OSIAS COLLEGES INC.

F. Tanedo St., San Nicolas, Tarlac City

Tel. No. 045-982-02-45

SUBJECT: Curriculum Development and Innovations

MODULE: 6
TOPIC: Curriculum Development
- Different Curriculum Development Models
- Linear Models of Curriculum Development
- Cyclical Models of Curriculum Development
- Dynamic Models of Curriculum Development
OBJECTIVES:
By the end of the discussion, the students are expected to:
1. Identify and analyse the different linear models of curriculum development
2. Describe the different cyclical models of curriculum development
3. Examine and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of a curriculum
4. Identify and analyse the different dynamic models of curriculum development
LESSON PROPER
Read
Different Curriculum Development Models
Curriculum is a dynamic process. In curriculum development there are always changes
that occur that are intended for improvement. Curriculum development models are based on a clear and
consistent understanding of various scholars of nature of curriculum as a discipline and as a field of study.
Different models are described based on the different views and processes of curriculum development
they offer. These models have been recognized and accepted by curriculum scholars as effective and
appropriate for developing curriculum in any level. The analysis points out various strengths and
weaknesses of different models. The models are treated as inimitable since it represents various ideas or
theories on how to develop curriculum.
Linear Models of Curriculum Development
The linear model of curriculum development prescribed a rational step-by-step procedure
for curriculum development starting with objectives.
Ralph Tyler developed the first model of curriculum at the University of Chicago. This
model was presented in his book Principles of Curriculum and Instruction published in 1949. Tyler
argued that curriculum development should be logical and systematic.
His model presents a process of curriculum development that follows a sequential pattern
starting from selecting objectives to selecting learning experiences, organizing learning experiences and
evaluation.
Tyler’s Rational-Linear Model

Society Students Subject Matter

Philosophy of Education Psychology of Learning

Selecting Objectives

Selecting Learning Experiences

Organizing Learning Experiences

Evaluation
He argued that to develop any curriculum, curriculum workers should respond to four
basic questions;
1. What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?
2. What educational experiences are likely to attain these objectives?
3. How can these educational experiences be organized?
4. How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?
Aside from these four questions, Tyler identified three curriculum sources: society,
students and subject matter. Accordingly, curriculum workers need to study these sources carefully in
order to develop a curriculum. He also pointed out the importance of philosophy of education and the
psychology of learning to screen the objectives that are included in the curriculum.
Strengths
 Clearly stated objectives a good place to begin
 Involves the active participation of the learner. (Prideaux, 2003)
 Simple linear approach to development of behavioural objectives (Billings & Halstead, 2009)
Weaknesses
 Narrowly interpreted objectives (acceptable verbs)
 Difficult and time-consuming construction of behavioural objectives
  Curriculum restricted to a constricted range of student skills and knowledge
 Critical thinking, problem solving and value acquiring processes cannot be plainly declared in
behavioural objectives (Prideaux, 2003)
B. Taba’s Grassroots Rational Model
Hilda Taba is a follower of Tyler who is another curriculum scholar. She presented her
model in her book Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice in 1962. Her model is a modified
version of Tyler’s Model. Taba argued that curriculum development should follow a sequential and
logical process and she suggested for more information input in all phases of curriculum development.
She also claimed that all curricula are composed of fundamental elements. In her model, Taba outlined
seven steps that should be followed when developing a curriculum.
1. Diagnoses of needs – identifying needs of students. The teacher (curriculum designer) starts
the process by identifying the needs of the students for whom the curriculum is to be planned.
2. Formulation of objectives – specifying the objectives to be accomplished. After the teacher
has identified the needs that required attention, he/she specifies objectives to be
accomplished.
3. Selection of content – determining the content, its validity and significance. The objective
selected or created suggest the subject matter or content of the curriculum. Not only
objectives and content match but also the validity and significance of the content chosen
needs to be determined.
4. Organization of content – sequencing content considering maturity of learners, their
achievement and interests. A teacher can not just select content but must organize it in some
types of sequence taking into consideration the maturity of the learners, their academic
achievement and their interests.
5. Selection of learning experiences – selection of instructional methods that involves students
with the content. Content must be presented to pupils and pupils must engage the content. At
this point, the teacher selects instructional methods that involves the students with the
content.
6. Organization of learning experiences – consider the students in choosing activities. Just as
content must be sequenced and organized, so must the learning activities. Often the sequence
of the learning activities is determined by the content. But the teacher needs to keep in mind
the particular students whom he/she will be teaching.
7. Determination of what to evaluate and ways and means of doing it – determining which
objectives have been accomplished. The curriculum must determine just what objectives
have been accomplished. Evaluation procedures need to be considered by the students and
teachers.
Strengths of using the Taba Model in the classroom:

