CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

CURRICULUM AND PEDAGOGY

Lecturer :
Dr. Saifolrudin Khalid bin Mahzan

ABDURRAHMAN THALIB (833456)

MUHAMMAD RIFALDI (833465)

AWANG HAD SALLEH GRADUATE SCHOOL

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES
ISLAMIC EDUCATIONAL STUDIES
UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
2024
A. Curriculum Development
Before delving into curriculum development, one must first grasp the concepts of
curriculum and education. With a thorough grasp of these two ideas, it is expected that
education managers, specifically those responsible for implementing curriculum, can
effectively fulfil their responsibilities. The curriculum and education are compared to two sides
of a coin, they are closely connected and cannot be divided.

From the moment they are born, humans possess an inherent potential (fitrah) that needs
to be nurtured to be useful in their future lives. Intentional and mindful actions can be taken to
realize this capacity, leading to the attainment of maximum growth and development.
Education involves adults interacting with young individuals to uncover their abilities and help
them grow and develop. Education serves to offer motivation for the growth of human
capabilities in alignment with certain goals (Dr. Yunus et al., 2023).

Curriculum is a structured learning journey created by systematically organizing

knowledge and experiences, overseen by an educational institution to engage and inspire
students in their learning. An additional expert perspective suggests that the curriculum consists
of carefully thought out and executed lessons, whether conducted individually or in groups,
and whether inside or outside of the traditional classroom setting. Under Law Number 20 of
2003, curriculum entails plans and arrangements related to content, goals, and teaching
materials that act as a framework for carrying out educational activities to reach National
Education objectives (Sukino, 2023).

B. Technical Scientific Approach

The technical-scientific method in education focuses on teaching students’ specific
subjects with clear outcomes. This approach uses scientific principles and carefully tracks the
elements of curriculum design. Teachers who follow this method aim to systematically detail
the processes that help develop the curriculum (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).

The development of the technical-scientific curriculum started around 1900, when

educators began using empirical methods, like surveys and analyses of human behaviour, to
determine curriculum content. This moves towards a scientific approach to creating curricula
happened alongside advancements in biology, physics, and chemistry, as well as the adoption
of "machine theory" in business and industry (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).

1. Bobbitt and Charters Model

 Franklin Bobbitt likened creating a curriculum to building a railroad: once the
overall route is decided, the builder surveys the land and then lays the track. In the
same way, developing a curriculum involves planning a person's path to growth,
culture, and their unique talents. According to Bobbitt, the first step in curriculum
development is to identify the activities that should be part of students' lives, as well
as the abilities and personal qualities needed for their effective performance. To
provide a meaningful educational experience, a scientific method was required to
design curricula that educate students in specific activities essential for a productive
life that benefits society. This approach is still used today in various forms of task
analysis (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
Werrett Charters, a contemporary of Bobbitt, also supported activity analysis.
However, Charters emphasized that changes in the curriculum always follow shifts
in our understanding of the goals of education. He wanted educators to link
educational aims with the activities people engage in. Charters proposed four steps
for building a curriculum: "(1) selecting objectives, (2) dividing them into ideals
and activities, (3) breaking them down into manageable units, and (4) gathering
methods for achieving them." (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
Bobbitt and Charters were key figures in establishing scientific curriculum
development. They viewed the creation of an effective curriculum as a process
leading to a meaningful educational program. Both emphasized the importance of
aligning goals, objectives, and activities. They saw goal selection as a normative
process, while choosing objectives and activities was considered empirical and
scientific. Bobbitt and Charters believed that curricular activities could be
systematically planned, studied, and evaluated (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
2. Tyler Model
Ralph Tyler’s technical-scientific model is among the most well-known
approaches. In 1949, Tyler published "Basic Principles of Curriculum and
Instruction," where he detailed his method for curriculum development (Ornstein
& Hunkins, 2018).
According to Tyler, those involved in curriculum inquiry should:
(1) determine the school’s purposes,
(2) identify educational experiences related to those purposes,
(3) understand how these experiences are organized, and
(4) evaluate the purposes.
 Tyler suggested that curriculum planners should identify objectives by
collecting data from the subject matter, the learners, and society. After establishing
several general objectives, planners should refine them by considering the school’s
philosophy and the psychology of learning. Tyler believed that sequencing needed
to be somewhat systematic to achieve the maximum cumulative effect. He thought
that ideas, concepts, values, and skills should be seamlessly integrated into the
curriculum (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
Some critics argue that Tyler's approach is too linear, overly reliant on
objectivity, and based on assumptions about cause and effect. They contend that it
justifies all educational experiences solely through the objectives they aim to
achieve. Despite these criticisms, Tyler's method of curriculum development
remains widely adopted by school district personnel and continues to influence
universities. Its practicality and logical framework appeal to many educators and
administrators (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
3. TABA Model
Unlike Tyler, Taba believed in the active participation of teachers in curriculum
development. She promoted what is often referred to as the grassroots approach,
which shares similarities with Tyler’s model in its structured steps (Ornstein &
Hunkins, 2018).
Taba advocated for teachers to start by creating specific teaching-learning units
tailored to their students' needs, and then gradually build towards a broader
curriculum design. She favored an inductive approach, contrasting with the
traditional deductive method that begins with a general design and moves towards
specifics (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
Taba’s grassroots model entails seven major steps:
1) Diagnosis of needs. The teacher identifies the needs of the students for
whom the curriculum is being planned.
2) Formulation of objectives. The teacher specifies objectives.
3) Selection of content. The objectives suggest the curriculum’s content. The
objectives and content should match. The content’s validity and significance
also are determined.
4) Organization of content. The teacher organizes the content into a sequence,
taking into consideration learners’ maturity, academic achievement, and
interests.
 5) Selection of learning experiences. The teacher selects instructional methods
that engage the students with the content.
6) Organization of learning activities. The teacher organizes the learning
activities into a sequence, often determined by the content. The teacher must
bear in mind the students who will be taught.
7) Evaluation and means of evaluation. The curriculum planner determines
which objectives have been accomplished. Students and teachers must
consider evaluation procedures.
4. Backward-Design Model
Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe advocate for "backward design," or "backward
development" as they prefer to call it. This approach starts by identifying the desired
outcomes. What do you want to achieve? What should students know and be able
to do? What values and attitudes should they hold? What skills should they possess
and be able to demonstrate? (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
Wiggins and McTighe outline three levels of decision-making in the initial stage
of backward design. At the first and most general level, an educator considers goals
and aligns them with national, state, and local content standards. At the second
level, curriculum developers select content, choosing valuable information and
skills that will help students achieve the desired outcomes. The final level involves
narrowing down these content possibilities to focus on the most essential elements
(Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).

