9.1 Curriculum Concepts, Types, Dimensions, and Development Models

Curriculum Concepts, Types, Dimensions, and Development Models

LET Exam Tip: Questions on curriculum development frequently test your ability to differentiate between traditional and progressive curriculum perspectives, classify real-world school scenarios into Allan Glatthorn's 7 Types of Curriculum, compare linear vs. inductive curriculum models (Tyler vs. Taba), and identify design dimensions like vertical articulation vs. horizontal integration.

1. Etymology and Conceptual Evolution of Curriculum

The word curriculum originates from the Latin verb currere, which translates to "to run" or "a runway/racecourse." In an educational context, it symbolizes the track or course of study that learners traverse to reach academic and developmental milestones.

Over the past century, curriculum theory has evolved into two distinct schools of thought:

A. Traditional / Essentialist View

Traditionalists view the curriculum as a body of accumulated knowledge, subject matter fields, or a structured syllabus prepared by experts for students to master.

• Robert M. Hutchins: Defined curriculum as permanent studies where rules of grammar, reading, rhetoric, logic, and mathematics are emphasized. He believed basic education should focus on the 3 Rs (Reading, Writing, Arithmetic).
• Arthur Bestor: Maintained that the sole mission of the school is intellectual training through fundamental academic disciplines (Science, History, Mathematics, Literature, Foreign Language).
• Joseph Schwab: Coined the term "discipline" as the sole source of curriculum, arguing that learning content must be derived directly from established academic disciplines.

B. Progressive / Learner-Centered View

Progressivists define curriculum as all the total learning experiences of the student under the guidance of the school and teacher.

• John Dewey: Viewed education as learning by doing and defined curriculum as a continuous reconstruction of living experiences.
• Hollis Caswell and Doak Campbell: Defined curriculum as all the experiences children have under the guidance of teachers.
• Colin Marsh and George Willis: Stated that curriculum refers to all the experiences in the classroom that are planned and enacted by teachers and learned by students.

---

2. Allan Glatthorn's Seven Operational Types of Curriculum

In actual school environments, curriculum operates at multiple distinct levels. Allan Glatthorn categorized these into seven operational types (supplemented by the concept of the Null Curriculum):

Note on Null / Excluded Curriculum: Refers to topics or subject areas that are intentionally or unintentionally omitted from instruction (e.g., taboo topics or outdated historical events).

---

3. Major Curriculum Development Models

Curriculum development follows structured conceptual models. The LET tests your ability to distinguish between deductive (top-down) and inductive (bottom-up) models.

Traditional Deductive Approach (Tyler)
  Objectives ➔ Selection of Experiences ➔ Organization ➔ Evaluation

Progressive Inductive Approach (Taba)
  Diagnosis of Needs ➔ Formulation of Objectives ➔ Selection & Organization of Content/Experiences ➔ Evaluation

A. Ralph Tyler's Rationale Model (1949) — Linear / Deductive

Ralph Tyler proposed a classic, top-down deductive model centered on four fundamental questions:

1. What educational purposes should the school seek to attain? (Formulating Objectives)
2. What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these purposes? (Selecting Learning Experiences)
3. How can these educational experiences be effectively organized? (Organizing Learning Experiences)
4. How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained? (Evaluating Learning Outcomes)

B. Hilda Taba's Grassroots Approach (1962) — Inductive / Teacher-Driven

Hilda Taba argued that curriculum should be designed by teachers who implement it, rather than handed down by higher authorities. She formulated an inductive 7-step approach:

1. Diagnosis of learners' needs
2. Formulation of objectives
3. Selection of content
4. Organization of content
5. Selection of learning experiences
6. Organization of learning experiences
7. Determination of what to evaluate and ways and means of doing it

C. Galen Saylor and William Alexander Model (1981) — Systemic Framework

Saylor and Alexander viewed curriculum development as a four-stage decision-making process:

• Goals, Objectives, and Domains: Establishing major educational goals across cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains.
• Curriculum Designing: Deciding on the appropriate curriculum design structure (subject-centered, learner-centered, or problem-centered).
• Curriculum Implementation: Enacting instructional plans using teaching strategies and learning environments.
• Curriculum Evaluation: Assessing both student learning outcomes and the effectiveness of the total curriculum design.

D. Lawrence Stenhouse's Process Model (1975)

Stenhouse criticized rigid behavioral objectives, proposing that curriculum should focus on the process of inquiry, critical thinking, and teacher growth rather than predetermined product outcomes. Teachers act as researchers in their own classrooms.

---

4. Essential Dimensions of Curriculum Design

When designing a cohesive curriculum, developers must balance six core organizational dimensions:

1. Scope: The breadth and depth of content, topics, and learning experiences covered at a given time or grade level (answers what and how much to teach).
2. Sequence: The logical ordering and continuous progression of learning content over time (e.g., simple to complex, concrete to abstract, chronological, or prerequisite learning).
3. Continuity: The vertical repetition and reinforcement of key concepts and skills across different grade levels (e.g., revisiting fractions in Grade 4, Grade 6, and High School with increasing depth).
4. Integration: The horizontal linkages across different subject areas, allowing learners to see unified relationships between concepts (e.g., linking Science environmental concepts with Araling Panlipunan social issues).
5. Articulation: The seamless connection and smooth transition between levels or subjects:
   • Vertical Articulation: Seamless transition from Grade 1 to Grade 2, or Elementary to Junior High School.
   • Horizontal Articulation: Alignment between subjects taught at the same grade level (e.g., Grade 7 Science aligning with Grade 7 Mathematics).
6. Balance: Ensuring an equitable assignment of time, content, and resources across cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains without overemphasizing one subject at the expense of others.