 Gifted students begin 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

Limitations of using the Taba Model in the classroom:

 Can be difficult for non-gifted students to grasp 

 Difficult for heterogeneous classrooms
  Works well for fiction and non-fiction, may be difficult to easily use in all subjects
Taba also suggested that curriculum development could be made successful if there was a
diagnostic of needs. This would help curriculum workers in understanding the needs of the learners. It
would also help in the selection of the goals and objectives and in the selection of the contents. Taba
pointed out that the nature of the objectives determines what learning is to follow.
C. Standard-based Curriculum Development Model
This model was developed by Allan Glatthorn. The model intended for developing
curriculum standards for any discipline from basic education to higher education.He identified three
phases to be followed in developing a standard-based curriculum. This is an example of a linear model. It
includes a prescribed sequence of curriculum development activities to develop standards.
Phase 1 – Develop Standards
1. Develop a comprehensive set of content standards using multiple sources
2. Refine the comprehensive list by eliminating and combining
3. Secure teacher input to identify teacher priorities
4. Use data to develop final draft of standards divided into Essential Standards and Enrichment
Standards
Phase 11 – Develop benchmarks
1. Review decisions about content emphases
2. Identify standards for continuing development (standards that will no be benchmarked)
3. Decide how benchmarks will be identified- by taskforce or by teachers
4. Develop initial draft of benchmark, evaluating with criteria provided, and secure teacher review,
revise benchmarks if needed.
Phase 111 – Develop final products
1. Use standards and benchmarks to produce the scope and sequence chart
2. Decide on curriculum guide content
3. Analyze benchmarks into learning objectives
Glatthorn model is an example of a linear and rational curriculum development model.
The model is rational and descriptive, stressing on the development of standards as the first activity in
curriculum development. The model recognizes the importance of using multiple sources in developing
curriculum standards. It also recognizes teacher’s input in the development of standards, which are often
neglected in curriculum projects in the Philippines because of the top down approach to curriculum
development and implementation.
The use of benchmarks to improve, refine and validate curriculum standards is an equally
good practice in curriculum development. The model extends itself up to the
development of scope and sequence which is important for planning instruction and deciding on specific
contents and objectives. Another important feature of this model is its relevance and applicability in any
educational institutions in developing curriculum standards for various courses. This model is very useful
in the development of curriculum standards that is one of the major purposes of this book. The linear
nature of Glatthorn’s model is also one of its weaknesses.
Roberts (2003) stressed that in curriculum studies, as in many other domains of human
activity, one of the few constants in change. Roberts further explained his idea that as a field of inquiry,
curriculum should allow new theories to emerge and new insights to flourish to make the curriculum field
more vibrant and dynamic.
 In Glatthorn model, developing curriculum standards is a separate activity from the
overall curriculum development process. This makes the model incomplete. The model should recognize
the developing curriculum standards is an integral part of the curriculum development process. This
model does not include situational analysis not needs analysis. Unlike in other curriculum models,
situational analysis or diagnosis of needs is included as an important process. While the model specified
the development of standards using multiple sources it cannot replace the important function of
situational analysis in the curriculum development process. Situational analysis is helpful in
understanding the context in which curriculum is developed. Analyzing the different curriculum sources
and influences will lead to the development of curriculum standards that are not just focused on a specific
discipline, but will also consider the important role of the learners and the society in curriculum
development.
D. Understanding by Design Model (UbD)
This model was developed by Wiggins and McTighe (2002). It has become a byword in
the Philippine educational system because it was use to design the current basic education curriculum. As
of school year 2010-2011, first and second year high school are using UbD.
The model is also called backward design for putting emphasis on starting with the goals
and objectives in designing curriculum. This model put emphasis on designing curriculum to engage
students in exploring, and deepening, their understanding of important ideas and the design of assessment
(Wiggins &McTighe, 2002). There three stages in the backward design process.