C. Nontechnical Nonscientific Approach

Nontechnical curriculum developers, also known as postmodern or post-constructivist,
emphasize the subjective, personal, aesthetic, heuristic, spiritual, social, and transactional
aspects of education. Specialists and generalists in this field believe that their actions are
inherently complex and turbulent, characterized by an "orderly disorder." It is widely
acknowledged that we live in a complex world (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).

Nontechnical curriculum developers prioritize learners over subject matter, valuing

content only to the extent that students find it meaningful. The subject matter should offer
opportunities for reflection and critique, engaging students in the creation of meaning. For
nontechnical curriculum developers, learning is holistic and cannot be divided into separate
parts or steps. They often favor child-centered and, to a lesser extent, problem-centered designs
(Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).

1. Deliberation Model
In the deliberation model of nontechnical curriculum development, educators
share their views with colleagues and sometimes with students about the goals of
education and what should be taught (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
Noye outlines six stages in this model:
(1) public sharing,
(2) highlighting agreement and disagreement,
(3) explaining positions,
(4) highlighting changes in position,
(5) negotiating points of agreement, and
(6) adopting a decision.
2. Slattery’s Approach
Patrick Slattery, in his book "Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era,"
presents "an integrated global and local vision for curriculum development in the
postmodern era." (Slattery, 2006).
Slattery's first guiding principle emphasizes that educators must acknowledge
the potential of education to redefine the concept of schooling on both global and
local levels. Additionally, educators should respect each student's uniqueness and
recognize the myriad relationships within each student's experiences, incorporating
complexity theory and chaos theory.
His second guiding principle is a directive rather than a process suggestion.
Slattery advises followers of postmodern curriculum development to reject all
modernist perspectives on curriculum and schooling. This rejection is essential to
fostering "an appropriate postmodern educational experience.".
Third, to be aligned with the postmodern camp, one must accept that
postmodernism provides "an important emerging approach to understanding
curriculum." Educators must also embrace the challenge of using the curriculum to
create opportunities for students to address social and educational issues on a global
scale.
 Fourth, the curriculum must be studied as "currere" allowing educators to
develop generalizations about schooling and its curricula. "Currere" a Latin word
meaning "to run the racecourse," is the root of the word curriculum.
Fifth, curricularists need to be not only curriculum developers but also scholars
of curriculum. They must engage in hermeneutics, the science of interpretation,
which is essential in all scholarly fields. This involves studying and interpreting
documents within their disciplines to deepen their understanding and enhance their
contributions to curriculum development.

