Technical Curriculum Models: Structured Approaches to Learning

When educators set out to design a curriculum, they often face a fundamental question: where do we begin? Technical curriculum models provide systematic, step-by-step frameworks that transform educational chaos into structured learning experiences. These models serve as blueprints, guiding educators through the complex process of curriculum development with scientific precision and methodical approaches that have shaped modern education for decades.

Understanding technical curriculum models 🔗

Technical curriculum models represent systematic approaches to curriculum development that emphasize rational, sequential planning processes. Unlike intuitive or experience-based methods, these models follow predetermined steps and scientific principles to create educational programs. The beauty of technical models lies in their predictability and replicability – when followed correctly, they should produce consistent, quality results across different educational contexts.

These models are rooted in a behaviorist philosophy, where the goal is to create measurable learning outcomes. They focus on structure, process, and outcomes, with a strong emphasis on objectives, content, teaching strategies, and evaluation. Three foundational models have particularly influenced modern curriculum development: the Tyler model, the Taba model, and the Saylor-Alexander model.

Tyler’s model: The foundation of systematic curriculum planning 🔗

Ralph Tyler’s curriculum model, introduced in 1949, revolutionized how educators approach curriculum development. Often called the Tyler Rationale, this model poses four fundamental questions that form the backbone of systematic curriculum planning.

The four essential questions 🔗

The first question asks what educational purposes the school should seek to attain. This step involves identifying clear, specific learning objectives. Tyler emphasized that objectives should be derived from three sources: the learner, society, and subject matter specialists. For instance, when developing a digital literacy curriculum for distance learners, educators would consider students’ current technology skills, society’s digital demands, and expert recommendations on essential digital competencies.

The second question focuses on what educational experiences can be provided that are likely to achieve these purposes. This means developing learning experiences that help students achieve the stated objectives. If students need to meet the objective of writing an essay, the learning experience might be a demonstration by the teacher followed by practice opportunities.

The third question addresses how these experiences can be effectively organized. Should the teacher demonstrate first or should students learn by doing immediately? The point is that educators need to determine a logical order of experiences for students, considering both educational philosophy and learners’ needs.

The final question asks how we can determine whether these purposes are being achieved. This evaluation step assesses students’ ability to demonstrate the desired competencies. Tyler’s model emphasizes that evaluation is essential to determine if educational objectives are being realized by the curriculum and instruction.

Strengths and modern applications 🔗

Tyler’s model is deductive – it proceeds from the general to the specific. The model is linear, involving a certain order or sequence of steps from beginning to end. Despite being developed over 70 years ago, Tyler’s thinking continues to be popular, and his concepts of behavioral objectives, curricular organization, and evaluation are deeply embedded in the standards and accountability movement today.

Taba’s grassroots model: Teacher-driven curriculum development 🔗

While Tyler’s work influenced curriculum theory significantly, Hilda Taba challenged conventional thinking with her flexible, teacher-centered approach in the 1960s. Taba believed that curriculum should be developed by teachers who understand the needs of their students, rather than imposed from above by policymakers.

The seven-step process 🔗

Taba’s grassroots model emphasizes a collaborative and democratic approach to curriculum development. The model involves seven key steps: diagnosing learner needs, formulating objectives, selecting content, organizing content, selecting learning experiences, organizing learning experiences, and evaluation.

What makes Taba’s approach unique is its inductive method – starting with the specifics and building toward a general design, rather than the traditional deductive approach. Teachers begin by creating specific teaching-learning units and building to a general design. This bottom-up process ensures that curriculum decisions are based on actual classroom needs rather than theoretical assumptions.

Contemporary relevance 🔗

The Taba model advocates for teacher involvement at every stage of curriculum development. Unlike traditional top-down approaches that may rely on administrators or policymakers to dictate curriculum, Taba’s model emphasizes that teachers are in the best position to assess student needs and create relevant learning experiences.

This grassroots approach proves especially valuable in distance education because it emphasizes understanding learner characteristics – crucial when students may have diverse technological capabilities, learning preferences, and life circumstances. The model’s emphasis on diagnosing learner needs becomes even more critical when instructors cannot observe students directly.