Stage 1 – Identify
Stage 2 – Determine
desired results Stage 3 – Plan the
acceptable evidence
learning experiences
and instruction
Stage 1 includes what students should know, understand and be able to do. It also asks
the questions about what is worthy of understanding and what enduring understanding are desired for the
learners. This calls for examining current curriculum goals and established curriculum standards, and
reviewing curriculum expectations. Stage 2 calls for designing assessment evidence for documenting or
validating whether the desired learning has been achieved
This model encourages the use of authentic assessment for assessing and evaluating students’ learning.
Stage 3 includes planning learning experiences that are useful in implementing the curriculum.
The UbD model is prescriptive and rational focusing on the development of goals as the
starting point of the curriculum development process. The model is currently popular in the Philippines
because of its advocacy in focusing on enduring understandings or central ideas(Wiggings & McTighe
2002) as the central goal pf the curriculum.
The model stresses on the six facets of understanding as a framework for identifying the
results or goals of learning. If this model is used in the Philippines, it can help the CHED particularly
various teacher education institutions, to revise their existing curricula to focus on higher understanding
rather than just prescribing subjects and course descriptions. The UbD calls for development of higher
and more relevant curriculum standards in the country.
UbD’s advocacy of planning for authentic assessment before planning learning
experiences is essential in connecting the assessment with the goals and learning experiences of the
curriculum. Analyzing what the learners should know and understand is an important feature of the
model. This principle will make the content of the teacher education curriculum more learner-centered.
Like Glatthorn’s model it also recognizes the important role of teachers in curriculum development
processes which is a good practice in curriculum development.
While the UbD model puts emphasis on analysing what the learners need to know and
understand in formulating curriculum goals, the school authority or the government already fixes the
standards. The model is fixed at accepting what standards are prescribed by the government agency on
education. Consequently, the goals are most likely to follow the prescribed content standards set by the
government.
E. Systematic Design Model
Robert Diamond originally developed the Systematic Design Model in the early 1960s.
Since then, it has undergone major revisions but the structure is unchanged (Diamond 1998) The model
has two basic phases: 1. Project selection and design; and 2. Production, implementation and evaluation.
This also follows the linear process of curriculum development. Diamond (1998) explained that ideally
some actions must precede others and certain decisions should not be made until all relevant facts are
known. It is imperative that all data must be complete before proceeding to the next step.
This model is prescriptive and rational. It presents a systematic and linear view of
curriculum development. The use of diagrams is an excellent way of helping curriculum workers to
visualize the entire curriculum development process. As shown in its first phase, some curriculum
influences and sources are also acknowledged in the process of curriculum development. These
curriculum influences and sources are used to determine the objectives of the curriculum.
The model relies heavily on the data therefore it is important to gather necessary
information before proceeding to each of the processes. This curriculum practice allows research to
influence curriculum processes and encourage a team approach to curriculum development.
The second phase of the model allows curriculum workers to design for the production
and implementation of the curriculum and on the importance of the evaluation of instructional materials
to ensure the smooth implementation of the curriculum. The model involves the series of tasks, which, if
carefully followed, may result in a relevant and effective curriculum.
Similar to the weaknesses of linear models presented earlier, Diamond’s model ended in
Phase 2. It assumes that the product, which is the curriculum, is final and good as planned. There is no
provisions where curriculum workers can review their actions and decisions in relation to the factors
identified in Phase 1. Probably the data gathered were assumed to support the curriculum and are
sufficient to ensure that the curriculum is relevant and effective. Evaluation and revision are only done in
Phase 2 but the level of instruction or the implemented curriculum.
The model, if applied in the Philippines, will be probably difficult to adapt because
of the luck of research culture in our education institutions. Having a research culture among faculty
members can improve the way higher education curricula have planned. The results of these researches
can serve as basis for developing curricula and in proposing necessary changes in the curriculum. Print
(1993) and Doll (1992) considered curriculum development as a decision-making process, emphasizing
for faculty members to conduct researches as a basis for making curricular decisions.
 Phase 1 – Project Selection and Design
Project-specific Factors
Curriculum Projects
Basic Planning Inputs  Accreditation requirements
 Credit restrictions
(Project Specific)
 Fiscal and staff constraints
 Field of knowledge  Effectiveness of existing
programs
 Student knowledge,
Course Projects
attitudes and priorities  Goals, time, resources,
 Societal needs student factors, related
 Research research, grading and
 Educational priorities scheduling options