3. Doll’s Model
Doll's suggested four R's are "Richness, Recursion, Relations, and Rigor." (Jr
& D, 2004).
Richness refers to the depth of curricular content and experiences. A rich
curriculum offers complex layers of meaning and provides students with
opportunities to explore various interpretations of content and experiences. Doll
emphasizes that a rich curriculum should include an appropriate level of
indeterminacy, anomaly, inefficiency, chaos, disequilibrium, and lived experience.
Recursion, Doll's second R, involves the concept of repetition or happening
again, akin to the iterative process in mathematics.
Relations, Doll's third R, plays a crucial role in a postmodern curriculum both
pedagogically and culturally. It focuses on the connections and structural links that
shape the curriculum, encompassing its content and pedagogical experiences. Doll
stresses that relations are dynamic actions rather than static positions.
Rigor, Doll's final R, is perhaps the most critical of the four. Doll suggests that
these four R's serve as criteria for evaluating the process of curriculum development
rather than as sequential steps in creating postmodern curricula.

D. Enacting Curriculum Development

Curriculum development involves curriculum design and instructional design, with
educators typically more knowledgeable about the former. Schools often update curricula while
instructional practices remain stagnant. Instructional design is defined as the systematic
development of instructional specifications to enhance instruction quality. Programs need to
focus on how new content is taught and how classroom environments are structured.
Curriculum developers often rely on instructional design specialists for expertise.
 1. Establishing Curriculum Teams
The highest-level curriculum teams are at the federal or state level, generating programs
and policies like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. This chapter focuses on local
curriculum teams, where specifics are aligned with state or federal standards. Teachers are key
members of curricular teams, drawing on their classroom experiences. In some districts,
teachers adapt textbooks to lesson plans, while curriculum boards select materials in others.

Teacher involvement in curriculum teams is ideal, but some resist due to time
constraints. Successful curriculum development requires principal involvement, with recent
research emphasizing their role in change initiatives. Effective principals foster teacher
communities and distributive leadership, involving all staff in curriculum teams and other
educational matters. Outside curriculum experts are sometimes hired for their expertise.

Elementary teachers cover multiple subjects, requiring collaboration across grades in

curriculum development. Middle and high schools focus more on specific subjects,
determining teacher involvement based on the curriculum being developed. It is essential for
teachers who will teach the new curriculum to be part of the development team.

2. Generating Aims, Goals, and Objectives

Curriculum development involves addressing challenges and balancing the need for
students to acquire knowledge, skills, and attitudes with the desire to reflect and promote
societal interests. Schools derive their curricular aims from various sources, including local
citizens, state organizations, and national groups. Educators begin curriculum development by
analysing needs and tasks, determining what students must learn for success in school and
beyond. This phase involves gathering data, observing schools and classrooms, and consulting
with stakeholders. By identifying gaps in learning, educators can shape the curriculum to
include relevant content, activities, and evaluation methods.

Aims in education are crucial for providing direction and reflecting values. Educational
aims encompass self-realization, literacy, social mobility, employment skills, decision-making
abilities, and continued learning. Educators should strive to create programs that address
intellectual, social, personal, and moral aims, aiming to cultivate citizens who contribute to
world peace and prosperity. Goals in curriculum development specify what learners should
achieve within a particular subject or program. Goals are more specific than aims and guide
the educational program towards specific purposes. Educational goals may include fostering
good citizenship, promoting diversity and understanding, developing critical thinking skills,
and instilling democratic values. Goals should be relevant to current needs while also preparing
students for the future.

In the context of educational aims and goals, specific objectives are necessary to
complement long-term aims and goals. Objectives are short-term and can be used to approach
broader goals, such as improving students' skills in information processing in science. When
formulating objectives, educators must ensure they align with stated goals and aims. Objectives
should be specific, relevant, and valuable to students both in the present and future. However,
the challenge arises when determining the worth of objectives, as value can vary among
students. Standards play a crucial role in educational decision-making, but the challenge lies in
ensuring they are applicable across diverse contexts. National standards often assume
uniformity among students, teachers, and school districts, which may not reflect the reality of
educational diversity. Objectives should be clearly expressed and agreed upon to avoid
ambiguity and ensure effective implementation. Educators must consider students' needs and
interests when formulating objectives to ensure appropriateness and relevance.

