STRUCTURE CURRICULUM PHYSICS PAPER

TYLER THEORY OF CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

A R R A N G E D BY:

DEBORA BETTY SITANGGANG (409322015) GITA RAVHANI ANUGRAH (409322017) RIKA YULIA FITRI (409322) TIONAR M MALAU (409322)

PHYSICS DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCES STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN 2011

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

Development of curriculum theory can not be separated from the history of its development. Development of the curriculum has been initiated in 1890 by Charles and McMurry writing, but it definitely has its origin in the work of Franklin Babbit in 1918. Bobbit Bering viewed as the first curriculum expert, is pioneering the development of curriculum practice. Bobbit was the first to conduct the analysis or job skills as a way of determining a decision in the preparation of the curriculum. He also who use a scientific approach in identifying job skills and adult life as a basis for According to Bobbit, the core curriculum theory is simple, namely human life. Human life is different though basically there are same, formed to a number of job skills. Education seeks to prepare these skills with a thorough and complete. Skills that must be mastered to be able to engage in life vary widely, depending on the level and type of environment. Every level of life and the environment requires the acquisition of knowledge, skills, attitudes, habits, and a certain appreciation. Those things are the curriculum. To achieve these things there is a series of experiences that children have mastered. All purpose with the experiences is the subject of theoretical studies curriculum. Werrett W. Charlters (1923) agrees with the concept of analysis Bobbit skills or jobs as the basis for curriculum development, but Charters more emphasis on vocational education.

There are two things in common of curriculum theory, theory and Charters Bobbit. First, they agree on the use of scientific techniques in solving the problems of the curriculum. In this case they are influenced by the scientific movement in education pioneered by EL Thorndike, Charles Judd, and others. Second, both theories contrary to assumption that say the school works to prepare the children as adults. To achieve this, the necessary analysis of the tasks and demands in a structured curriculum of skills,

knowledge, attitudes, values, and others needed to be able to participate in adult life. Contrary to those things they put together a complete curriculum in a systematic form. Beginning in 1920, due to the influence of progressive education, develops educational movement that centered on the child (child centered). Theory of curriculum changes from that emphasize on content organization that is directed at life as an adult (Bobbit and Charters) to the psychological life of a child at this time. Children are center of the education. Content of the curriculum should be based on the interests and needs of students. Emphasize education to the student activity, students learn through experience. Curriculum should engage students. Development theory of curriculum continues presented by Hollis Caswell. In his role as chairman of the division of curriculum developers in several states in the United States (Tennessee, Alabama, Florida, Virginia), is developing a curriculum that is centered on the concept of the public or occupational (centered society) then Caswell develop a curriculum that is interactive. In curriculum development, Caswell emphasis on the participation of teachers, participate in determining the curriculum, determine the organizational structure of the curriculum, in formulating a definition of curriculum, formulating goals, selecting content, determining learning activities, curriculum design, assessing the results, and so forth. In 1947 at the University of Chicago held the first major discussion of the theory of the curriculum. As a result of these discussions are formulated three main tasks curriculum theories: (1) Identify critical issues that arise in the development of curriculum and its underlying concepts, (2) Determine the relationship between these problems with the structure that supports it, (3) Seek or foresee the approaches in the future to solve the problem. Ralph W. Tylor (1949) suggests four basic questions that a review of the core curriculum:

1. Which educational goals to be achieved by the school? 2. How the educational experiences that should be provided to achieve these goals? 3. How to organize effectively the educational experience? 4. How do we determine that these goals have been achieved? Four basic questions about the curriculum of Tylor are widely used by subsequent curriculum development. In association national conference of developers and curriculum supervisors in 1963 discussed two important papers of George A. Beauchamp and Othanel Smith. Beauchamp to analyze the scientific approach of development tasks in curriculum theory. According to Beauchamp, curriculum theory is conceptually closely related to the development of theories in other sciences. Things that are important in the development of curriculum theory is the use of technical terms appropriate and consistent, the analysis and classification of knowledge, the use of research to add concepts, generalizations or principles, as principles are to be hold in explaining the phenomenon of the curriculum.

CHAPTER II DISCUSSION

2.1 Tylers Model With the publication of Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, Ralph W. Tyler could not have suspected that his little book of only eighty-three pages would make such an indelible mark on the field of curriculum theorizing, as well as on teaching practices in the American public schools. In 1949, Tyler probably could not have predicted that in time he would become the most prominent name in curriculum studies in the United States, either. Yet, this is exactly the course his career would take through the mid-twentieth century. A student of Charles Judd at the University of Chicago, Ralph W. Tyler graduated with a Ph.D. in 1927. Approximately ten years later, he went on to fill a prominent position on the Eight Year Study as the Director of Research for the Evaluation Staff. In this position, Tyler initially formulated his approach to education research which was grounded in the belief that successful teaching and learning techniques can be determined as a result of scientific study. By applying such methods during the Eight Year Study, Tyler soon determined that evaluation of student behaviors proved to be a highly appropriate means for determining educational success or failure. In Appraising and Recording Student Progress, Tyler wrote: Any device which provides valid evidence regarding the progress of students toward educational objectives is appropriate...The selection of evaluation techniques should be made in terms of the appropriateness of that technique for the kind of behavior to be appraised (Tyler, cited in Pinar, p. 136). Tylers model for curriculum designing is based on the following questions: What educational purposes should the school seek to attain? What educational experiences can be provided that is likely to attain these purposes? How can these educational experiences be effectively organized? How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?