Project Selection
Ideal Sequence Operational Sequence
 Establishing needs
 Ensuring success

Phase 11 – Production, Implementation and Evaluation for each Unit

Design Evaluation Instruments and Procedures

Select Evaluate Produce and Coordinate Implement,

Determine and select field-test logistics for
instructional evaluate
objectives existing new and implementa
formats and revise
materialsPro evaluate tion
duce and materials

F. Murray Print Model for Curriculum Development

Murray Print published his model in his book Curriculum Development and Design in
1988. His model prescribes a sequential and logical approach to curriculum development to provide a
useful and easy-to-understand process in developing curriculum.
 The first phase of Print’s model recognizes the nature of the curriculum workers involved
in the curriculum development of the curriculum. In this phase it is important to pose the following
questions, that may influence curriculum development.
1. Who are involved in this curriculum development and what, if anything, do they
represent?

Aims, Goals, Objectives Content

Curriculum Presage Implementation and

Modification

Situational Analysis Learning Activities

Monitoring and
Instructional Evaluation Feedback, Curriculum
Evaluation

Phase l – Organization. Phase II – Development. Phase III - Application

2. What conceptions of curriculum do they bring with them?
3. What underlying forces or foundations have influenced the developers’ thinking?
The answer to these questions will bring useful insights into the type of curriculum
that will be developed.
The second phase of this model is the task of developing the curriculum.The procedure is
cyclical, which begins with a situational analysis and continues with the aims, goals and objectives,
content, learning activities and instructional evaluation and then continuing to situational analysis again.
The third phase includes the actual application that incorporates three major activities: (1)
implementation of the curriculum, (2) monitoring of and feedback from the curriculum, and (3) the
provision of the feedback data to the presage group.
Print’s model is also prescriptive and rational. The model starts with identifying the aims,
goals and objectives of the curriculum. It also embraces the principles of cyclical and dynamic models in
its procedures. Curriculum workers can examine their actions as they go through the process of
curriculum development. Print’s idea of curriculum presage recognizes the important role and influence
of various curriculum workers involved in different curriculum activities. It also recognizes the myriad of
curriculum conceptions and ideas that various curriculum workers bring to the curriculum development
process which may influence them in making important curricular decisions.
The inclusion of instructional evaluation in the development process makes the model
unique. Evaluation provides necessary data regarding the implementation of the curriculum. The result of
the evaluation is valuable in examining whether the curriculum is applicable to the students or whether
the goals of the curriculum have been achieved. The monitoring and feedback system in the curriculum
development is also useful when there is a need to do some revisions. This model can be used in any level
of curriculum development – local, college-wide or national. Hence it is very practical to apply this model
in the Philippines.
Print’s model describes the process of curriculum development on a macro level;
however, it is not clear where the philosophy of institutions and philosophy of the curriculum will come
into play. Philosophy is very influential in curriculum processes. The philosophy of the school and of the
curriculum embodies or reflect the kind of curriculum offered in a particular institution. Philosophy
should precede selection of objectives.
Furthermore, Print’s model should establish a stronger link between the curriculum
presage and the situational analysis. The model gives an impression that curriculum presage has no direct
effect or relationship with situational analysis. Curriculum presage is a part of situational analysis since
the various curriculum workers are also part of the content or environment of the curriculum.

