DYNAMIC MODELS

OF CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT
Prepared by:
RYAN C. PANIS BSED FILIPINO S38
 The dynamic models describe how
Dynamic curriculum workers develop curricula in
a various educational contexts. The
Models of dynamic curriculum development
Curriculum models are usually used in school-based
settings.
 Decker Walker developed a model
for curriculum development and first
published it in 1971. Walker contended
Walker’s that curriculum developers do not
follow the prescriptive approach of the
Models of rationale-linear sequence of curriculum
elements when they develop curricula
Curriculum (Walker 1971; Marsh & Wills 2007; print
Development 1993). In his model, Walker was
particularly interested on how
curriculum workers actually do their
task in curriculum development.
 As shown in the next slide, we will witness Walker
was able to identify three phases, which he termed
platform, deliberation, and design.
 Beliefs, Theories, Concepcions,
Points of Views, Aims, Objectives

Walker’s Platforms
Naturalistic
Deliberations
Model (applying them to practical situations, arguing about, accepting, refusing, changing, adapting)

Curriculum Design
Walker’s In the platform phase, Walker
suggested that curriculum workers bring
Models of with them their individual beliefs,
knowledge, and values. They have their
Curriculum own ideas about how to do their task
and they are prepared to discuss and
Development argue about them.
Walker’s Deliberation phase, on the other
Models of hand, involves identifying which facts
are needed for means and ends,
Curriculum generating alternatives and considering
the consequences of these alternatives.
Development
 This phase is also used in weighing
Walker’s alternative costs and consequences, and
choosing the best alternative for the
Models of curriculum task they are about to do.
Curriculum The third phase, which is the
Curriculum Design, involves planning,
Development decision-making, and the actual
development of the curriculum.
Walker’s Walker’s model is a dynamic and
descriptive model of curriculum
Models of development. It reflects the realities of
how curriculum workers plan and
Curriculum develop a curriculum. It recognizes the
role and influence of curriculum workers
Development in any curriculum development tasks.
Walker’s In addition, it avoids the obsession
of starting with objectives. This practice
Models of is also observed in the model of Print
(1993). Since the model is dynamic, the
Curriculum curriculum workers may commence at
any point in the curriculum process
Development depending on their needs.
 This allows more flexibility among
Walker’s curriculum workers in developing
curriculum. Curriculum workers may
Models of review their previous decisions and
actions to correct some mistakes.
Curriculum According to Walker (1971), this model
Development can be used for a school-based
curriculum development.
 This model, being dynamic, can be
Walker’s confusing to other curriculum workers
who are not aware of the necessary
Models of process of curriculum development. If
this model is applied in the Philippines,
Curriculum where most teachers are mere
implementers of curriculum developed
Development by other educators, it may not have
value to them.
 Another weakness of Walker’s
model is a strong tendency of
Walker’s curriculum to be stuck in Phase II.
According to Print (1993), too much
Models of discussion may lead to analysis-paralysis
syndrome that could penalize or prolong
Curriculum the process of curriculum development.
Probably, this model can be tolerated
Development more on the design process involved in
Phase III to help teachers and neophyte
curriculum workers to do their tasks.
 Situational Analysis

Goal Formulation
Skilbeck’s
Curriculum Program Building

Development Interpretation and

Model Implementation

Monitoring, Feedback,
Assessment, and
Reconstruction
 Skilbeck’s curriculum model develop
in 1976.
Skilbeck’s Skill beck suggested an approach for
devising curriculum at the school
Curriculum level by which teacher could
realistically develop appropriate
Development curriculum. The model claims that
for SBCD (School Based Curriculum
Model Development) to work effectively
five steps are required in the
curriculum process.
 Skilbeck model locates curriculum
Skilbeck’s design and development firmly
within a cultural framework. It views
Curriculum such design as a means whereby
teachers modify and transform pupil
Development experience through providing
insights into cultural values,
Model interpretative frameworks and
symbolic systems.
 It is a more comprehensive
Skilbeck’s framework, which can encompass
either the process model or the
Curriculum objective model depending on which
aspects of the curriculum are being
Development designed. It is flexible, adaptable
Model and open to interpretation in the
light of changing circumstances.
Skilbeck’s It does not presuppose a linear
Curriculum progression through
components. Teachers can begin at
its

Development any stage and activities can develop

concurrently.
Model
 The model outlined does not
presuppose a means-end analysis at
Skilbeck’s all; it simple encourages teams or
groups of curriculum developers to
Curriculum take into account different elements
and aspects of the curriculum-
Development development process, to see the
Model process as an organic whole, and to
work in a moderately systematic
way.
 1. Situation Analysis
Five 2. Objectives
Steps of 3. Design (Program building)
Skilbeck 4. Interpretation and Implementation
5. Evaluation (Monitoring, feedback,
Model assessment, and reconstruction)
 Situational Analysis

