When adults are involved in training sessions, there are various program planning models that can be used, depending on the goal of the training session. Researchers developed these models based on their ideological frameworks and goals. A literature review was performed to determine their relevance to the research.
Perkins Imagine that we have the opportunity to observe two classrooms where the teachers are discussing the Boston Tea Party. Both teachers have been integrating certain ideas across several subject matters, but they do not have the same agenda. In classroom A, the teacher highlights an integrative theme mentioned earlier in this book, dependence and independence.
The students have already read the history of the Boston Tea Party. To foster collaborative learning, the teacher divides the class into groups of two or three.
The students set out to diagram some of the intricacies behind the Boston Tea Party. For example, the Boston tea sellers were not entirely dependent on British tea; there was a thriving black market in Dutch tea.
This time, I want you to highlight relationships of dependency. Who depends on whom, how much, and in what ways? A distinction was promised between content and skills integration, yet the two teachers seem to be doing essentially the same thing.
In both classrooms A and B, the students are working in groups, making diagrams, and highlighting dependency relationships.
Where, then, lies the difference? The difference cannot be seen clearly in one lesson on one topic. However, if we look across several lessons in different subjects, we begin to see the essence of two contrasting attempts at integration across the curriculum.
In classroom A, the approach is thematic: In another lesson, an introduction to the concept of ecology, the teacher involves the students in discussing not concept mapping patterns of dependence and independence in the food web.
In exploring a short story about a child who runs away from home, the students make up additional episodes for the story, showing how the child just shifts his dependencies rather than become independent.
However, in classroom B, where the students also study ecology and read the story about the boy who ran away, matters play out differently. As part of their ecology unit, the students make a concept map of the ecological system of a pond: They highlight cause-and-effect relationships and predict the behavior of the system over time.
After the students read the short story, the teacher asks them to prepare concept maps of the problems the child faces upon running away from home: These examples illustrate the difference between content-oriented integration and skill-oriented integration.
In this chapter, we focus on the potentials of integrating thinking and learning skills across the curriculum. When, how, and why might we cultivate such an approach to integration?
What are its promises and its pitfalls? Contrasting Visions In its broadest sense curriculum integration embraces not just the interweaving of subjects e. While virtually all educators agree that students ought to acquire both skills needed to acquire knowledge and some knowledge itself, there is nowhere near unanimity on how instruction aiming toward these complementary sets of goals should be organized.
But there are many obstacles to systematic skills-content integration. To bring these issues to the fore, it is helpful to contrast a standard view of the relationship between skills and content and a futuristic alternative. What is most striking in the prevailing approach to skills and content is the dichotomy between elementary and secondary education.
The skill teaching orientation is so pervasive that it engulfs whatever it comes in contact with. Thus, basal readers run students through a gauntlet of literature skills in addition to regular reading skills, social studies emphasizes map skills, and proponents of higher-level thinking see their elevated visions transformed into still more skills lists.
Proponents of teaching reading and writing skills across the elementary curriculum receive a mixed reaction.-Demonstrates that effective curriculum requires a defined order of creation, thereby leading to a linear model.
-Provides a faculty a means for the complete development of a school's curriculum. A community's needs often differs from the general public's needs. To Tyler, evaluation is a process by which one matches the initial expectation with the outcomes.
Taba’s Model Taba’s model based upon the curriculum development process similar to Tyler's, but introduced additional steps and called for more information to be provided for each of them.
There are a number of contrasts in this model of curriculum theory and practice as compared with the product model. First, where the product model appeals to the workshop for a model, this process model looks to the world of experimentation. Compare and Contrast Between Tyler.
Different Models of Curriculum. CT2. Compare and contrast the. curriculum design models Taba’s, Tyler’s, Wheeler’s MODELS TABA TYLER WHEELER Compare and Contrast the Curriculum Design. Curriculum Models. Uploaded by. freelancer_jc/4(10). Scottish usage did not spread widely or rapidly.
In the normal course of events, once a useful concept is introduced, the term is elaborated, invested with specific meanings, and articulated as part of the technical terminology. The New York State Education Department is responsible for setting student learning expectations (standards) for what all students should know and be able to do as a result of skilled instruction.