User:NicHarri/sandbox

INTRODUCTION
This page seeks to provide a short biography on curriculum developers Ralph Tyler and Hilda Taba. It will also compare the Tyler model and the Taba model, supported by a concept map and conclude by examining the model which is reflected within the Caribbean context. The information will be presented via this Wikipedia page.

Education
Ralph W. Tyler was born in 1902 in Chicago. He was educated at Doane College in Crete Nebraska, attending school during the day and worked as a telegraph operator for a railway at night (Burell, 1994). At the age of 19, Tyler graduated with a Bachelor’s degree majoring in Philosophy, Physics and Mathematics and later assumed a role as a science teacher at high school Pierre South Dakota. In 1923, he achieved a Master’s degree from the University of Nebraska while working there as assistant supervisor of sciences from 1922-1927. Tyler continued to advance his education and achieved his Doctorate in Educational Psychology in 1927 from the University of Chicago. While there, he produced a dissertation entitled “Statistical Methods for Utilizing Personal Judgment to Evaluate Teacher Training Curricular”. He was recognized by notable educators such as Charles Judd for this work; who also inspired his later work in curriculum development and evaluation Nowakowski, 1983.

Academic Career
After achieving his doctoral degree, Ralph Tyler was appointed at the University of North Carolina where he worked with other teachers to develop curricula within the state. It was from here that Tyler’s reputation within curriculum development grew. In 1929 he embarked on as assignment leading a team of scholars at Ohio State University (OSU) where he taught them how to generate evidence that were aligned with their course objectives (Nowakowski, 1983). His time spent at OSU charted the trajectory of his career in shaping theory and practice in Education. He was selected as Director of Evaluation for the Progressive Education Association (known as the Eight-Year Study) aimed at reexamining the course requirements of American high schools to better understand the effects of high school experience on college performance. Marsh & Willis (2007) made reference to Tyler’s book Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction published in 1949 as the blueprint for curriculum as it has influenced how curricula are planned and developed worldwide. Within the book, Tyler’s model for curriculum development contends that there are four essential questions to be answered by curriculum developers. These are concerned with selecting objectives, selecting learning experiences related to those objectives, organizing learning experiences and evaluating; with focus on a linear approach (Tyler rationale) to answering the questions as answers to all lateral questions logically presuppose answers to all prior questions. Further, Tyler (1975) cited in Marsh & Willis (2007) captures the profoundness of his approach to curriculum planning stating that curriculum planners should design a system to operate effectively in a society where there are prevailing constraints and citizens who all have preferences, purposes and dynamic mechanism in operation.



Education
Hilda Taba was born in 1902 in a small village in south-east Estonia, the first of nine children of schoolmaster Robert Taba. She attended her father’s elementary school and then a local parish school. It was after graduating from a local girl’s school that she decided to become an elementary school teacher. She attended the University of Tartu where she majored in History and Education and after graduating in 1926, she went on to pursue doctoral studies in educational philosophy at Colombia University (Brady, 1992). Her educational direction was charted through the writing of her dissertation and was influenced by educational pioneers John Dewey and guided by William H. Kilkpatrick, to whom she dedicated her dissertation (Costa & Loveall, 2002).

Academic Career
Taba’s dissertation served as the foundation for her subsequent work. Pursuant to the achievement of her doctoral degree, she was appointed the role of Director of curriculum in the Dalton School in Ohio. Taba’s educational research was developed after she was invited by Ralph Tyler to serve on the Eight-Year Study in which her school was involved. She contributed to the study by evaluating social sensitivity which was aligned with the goal of preparing students to be effective participators in democratic society (Bernard-Powers, 1999). Taba's work on evaluation, led to a collaborative working relationship with Ralph Tyler and the design of a general framework and theoretical rationale for developing curriculum. It also led to a position as Director of the Curriculum Laboratory at the University of Chicago in 1938 and her subsequent leadership in intergroup education in the 1940s during which time she became widely recognized as an educational researcher (Krull, 2003).

Taba’s perspectives on curriculum design were influenced by and can be considered as a further elaboration of Ralph Tyler’s psychological principles of curriculum development, however, ascribing to them a more pedagogical and practical nature. In her version of the seven-step model which adopts a grassroots approach, Taba introduced ideas surrounding multiple and distinct categories of educational objectives (basic knowledge, thinking skills, attitudes, and academic skills) based on learners needs (Ornstein & Hunkins, (2009) . This approach allowed Hilda Taba to relate specific teaching/learning strategies to each category of objectives and allowed for more practical meaning through the selection and organization of instructional content and strategies of learning specific to each objective (Taba, 1967) . Many of Hilda Taba’s work developed and evolved throughout her career which can be grounded on four principles, the most noteworthy highlighted by Krull & Kurm (1996, p. 11-12) as:“Social processes, including the socialization of human beings, are not linear, and they cannot be modelled through linear planning. In other words, learning and development of personality cannot be considered as one-way processes of establishing educational aims and deriving specific objectives from an ideal of education proclaimed or imagined by some authority.”

AREAS OF COMPARISON AND CONTRAST BETWEEN THE TYLER AND TABA MODEL IN THE CONTEXT OF CARIBBEAN CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
As illustrated in the concept map above, the main concept of Taba’s model is that the teacher must be involved in curriculum development, placing students at the forefront of the curriculum. The curriculum development approach in the Commonwealth Caribbean is reflected more in the Tyler model. Curriculum development in the Caribbean takes on a centralized approach where there is an administrator approach taken to the content selection, which happens within the Ministries of Education within these territories. Regarding the identification of learning outcomes, generally at the secondary level, the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) Syllabi outline the instructional objectives and learning activities. The syllabi are not overly prescriptive, and teachers are cautioned that the syllabi should be used as a guide and not a blueprint and should adapt accordingly to suit the needs of their class. In relation to organizing learning experiences, Jennings-Wary (1984) highlighted that unlike the Taba Model, the Caribbean curriculum does not adopt a child-centered approach stressed the need for teachers to de-emphasize the “chalk and talk” and adopt the technique of questioning this taps into the child’s higher order thinking skills rather the recitation method. In terms of evaluation, thorough analyses are done at the CXC level with extensive comparisons across territories. The outcomes of these analyses are expected to provide feedback for teachers to aid them in improving their teaching. Similarly, teachers provide feedback on the relevance of prescribed content and the appropriateness of suggested learning activities; due to the exclusion of the involvement in curriculum development, this process is greatly constrained. Realistically, within the context of the Caribbean, there is a top-down approach to curriculum development unlike the scope of the Taba Model, and teachers are seen only as active implementers in development. Perhaps development in line with the Taba model should be considered. When we speak to the Caribbean, context is important, as though we are one region, context tends to be very different in relation to educational environments.