Goal Formulation
Skilbeck’s
Curriculum Program Building

Development Interpretation and

Model Implementation

Monitoring, Feedback,
Assessment, and
Reconstruction
 1. Situation Analysis
Skilbeck’s Skilbeck describes the
Curriculum situational analysis phase both
external and internal to the
Development school.
Model External Situational Analysis
Internal Situation Analysis
Skilbeck’s External Analysis
Curriculum  Culture and social changes and
expectation including parents’
Development expectations, employer requirements,
community assumptions and values,
Model changing relationships (adults and
children), ideology.
 External Analysis
Skilbeck’s  Educational system requirements and
Curriculum challenges e.g. policy statements,
examinations, local authority demands
Development and expectation
curriculum project,
or pressure,
educational
Model research.
 The changing nature of subject matter
to be taught.
Skilbeck’s External Analysis
Curriculum  The potential contribution of teacher
Development support system e.g. teacher training
institutions and research institutes.
Model  Flow of resources in school.
Skilbeck’s Internal Analysis
Curriculum  Pupils: aptitudes, abilities and define
educational needs
Development  Teacher: Values, attitudes, skills,
Model knowledge, experience, special
strength and weakness.
Skilbeck’s Internal Analysis
Curriculum  Perceive and felt problems and
shortcoming in existing curriculum
Development  Material resources including plant,
Model equipment’s and potential for
enhancing these.
Skilbeck’s Internal Analysis
Curriculum  Pupils: aptitudes, abilities and define
educational needs
Development  Teacher: Values, attitudes, skills,
Model knowledge, experience, special
strength and weakness.
 2. Goal Formation
 Skilbeck assigns a decision making
Skilbeck’s role to teachers, senior staff and
Curriculum principals in the development of
objectives for the school-based
Development curriculum.
Model Skilbeck does not categorically state
the degree of participation of the
school staff at the various levels in
the school organization.
 According to Skilbeck:
Skilbeck’s “The curriculum is, for the learner
and the teacher, made up of
Curriculum experiences; these should be
experiences of value, developed by
Development the teacher and learner together
Model from a close and sympathetic
appraisal of the learner's needs and
his characteristics as a learner."
 Action Research
Action research is based on the
Skilbeck’s assumption that the involvement of
Curriculum teachers in a scientific study of an
on-the-job problem is a promising
Development approach.
Model Our experience as consultants in
action research shows that this
involvement is also a source of great
difficulties.
 According to Skilbeck Interest of
Parents:
Skilbeck conceives of parents being
Skilbeck’s invited by teachers to discuss matters
relating to the development of
Curriculum curriculum objectives.
Development Research by Kohn' and Bridge, however,
show that not all parents are interested
Model in participating in school decisions, and
that not all parents are well enough
informed to participate in school
decision.
Skilbeck’s According to Skilbeck:
Curriculum “One of the most important reasons
for teacher responsibility in program
Development development relates to the concept of
cognitive innovation and meaningful
Model learning”.
 3. Program Building
Skilbeck’s
Which comprises the selection of
Curriculum subject matter for learning, the
Development sequencing of teaching-learning
episodes, the deployment of staff and
Model the choice of appropriate
supplementary materials and media.
Skilbeck’s 3. Program Building
Curriculum Schwab point of view:
Development Problems posed to teachers who
seek to use externally developed
Model curriculum materials.
 3. Program Building
The problems concern the
Skilbeck’s learning and developmental
Curriculum theories upon which the materials
are based.
Development Schwab maintains that learning
Model and developmental theories are
only one of - several starting
points for the design of a
curriculum.
 4. Interpretation & Implementation
Skilbeck’s A closer examination of theories of
cognitive motivation will throw greater
Curriculum light on Skilbeck's insistence on involving
teachers in a problem-solving situation.
Development Theories of cognitive motivation are useful
Model in explaining why circumstantial
differences are appropriate to the level or
degree of innovativeness by teachers.
 4. Interpretation & Implementation
Skilbeck’s  Two features of cognitive motivation often
identified (McReynolds1) are the minimization of

Curriculum unassimilated perceptual material and the

optimization of innovation rate.

Development  McReynold's study shows that during the

implementation phase of Skilbeck's model it is the
Model interaction between the information concerning the
curriculum design and the teacher's present
cognitive structures that determines whether that
teacher will be motivated to exert the effort
necessary to make the information meaningful.
 4. Interpretation & Implementation
Skilbeck’s All information can be described in terms of
Curriculum the relative proportion that is perceived by
the potential implementer (the teacher) as
Development being familiar and readily assailable into
existing cognitive structures as compared
Model with the proportion that is perceived as being
unfamiliar and requiring cognitive
accommodation.
 5. Evaluation
(Monitoring, feedback, assessment, and
reconstruction):

Skilbeck’s Skilbeck lists the "problems of continuous

Curriculum assessment" as being of central concern
during the evaluation.
Development Skilbeck perceives the role of the teacher
to be central during the evaluation phase
Model to ensure continual reconstruction of the
curriculum. Leithwood and Russell l agree
and add:
Skilbeck’s 5. Evaluation
(Monitoring, feedback, assessment, and
Curriculum reconstruction):

Development “Mechanisms are necessary to ensure that a

change will be in a continual process of
Model revision in the light of formative evaluation
data”