Cyclical Models of Curriculum Development

The cyclical models prescribe a cyclical or continuous process of curriculum

development. Cyclical models usually starts with situational analysis that serves as the basis for all the
succeeding process.

A. Audrey Nicholls and Howard Nicholls Model for Curriculum Development

Situational Analysis

Selection of Objectives Evaluation

Selection and Selection and

Organization of Content Organization of Methods

Cyclical model for curriculum development was developed by Nicholls and

Nicholls (1978). This emphasizes the cyclical nature of curriculum development is a continuous process.
The model prescribes five logical and interdependent stages that are continuous
curriculum development process. The model starts with a situational analysis in which curricular
decisions are made, followed by the selection of objectives and the other succeeding phases.
The model is highly prescriptive and dynamic. The inclusion of situational analysis as
part of the model is a valuable principle in curriculum development. It enables the curriculum workers to
understand better the context in which the curriculum is developed. By starting with situational analysis,
curriculum workers will be able to collect data and the needed information from various curriculum
sources and influences that are prerequisite in formulating curriculum goals to conduct situational
analysis before planning their syllabi and curriculum plans. This will make it possible for the curriculum
to be more relevant and responsive to the needs of the students and the school.
This model also recognizes the influence and importance of contributing disciplines such
as philosophy, psychology and sociology in developing the curriculum. These disciplines are useful in
selecting the curriculum goals and objectives, content, learning experiences and evaluation. The
importance of these three disciplines in developing curriculum is also recognized in the model of Tyler.
 Moreover, this model has the potential to be used in any educational setting; either
school-based or on a national level. The cyclical nature of the model also enables the curriculum workers
in making the necessary changes or adjustments in the total curriculum. This attribute of the model is
helpful to teachers, administrators and education boards to address curricular issues and propose
innovations and changes wherever needed. The model advocates a curriculum development activity that
involves continuous improvement.
However, there is a little weakness found in this model. The possible problem that may
occur is that many curriculum workers are used to develop curricula following a linear model. In the
Philippines, for example, curriculum development follows a top-down approach where many curricular
decisions are made in the national level. The goals and content of the curriculum are set by the state. In
the context of higher education there is a tendency for the teachers not to follow this model because of the
tedious job in conducting situational analysis before developing any syllabus or curriculum plan.
B. Wheeler’s Curriculum Development Model

1. Development of Aims, 2. Selection of Learning

Goals and Objectives Experiences

5. Evaluation 3. Selection of Content

4. Organization and Integration of

Learning Experiences and Content

Wheeler presented a cyclical process in his influential book Curriculum Process, in which
each element in the curriculum is related and interdependent. Although, this model is also rational in
nature, each phase is a logical development of the preceding one. One cannot proceed to the next phase
unless the preceding phase is done. Wheeler also emphasized the importance of starting from the
development of aims, goals and objectives.
C. The Contextual Filters Model of Course Planning
This model was developed by Stark, Lowther, Bently, Ryan, Martens, Genthon,Wren,
and
Shaw in 1990 as part of their study conducted at the University of Michigan National Center for Research
to improved Post-Secondary Teaching and Learning. This model appeared in the book Shaping the
College Curriculum written by Stark and Latucca published in 1997.