Educational objectives can be categorized into cognitive, affective, and psychomotor

domains. Cognitive objectives focus on knowledge and cognitive processes, with varying
levels of complexity. Affective objectives address beliefs, attitudes, and values, progressing
from receiving stimuli to internalizing values. Psychomotor objectives relate to physical
movements and skills, ranging from reflex movements to skilled movements. Each domain
requires the attainment of previous levels to progress effectively. Overall, objectives should be
periodically revised to accommodate changes in students, society, knowledge, and instructional
strategies. Objectives should enable students to progress in their educational journey and
prepare them for the world outside of school. Compliance with federal and state mandates is
essential for the legality of objectives, ensuring minimal levels of content knowledge and skills
attainment. The complexity of human learning and action necessitates a comprehensive
approach to developing objectives that encompass knowledge, skills, emotions, attitudes,
ethics, morals, and spiritual dimensions.

3. Selecting Curriculum Content

Curricularists must determine the most valuable knowledge for students in today's
global and digital world. The question of what knowledge is essential and to what extent
students should master it brings up the issue of standards. Useful knowledge is culturally and
historically specific, and skill levels for using knowledge vary based on individual interests
and needs. As societies evolve, the value of knowledge changes, and what is essential in one
society may not hold the same value in another.
Educators face the challenge of selecting content for curricula that cater to a global
society, considering both real and virtual worlds. The virtual world, as described by Yong
Zhao, requires different knowledge and skills. Second Life, a 3-D virtual world, serves as a
platform for education, allowing students to engage in various activities and experiences
beyond traditional learning methods.
Christine Sleeter highlighted the historical bias in school content, favoring the dominant
culture while excluding marginalized groups. In the global and digital era, curricularists must
select content that benefits all students, keeping it relevant and engaging. Alfred North
Whitehead criticized the presentation of "dead" knowledge in education, emphasizing the
importance of keeping content alive and connected to real-life applications.
Different knowledge domains have unique concepts and relationships, leading to
various ways of organizing content. Curriculum planners can adopt philosophical,
psychological, political, or practical approaches to content organization. Each approach
focuses on different aspects of learning and aims to optimize students' understanding and
engagement with the curriculum.
Criteria for selecting content include self-sufficiency, significance, validity, interest,
utility, learnability, and feasibility. Content should help learners achieve self-sufficiency,
contribute to the curriculum's overall aims, be authentic, meaningful, and useful. Educators
must consider students' interests, the ease of learning, and the practicality of implementing the
content within existing constraints. The global and digital world opens new possibilities for
curriculum content, emphasizing the importance of selecting knowledge that has utility and
appeal on a global scale.
4. Selecting Curriculum Experiences
Curriculum developers focus on content, instructional strategies, and activities to
enhance students' values and skills. The emphasis is on right-hemisphere thinking skills in the
21st century. Educational experiences should stimulate excitement and creativity,
incorporating play and global interactions. Balancing left and right-brain stimulation is crucial.
Feasibility is important for implementing pedagogies. Quality education requires best practices
in curriculum design and high standards in implementation.
5. Selecting Educational Environments
Educational spaces shape student learning outcomes. Spaces influence inner
experiences, knowledge, and understanding. Design reflects community values and impacts
students' lives. Schools and housing designs reflect societal values and priorities. Educational
environments should foster communication and mutual learning. Heterotopias stimulate
inquiry and diverse learning strategies. Hidden curriculum influences learning outcomes.
Technological advancements alter student interactions. Educators must design environments
that promote empathy, tolerance, and social connections for effective learning.
6. The Final Synthesis
Curriculum development aligns content with school goals. Educators involved in all
stages, from design to lesson plans. Key to align content with school objectives, like improving
literacy (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018).
References
Dr. Yunus, S. P. I. M. P. I., Mudzakir, S. P. I. M. A., Nurrahmaniah, S. P. M. P., & Adab, P.
(2023). MENELAAH PERKEMBANGAN KURIKULUM. Penerbit Adab.
https://books.google.com.my/books?id=9PLMEAAAQBAJ
Jr, W. E. D., & D, W. (2004). The Four R’s: An Alternative to the Tyler Rationale. In D. J.
Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The Curriculum Studies Reader. Routledge.
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2018). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues
(Seventh edition, global edition). Pearson.
Slattery, P. (2006). Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. Routledge.
Sukino, S. (2023). Pengembangan Kurikulum Dan Pendekatan Pembelajaran Pendidikan
Agama Islam Kontekstual. Belajea: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 8(1), 1.
https://doi.org/10.29240/belajea.v8i1.6597