User:Timeisha Jacobs/sandbox

'School education is more vital than ever before in our continually inventive century (Lai & Lin, 2004) . Each school must be able to produce well-prepared pupils who can meet the intense worldwide competition in order to thrive in the fast-changing business environment. As a result, curriculum preparation has become a non-negotiable and critical subject for school officials to consider. This page discusses areas of comparison and contrast between the two approaches to curriculum development in the context of Caribbean curriculum development based on Ralph Tyler and Decker. F. Walker curriculum model.'

About Curriculum Developer: Ralph Tyler
Ralph W. Tyler (1902-1994), a pioneer in curriculum theory and development, as well as educational assessment and evaluation, was an American educator and researcher. Ralph Winfred Tyler was born in Chicago, Illinois, on April 22, 1902, and moved to Nebraska soon after (1904). Tyler earned an A.B. from Doane College in Crete, Nebraska, in 1921, and went on to teach high school in Pierre, South Dakota. In 1923, while working as an assistant supervisor of sciences at the University of Nebraska, he received his A.M. Tyler earned his Ph.D. in 1927 from the University of Chicago. Ralph Tyler has a vast number of academic articles spanning his whole career. One of his most valuable publications is Fundamental Principles of Curriculum and Instruction (1949), a course syllabus used by generations of college students as a primary reference for curriculum and instruction design (Antonelli, 1972).

About Curriculum Developer: Decker F. Walker
Decker, Walker Fannin was born in the United States on January 14, 1942, in Catlettsburg, Kentucky. Robert Farrel Walker and Ruby Opal (Cyrus) Stotts are his parents. In 1962, he married Joanne Edith Bakunas (divorced 1975). Glenn and David are their children. On June 12, 1981, he married Mary Ellen Bock. Carnegie-Mellon University awarded him a Bachelor of Science in Physics in 1963, a Master of Arts in Natural Science in 1966, and he obtained a Doctor of Philosophy in 1971 from Stanford University. His area of expertise was curriculum, and he was particularly interested in the process of curriculum creation and the formulation of curriculum policy. From 1963 to 1967, he taught science at Taylor Anderdice High School in Pittsburgh; since 1971, he has been an assistant professor of education at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California; from 1973 to 1974, he was an Associate Professor at the University of Illinois in Urbana; and from 1988 to 1989, he was a Program Officer at the National Science Foundation in Washington. He is a publisher of several books including Curriculum and Aims, and Fundamentals of Curriculum: Passion and Professionalism.

Curriculum Approaches: Technical Scientific- Non Technical Scientific
Curriculum development comprises of two approaches they are technical and non-technical methods (Hunkins and Ornstein 2017). When it comes to imparting education, the technical–scientific method is thought to be rational, efficient, and successful. The technical scientific method is used in several curriculum development approaches, with Ralph Tyler (1949) being one of the pioneers. On the other hand, the non-technical, focuses on the learner, is defined as subjective, personal, and aesthetic (Hunkins and Ornstein 2017). Decker Walker deliberative mode of curriculum creation is representative of the non-scientific approach.

Comparison and Contrast between Tyler's and Walker's Model
“Fundamental Principles of Curriculum and Instruction,” as articulated by Ralph W. Tyler, outlined four basic stages of curriculum creation. The first stage is to determine the school's or class's objectives. This is followed by step two where learning experiences are created that will assist students in completing step one. Step three, the teacher must decide on a logical order for the student experiences. The fourth and final phase is to assess the objectives that were outlined (Tyler, 1949). On the other hand, the platform phase, the deliberation phase, and the design phase are the three phases of Walker's model. Platform statements, which are made up of concepts, preferences, points of view, beliefs, and values held by curriculum creators, are recognized during this phase. The stage of deliberation is a complicated, randomized collection of interactions that requires comprehensive background work before the actual curriculum is created. It is during this stage curriculum creator’s start debating on the basis of recognized platform statements (Walker, 1971). Curriculum developers make judgments regarding the various components in the last step, which Walker refers to as the design stage.

The Tyler Model falls under the rational or objective models while Walker’s model is regarded as interactive. Tyler’s model is sequential and is a relatively inflexible method to understanding the curriculum process. The rational models are sequential and logical. They stress the set order of curricular elements, beginning with objectives and progressing in a logical sequence from objectives through content, technique, and evaluation. Whereas, the dynamic or interaction models, which come under the Walker Model, regard curricular processes as flexible, interactive, and changeable. This curriculum development process is not linear and sequential. The approach allows the developer to rearrange the planning sequence and navigate between curricular sections (Olivia and Gordon, 2013).

Tyler’s approach is prescriptive, taking into account the interactions between the learner and the instructor in order to maintain the student's success (Lunenburg, 2011). While, Walker’s model arose from a more descriptive approach to curriculum development, in which researchers observe instructors and developers as they developed curricula. The majority of selections are made based on views in order to provide a dynamic and adaptable curriculum that can help instructors and students. Unlike Tyler’s curricular plan that is centered on the learner, society, and achieving educational goals based on the students' learning requirements.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Models
The strengths of Tyler’s model lies in the fact that data obtained through goals centered on the learner, home environment, and subject content were utilized to create a design. Based on curricular design, his study promoted student performance and accomplishment (Olivia & Gordon, 2013). However, in terms of the reality of curriculum development, which is seldom a fixed or linear process, the goals model has faults. Another weakness is that it ignores the unpredictability of teaching and learning. While the model specifies certain goals to be met, learning happens outside of these goals owing to circumstances that cannot be predicted. The Walker model takes this weakness into account as it allows the flexibility of curriculum planners' to deliberate ideas, make modifications, and enhance school curriculum. Another strength of the model is that the different phases provides a hands-on approach to teaching and learning. This model is not without its weaknesses. One of weaknesses is that the ultimate result is unclear and may be skewed as a result of numerous opinions from curriculum experts and developers. In addition, the model's results can be modified at any time, and they may conflict with societal perspectives, students' religious views, and opinions based on cultural background.