Content Influences encompass faculty members’ background and associated disciplinary

and educational beliefs. Content Influences refer to the influences outside of the instructor’s immediate
control that cause adjustments in the course plan, such as student characteristics or instructional
resources. Course decisions include the processes that are followed when designing courses (Stark &
Latucca 1997). The Contextual Filters model presents a cyclical view of curriculum development. After
making the course decisions the planners can check with the content considerations and the contextual
filters. It describes the reality on how faculty college members design their courses. Hence, it is very
much applicable for designing higher education courses.
 This model is based on a research on how faculty members in several higher education
institutions in the US plan their curriculum. Several curriculum influences such as faculty background and
educational beliefs are recognized in this model. The influence and the special role of faculty members in
curriculum planning and development are recognized as a main factor in curriculum development in
higher education.

This model is very teacher-centered. Given the influence of academic freedom, faculty
members may plan the curriculum based on their own convenience. This can be improved by putting
students as part of the content influence. This could have been very useful for faculty members especially
for neophytes instructors, who do not have background knowledge on education.

Content and Background Considerations (Content)

Influence of Faculty Faculty Views of Purposes od

Background and Their Academic Education Espoused
Characteristics Fields by Faculty Members

Contextual Filters (Context)

Goals
Students
Schedules
Campus Services
Resources

Course Decisions (Form)

Select Content Feedback
Arrange Content
Choose Process Adjustment

Dynamic Models of Curriculum Development

The dynamic models describe how curriculum workers develop curricula in
various educational context. The dynamic curriculum development models are usually used in
school-based settings.
A. Walker’s Model of Curriculum Development
Decker Walker developed a model for curriculum development and first
published it in 1971. Walker contended that curriculum developers do not follow the perspective
approach of the rationale-linear sequence of curriculum elements when they develop curricula
(Walker, 1971, Marsh and Wellis 2007, Print 1993). In this model Walker was particularly
interested on how curriculum workers actually do their task in curriculum development. In his
model Walker was able to identify three phases, which he termed platform, deliberation and
design.
In the platform phase, Walker suggested that curriculum workers bring with them
their individual beliefs, knowledge and values. They have their own ideas about how to do their
task and thay are prepare to discuss and argue about them. The first phase is similar to the idea of
Print of a curriculum presage. The Deliberation phase, involves identifying which facts are
needed for means and ends, generating alternatives and considering the consequences of these
alternatives. This phase is also used in weighing alternative costs and consequences and choosing
the best alternative for the curriculum task they are about to do. The third phase which is the
Curriculum design involves planning, decision-making and the actual development of the
curriculum.
Walker’s model is a dynamic and descriptive model of curriculum development.
It reflects the realities of how curriculum workers plan and develop a curriculum. It recognizes
the role and influence of curriculum workers in any curriculum development tasks.

Beliefs, Theories, Conceptions, Points of View, Aims, Objective

Platform

Deliberation
( applying them to practical situations, arguing about accepting, refusing
changing, adapting)
(

Curriculum Design
In addition, it avoids the obsession of starting with objectives. This practice is
also observed in the model of Print (1993). Since the model is dynamic, the curriculum workers
may commence at any point in the curriculum process depending on their needs. This allows
more flexibility among curriculum workers in developing curriculum. Curriculum workers may
review their previous decisions and action to correct some mistakes. According to Walker
(1971), this model can be used for a school-based curriculum development.
This model being dynamic, can be confusing to other curriculum wworkers who
are not aware of the necessary processes of curriculum development. In this model is applied in
the Philippines, where most teachers are more implementation of curriculum developed by other
educators, it may not have value to them.
Another weakness of Walker’s model is a strong tendency of the curriculum
development to be stuck in Phase ll. According to Print (1993), too much discussion may lead to
analysis-paralysis syndrome that could penalize or prolong the process of curriculum
development. Probably, this model can be elaborated more on the design processes involved in
Phase lll to help teachers and neophyte curriculum workers to do their tasks.
B. Skilbeck’s Curriculum Development Model
In 1976, Malcolm Skilbeck came up with a model for developing a school-based
curriculum in Australia. His model presents a dynamic view of curriculum development. When
using this model, curriculum workers may start from any phase. However, each phase is
interrelated and follows a systematic sequence. Skilbeck’s model includes a situational analysis
that involves gathering data from the school society, and the learners. The results of the
situational analysis provide strong bases for making curricular decisions for all the succeeding
phases of curriculum development.

