has in which they learn
something. They can be both intentional and unintentional and both in and outside of schools.
Learning experiences can be structured, or unstructured, direct, or vicarious. They can come from
listening to a lecture, reading, participating in an activity, or through observation.

4. Does not have a feedback mechanism

An effective feedback mechanism should be designed to ensure that teachers can provide a timely,
accurate and relevant response to student progress. It also helps the students to understand their
progress better and make the necessary changes to excel by focusing their efforts accordingly.
 5. It limits what students can learn.

It is focused on the idea that the purpose of education is to uplift learning that is useful as
well as meaningful to learners.

In the article, Curriculum Theory and Practice, Smith outlines a number of approaches to curriculum,

including the Tyler rationale. The Tyler rationale focuses on:

● predetermining what students need to learn and creating objectives that outline what they should
learn
● selecting and organizing methods to teach these objectives to the students
● specifying how to evaluate if the students met each objective

It is a highly systematic approach with a great deal of focus on organization and managed learning. The

approach looks to determine whether pre-specified changes are seen in each student’s behavior and

uses this to determine if the student was successful in their learning.

I experienced this approach throughout my schooling in a number of different subject areas. For example,

I remember in elementary school we would spend year after year learning how to write in cursive from

those awfully boring workbooks. Somebody decided we needed to learn how to write in cursive, they

created a workbook where we could repeatedly trace each letter to memorize how to write, and they

evaluated our learning based on how well our letters matched the printed examples. This is just one

example of how the Tyler rationale was used in my own schooling, it was also present in many of my high

school classes. Math teachers would use a PowerPoint to teach us the material and then evaluate our

learning with a standardized test. It is important to note that most of my teachers were not even allowed to

create final exams for their students, as they had to be given special permission and have specific

qualifications to do so. Needless to say, the Tyler approach is still widely used and very present in schools

today.

One of the benefits of this approach for educators is that the outcomes they are expected to teach are

clear. The high level of organization present in this approach provides teachers with a clear and detailed

outline of what they are to teach, how they should teach it, and how to assess student’s learning. This

saves a lot of time for teachers, and makes lesson planning much easier. The Tyler rationale also holds

potential benefits for students, as it was initially intended to provide the specific skills and knowledge
required for students to live as adults and work a future job. Students are always asking when or if they

will be using the material they are learning in “real life”, so they are much more likely to engage in a model

of teaching that prioritizes the skills and knowledge they will need to succeed in their future workforce.

Despite the possible benefits, there are some major limitations to the Tyler rationale. While the outcomes

and objectives educators are to follow may be clear, they do not allow for teachers or students to make

any choices based on how they believe learning should take place. Teachers are not given much freedom

in their classroom and are not provided the opportunity to encourage other methods of learning. The

approach treats teachers more like robots that can be wired to follow instructions than educated human

beings who are capable of adapting to their student’s needs and making choices within their student’s

best interests.

In addition, students are not given a voice and are not provided any choices in their education. As Smith

mentions on page four of the article, the amount of importance this approach places on pre-determined

methods and outcomes “takes much away from learners,” since “[t]hey are told what they must learn and

how they will do it.” When students are not given a voice, it causes school to feel like a chore. Students

are much more likely to be actively engaged in learning and trying their best when they feel like their

opinions will be heard. Providing students with choices, such as what method they will use to research a

topic, also encourages them to be more interested, engaged, and motivated in their learning. Without any

space for student choice, individuality is also suppressed. In this way, the Tyler rationale limits student’s

ability for individual expression and creativity.

Another major drawback to this approach on curriculum is that it includes no adaptations whatsoever and

assumes that every student will succeed in learning from the exact same method. This, of course, is

highly problematic. Students who do not learn well from the methods chosen in this approach are likely to

fall through the cracks. When evaluated, it will be recorded that such students failed to learn the expected

objectives, even though they actually may have been able to learn the material just fine had it been taught

in another way. The Tyler rationale puts every student through the exact same process and then fails any

student who does not learn the intended objectives. It only values these pre-determined learning

outcomes, completely discarding the value of any other learning that may take place within the classroom