Tylers Model

Objectives

Selection of learning experiences

Organization of learning experiences

Evaluation The model is linear in nature, starting from objectives and ending with evaluation. In this model, evaluation is terminal. It is important to note that: Objectives form the basis for the selection and organization of learning experiences. Objectives form the basis for assessing the curriculum. Objectives are derived from the learner, contemporary life and subject specialist. To Tyler, evaluation is a process by which one matches the initial expectation with the outcomes. The most crucial step in this doctrine is obviously the first since all the others proceed from and wait upon the statement of objectives. As Tyler puts it, "If we are to study an educational program systematically and intelligently we must first be sure as to the educational objectives aimed at."

2.2.1 The Selection of Educational Objectives Tylers section on educational objectives is a description of the three sources of objectives: studies of learners, studies of contemporary life, and suggestions from subject-matter specialists, as well as an account of how data derived from these "sources are to be filtered through philosophical and psychological "screens."

2.2.1.1 Subject Matter as a Source of Objectives Tyler conceives of subjects as performing certain functions. These functions may take the form of a kind of definition of the field of study itself such as when he sees a function of science to be enabling the student to obtain a clearer understanding of the world as it is viewed by the scientist and mans relation to it, and the place of the world

in the larger universe; or the subject may perform external functions such as the contribution of science to the improvement of individual or public health or to the conservation of natural resources. The first sense of function is essentially a way of characterizing a field of study; in the second sense of function, the subject field serves as an instrument for achieving objectives drawn from Tylers other two sources. Subject matter is mainly one of several means by which one fulfills individual needs such as vocational aspirations or meets social expectations.

2.2.1.2 Needs of the Learner as a Source of Objectives The section on the "learners themselves as a source of educational objectives," although it is less strained and more analytical than the one on subject matter, is nevertheless elliptical. Tyler proceeds from the assumption that education is a process of changing behavior patterns of people. Tyler proceeds from his basic definition of education to a consideration of the reason for wanting to study the learner: "A study of the learners themselves would seek to identify needed changes in behavior patterns of the students which the educational institution should seek to produce."

2.2.1.3 Studies of Contemporary Life as a Source of Objectives Tylers section on studies of contemporary life as a source of curricular objectives follows the pattern set by the section on the learner. In this sense, the contemporary life source is just as dependent on the philosophical screen as is the learner source.

2.2.2 Selection and Organization of Learning Experiences Once the crucial first step of stating objectives is accomplished, the rationale proceeds relentlessly through the steps of the selection and organization of learning experiences as the means for achieving the ends and, finally, evaluating in terms of those ends. The learning experience is in some part a function of the perceptions, interests, and previous experience of the student. At least this part of the learning experience is not within the power of the teacher to select.

2.2.3 Evaluation The process of evaluation, according to Tyler, "is essentially the process of determining to what extent the educational objectives are actually being realized by the program of curriculum and instruction." In other words, the statement of objectives not only serves as the basis for the selection and organization of learning experiences, but the standard against which the program is assessed. To Tyler, then, evaluation is a process by which one matchs initial expectations in the form of behavioral objectives with outcomes. As a result of the basic principles, the role of the curricularist and teacher shifted to that of scientist. In the development of any curriculum using the Tyler method, hypotheses are to be established in direct relation to the expected learning outcomes for students. As the curriculum is enacted, teachers and curricularists become scientific observers, determining whether or not their curricular hypotheses are in fact demonstrated by student behavior. Following the application of the curriculum, educators return to the curricular plans to make any adjustments so as to ensure the proper outcomes in the classroom. In this case, students do not participate on any level in the planning or implementation of their education; rather, they solely assume the role of object of study. Tyler's basic principles were widely welcomed in classrooms and curriculum texts across the United States in 1949. Their functionality was well received and teachers generally appreciated the ease with which they could be applied to the daily work curriculum planning. It would be nearly thirty years, in fact, before any significant criticism were waged against Tyler's work. And by that time, his approaches were so entrenched in classroom practice that radical critiques of his approaches left few marked changes in the implementation of curriculum in the public schools.

CHAPTER III SUMMARY

Development of the curriculum has been initiated in 1918 by Bobbit. He state that the core curriculum theory is simple, namely human life. In 1923 Werrett W. Charlters make a theory about the curriculum. Charless theory same like Bobbits theory, but Charters more emphasis on vocational education.

In 1947 at the University of Chicago held the first major discussion of the theory of the curriculum. As a result of these discussions are formulated three main tasks curriculum theories: (1) Identify critical issues that arise in the development of curriculum and its underlying concepts, (2) Determine the relationship between these problems with the structure that supports it, (3) Seek or foresee the approaches in the future to solve the problem.

In 1949 Ralph W. Tylor suggests four basic questions that a review of the core curriculum: 1. Which educational goals to be achieved by the school? 2. How the educational experiences that should be provided to achieve these goals? 3. How to organize effectively the educational experience? 4. How do we determine that these goals have been achieved?

Steps of Tylers model of theory curriculum development 1. Objectives 2. Selection of learning experiences 3. Organization of learning experiences 4. Evaluation

References

Pinar, W., Reynolds, W., Slattery, P., and Taubman, P. 1995. Understanding Curriculum. New York: Peter Lang.

Stenhouse, L. (1975) An introduction to Curriculum Research and Development, London: Heineman Taba, H. (1962) Curriculum Development: Theory and practice, New York: Harcourt Brace and World. Tyler, R. W. (1949) Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.