Situational Analysis

Goal Formulation

Program Building

Interpretation and
Implementation

Monitoring, Feedback,
Assessment and Reconstruction

C. Eisner’s Artistic Approach to Curriculum Development

Elliot W. Eisner was a famous curriculum scholar. In 1979, he published the book
The Educational Imagination where he presented his idea on how curriculum development
should be done. Eisner (1979) believed that there is a need to develop a new theory that
recognizes the artistry of teaching which is useful in helping teachers develop these arts. In this
book, Eisner outlined how this artistic approach can also be used in curriculum development.

In selecting the goals and objective of the curriculum, Eisner (1979) stressed an
artful process of arriving at a consensus about curricular priorities by involving the participants.
Engaging the participants is similar to Walker’s (1971) idea of platform or Schab’s (1971) idea
of deliberation. In selecting the content of the curriculum Eisner (2002) considered the three
sources of curriculum: individual society and subject matter as identified by Tyler (1949). In
selecting learning opportunities, Eisner strongly favoured providing students with a wide variety
of learning opportunities. Accordingly, educational imagination must transform goals and
contents into high quality experiences for students. (Eisner 2002).

He also emphasized on providing a variety of learning opportunities to different

types of students using varied resources and activities. He contended that curriculum content
should be organized and integrated in different ways. Eisner suggested using different strategies
and methods to engage the students in meaningful learning. Lastly, for Eisner evaluation is not
the final step of curriculum development, but rather it is something that pervades the entire
curriculum development process (Eisner, 1985).

1. Goals and their priorities

 The need to consider less, well-defined objectives as well as explicit ones
 The need for deliberation in talking through priorities
2. Content of curriculum
 Options to consider in selecting curriculum
 Caveats about the null curriculum
3. Types of learning opportunities
 Emphasis on transforming goals and content into learning events that will be of
significance to students
4. Organization of learning opportunities
 Emphasis on a nonlinear approach in order to encourage diverse student outcomes
5. Organization of content areas
 Emphasis on cross-curricula organization of content
6. Mode of presentation and mode of response
 Use of a number of modes of communication to widen educational opportunities for
students
7. Types of evaluation procedure
 Use of comprehensive range of procedures at different stages of the process of
curriculum development
This model can be applied in designing school-based curriculum development or
in national curriculum projects. This model is an open-ended process or a form of a dynamic
model. It is descriptive in offering the general approach that can be followed by curriculum
workers, yet the model is also prescriptive in offering suggestions about what should happen
when developing a curriculum.
His model recognizes the influence of various curriculum workers in developing a
curriculum. This model emphasizes the importance of having well-defined goals and objectives
in curriculum. It recognizes the varied activities that teachers do in the school to attain the goals
of the curriculum. This model may be effective in the context of developing and designing
courses in higher education. The influence of academic freedom and the changing nature of the
discipline in higher education require a curriculum model that is less prescriptive but logical
enough to embrace the artistic or creative ways in which faculty members develop their courses.
Since the processes are not procedural, curriculum workers can always modify
and
improve their curricula to address certain problems and needs This model calls for more relevant
and responsive ways of selecting and organizing contents and learning experiences in order to
respond to the diverse needs of students.