Saylor-Alexander model: Administrative approach to curriculum design 🔗

John Galen Saylor and William Marvin Alexander developed an administrative approach to curriculum development that provides a comprehensive framework for institutional planning. Saylor and Alexander viewed curriculum as a plan for providing sets of learning opportunities to achieve broad educational goals and related specific objectives for an identifiable population served by a single school center.

Four stages of development 🔗

The Saylor-Alexander-Lewis model consists of four main stages: establishing goals and objectives, curriculum design, curriculum implementation, and curriculum evaluation.

In the first stage, goals and objectives are influenced by external forces such as legal requirements, research data, professional associations, and state guidelines. This step is also influenced by bases of curriculum including society, learners, and knowledge. Saylor and colleagues classified goals into four domains: personal development, social competences, continued learning skills, and specialization.

The second stage involves curriculum design, where planners analyze the goals and objectives to create a curriculum design appropriate for each domain. Teachers then design their own instructional plans based on the designed curriculum.

The third stage focuses on curriculum implementation, similar to performing a pilot experiment. This involves decisions about instruction and the actual implementation of the curriculum plan. The comprehensive approach addresses complex implementation challenges, from ensuring adequate technological infrastructure to preparing instructors for new teaching methods.

The final stage involves evaluation of both expected learning outcomes and the entire curriculum plan. This means-end model assumes a desired end (goals and objectives), a means of attaining this end (learning experiences), and a process (evaluation) for determining whether the means resulted in the desired end.

Flexibility and adaptability 🔗

The Saylor-Alexander model is both deductive and linear, moving from the general to the particular. However, linear models do not have to be constant sets of actions – the model’s entrance points and interrelationships can be decided upon by curriculum designers. This curriculum model offers substitute modes along with recommendations, fostering adaptability and greater freedom for both teachers and students.

Application in modern distance education 🔗

Distance education presents unique challenges that make technical curriculum models particularly valuable. The physical separation between instructors and students demands clear structure and systematic organization to ensure effective learning experiences.

When applying Tyler’s model to distance education, curriculum developers must pay special attention to selecting learning experiences that work effectively in virtual environments. The model’s emphasis on clear objectives and systematic evaluation becomes even more critical when face-to-face assessment is not possible.

Taba’s grassroots approach proves especially effective in online learning contexts where students often have diverse backgrounds, varying levels of technical skills, and different learning preferences. By focusing on learning outcomes and student experiences, institutions can create more engaging and effective online learning environments.

The Saylor-Alexander model’s comprehensive approach addresses the complex implementation challenges of distance education, from technological infrastructure to instructor preparation for online teaching methods. Its emphasis on systematic planning at the institutional level helps ensure consistency across multiple courses and programs.

Balancing structure with flexibility 🔗

While technical models provide valuable structure, modern curriculum developers recognize the importance of maintaining flexibility within systematic frameworks. Contemporary applications often modify these classical models to accommodate diverse learning styles, cultural differences, and unexpected learning opportunities.

Successful adaptation often involves combining elements from multiple models rather than strictly following a single approach. For example, an institution might use the Taba model’s learner-centered principles while incorporating Tyler’s emphasis on clear objectives and systematic evaluation. The key is selecting and adapting models based on specific institutional needs, learner characteristics, and educational contexts.

Critics have noted that technical models can over-emphasize measurable objectives and may struggle with moral or ethical objectives that are difficult to quantify. However, these limitations can be addressed by thoughtfully integrating elements from different models and remaining responsive to evolving educational needs.

What do you think? How might technical curriculum models need to evolve to better serve the diverse needs of today’s distance learners? What balance should educators strike between systematic structure and flexibility in curriculum design?

References

1. https://educationalresearchtechniques.com/2014/07/01/curriculum-development-the-tyler-model/
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_W._Tyler
3. https://www.ascd.org/blogs/curriculum-development-what-would-tyler-do
4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8132528/
5. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356866746_Saylor_Alexander_and_Lewis%27s_Curriculum_Development_Model_for_Islamic_Education_in_Schools