D. Pawilen’s Model for Developing Curriculum

Pawilen developed this model s one of the major outputs of his doctoral
dissertation
in the University of the Philippines, Diliman. This model was developed to help curriculum
workers in developing a curriculum that is relevant and appropriate to the Philippine context
(Pawilen, 2011)

1. Situational Analysis

Curriculum Sources 2. Selection of Goals and Objectives

- Learners
- Society 3. Development of Curriculum Standard
- Discipline a. Developing a comprehensive set of
standards
b. Aligning standards with several criteria
c. Securing teacher’s input
d. Validating of standards by experts
e. Developing final curriculum standards

4. Selection of Content or Subject Area

Curriculum Influences
- External 5. Selection of Organization of Learning Experiences
- Internal
- Organizational
6. Implementation

7. Evaluation

Curriculum sources are general factors that influence or affect curriculum

development and decision-making in the macro level. Posner (1995) suggested two level of
curriculum development macro level which include the general or overall process of curriculum
development and the micro level which focuses on specific phase/s or specific context/s like a
school-based curriculum development.
There three curriculum sources in the model learners, society and discipline.
These curriculum sources are based on the model of Ralph Tyler (1949). The learners as a
curriculum source is very important. Knowing their interests, needs, learning styles, culture,
socio-economic status, gender and other variables are significant data for developing curriculum.
Understanding the nature of learners is helpful in curriculum workers to make appropriate
choices in curriculum decision-making. (Print,1993)
Society is also considered as a source of curriculum. Knowledge about the society
provides a better understanding of the context on which the curriculum will be implemented.
Cultural values, beliefs, attitudes, political and economic systems and the physical environment
directly or indirectly affect curriculum development because the learners are an integral part of
the society. Understanding the nature of discipline is also essential in curriculum development. It
can provide data for making decisions as to what contents should be included in the curriculum
and how to organize the contents of the curriculum.
The curriculum sources are considered vital in conducting situational analysis.
Curriculum sources provide the necessary data in determining the goals and objectives of the
curriculum. These curriculum sources are also valuable of making decisions on the development
of curriculum standards. In the revised model, an arrow connects the curriculum sources to Phase
lll.
Curriculum influences are specific factors that affect the development of the
curriculum and decision-making in the micro level. The idea of curriculum influences was
adapted from the model of Stark and Lattuca (1997) Accordingly, these curriculum influences
can be grouped into three, external, internal and organizational.
External influences are social factors that directly influences the decision
making. These factors are society, market demand, government disciplinary associations and
alumni. Internal influences are those that are related to the school like faculty members,
students, disciplines and program mission. Organizational influences are school factor but they
are more concerned with the governance of the program and support system like school
resources, leadership, governance and program relationship (Stark & Lattuca, 1997). These
curriculum influences provide important data for conducting situational analysis.
In the revised proposed model, the various curriculum influences are integral as
shown in the arrow connecting the curriculum influences and the development of the curriculm
standards. In all phases of curriculum development, these curriculum influences are aalways
considered. For example, new government policies in most cases, need to be implemented
immediately. Change in school leadership and programs also need immediate action.
Consequently, at any point, the curriculum influences may have direct or indirect effect on
curriculum development. The broken arrows connecting the curriculum influences with the
different phases of the curriculum development show this. These influences make the model
dynamic. It always consider the changing nature, needs and demands of its context.
 By nature curriculum sources and influences serve as bases for selecting and
making decisions about the various elements of curriculum: intent, content, learning experiences
and evaluation.

Reflect
What have you learned in this lesson?
Respond
Accomplish the activity sheet provided for this lesson.
Reference : Curriculum Development, A Guide for Students and Teachers, by Greg Tabios Pawilen
 OSIAS COLLEGES INC.
F. Tanedo St. San Nicolas, Tarlac City
Tel. No. 045-982-02-45

LEARNING ACTIVITY SHEET

Module 6

Name: __________________________ Date: ____________________

Degree/Program: _________________ Score/Rating: _____________
Faculty: _____________________________

1. Review the linear curriculum development models. Identify the possible strengths
and weaknesses of each model when applied to the Philippine context.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
2. Assess the cyclical curriculum development models. Identify the possible strengths
and weaknesses of each model when applied to the Philippine context.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
 _____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
3. Being curriculum planners, which of these different models do you think best fits in the
Philippine education system?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___

4. Assess/Review the dynamic curriculum development models. Identify the possible

strengths and weaknesses of each model when applied to the Philippine context

_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________