3

Alternative Curriculum Conceptionsand DesignsM. FRANCES KLEIN

FOCUSING QUESTIONS

1. What is the measured curriculum?

2. In what waysdo alternative curriculum conceptions and designs influ-ence curriculum delivery and evaluation?

3. What common ideas do technological, cognitive processes, and aca-demic rationalism embrace?

4. How do social reconstructionism and self-actualization differ?5. How do the means-end, naturalistic observation, educational connois-

seurship, and case study forms of evaluation differ?6. Which type of curriculum conception and design do you prefer? Why?

The field of curriculum is not without its critics.Schwab (1978) has called the study of curriculummoribund and Jackson (1981) has even questionedthe existenceof curriculumas a field of study.Mostcurriculum scholars, however, are more confidentabout the existence of the curriculum field sincethey have spent their careers in an effort to concep-tualize it and study those practices which are calledcurriculum. Although some scholars may debatewhether curriculum studies exist and if so, how toconceptualize them, few practitioners would ques-tion the existence or importance of curriculum.Curriculum is the substance of schooling-the pri-mary reason why people attend school.

Many educational resources go to direct andsupport the curriculum. Countless committeemeetings are held to develop it; teachers are hired,trained, and supervised in order to implement it;administrators are exhorted to provide curriculumleadership as their primary role; materials are pur-

20

chased or created; learning resource centers arebuilt to support the curriculum; and educational re-searchers seek bases for improving it.

In the comparatively short time since itsgenerally recognized "birth" with the publicationof Bobbitt's book, The Curriculum (1918), thegrowth of the field has been slow and difficult.Curriculum scholars have debated significant ideasand proposed changes, but have not always ad-dressed themselves to what difference their ideas

make to the practitioner. Little wonder, then, thatthe practice of curriculum continues along a singlestrand of development with few alternative ideasconsidered.

Tyler's syllabus, Basic Principles of Curricu-

lum and Instruction (1950), was selected by theleadership group, Professors of Curriculum, as oneof two publications which has had the most influ-ence over the field of curriculum (Shane, 1981).1In the Tyler syllabus, concepts and procedures are

THREE ALTERNATIVE CURRICULUM CONCEPTIONS AND DESIGNS 21

spelled out as a way to view curriculum and theyhave been applied in diverse situations all over theworld in curriculum development efforts. Somecurriculum scholars owe their careers to their re-

finements and modifications of the Tyler rationale.Tyler identified three data sources which must

be used in curriculum development: society, stu-dent, and subject matter. These three data sourceshave historically stimulated alternative conceptionsof curriculum and the development of different cur-riculum designs. Scholars have long recognized theimportance of the three data sources, but too oftenmissed Tyler's message-that the use of one of thedata sources alone is inadequate in developing cur-ricula. A comprehensive curriculum must use allthree.

Current curriculum practice and research fo-cus almost exclusively on just one of these datasources, subject matter. Curricula have been devel-oped using what Eisner and Vallance (1974) callthe technological conception. Referred to here asthe measured curriculum, it has emerged into dom-inance over all other alternative conceptions and

designs.

THE MEASURED CURRICULUM

The measured curriculum is familiar to all educa-

tors. Behavioral objectives, time on task, sequentiallearning, positive reinforcement, direct instruction,achievement testing, mastery in skills and content,and teacher accountability are essential conceptsused in practice and research. The measured curric-ulum should neither be condemned nor used exclu-

sively to direct curriculum practice and research. Itmust be recognized for its strengths and limitations.It is compatible with some of the major educationaloutcomes valued by society-a store of knowledgeabout the world, command of the basic processes ofcommunication, and exposure to new content ar-eas. But this conception and design of curriculumcannot accomplish everything students are ex-pected to learn.

Most curriculum scholars have long advo-cated the use of different designs for a school'scurriculum; subject-centered, societal-centered,

and individual-centered designs are the most com-monly discussed. Unless alternatives to the techno-logical, subject-matter-based curriculum (i.e., themeasured curriculum) are used, some of the time-honored and persistently stated educational out-comes will not be accomplished.

OTHER CONCEPTIONS

Eisner and Vallance (1974) identified four otherconceptions of curriculum in addition to the tech-nological process: cognitive processes, self-actualization, social reconstruction, and academicrationalism. These four conceptions proposesomething the technological process does not-desired outcomes and a focus on the substance ofcurriculum. Two of the conceptions of curricu-lum, cognitive processes and academic rational-ism, are often planned and implemented throughthe use of the technological process and a subjectmatter design. The other two, self-actualizationand social reconstruction, require different curric-ulum designs and different concepts and proce-dures from the measured curriculum for planningand implementation.

Cognitive Processesand Academic Rationalism

Most similar to and compatible with the conceptsand procedures of the measured curriculum are ac-ademic rationalism and cognitive processes. Aca-demic rationalism advocates that the curriculumbe based on the storehouse of knowledge whichhas enabled humankind to advance civilization.This storehouse is defined as organized subjectmatter in the form of the academic disciplines.The subject-centered curriculum design and theefficient technological process of curriculumbuilding are compatible with this conception. Ithas been used well in the past and continues tohave strong and prestigious advocates-Adler inThe Paideia Proposal (1982), for example. Class-room practices and research are familiar to allwhen they are based on this conception. It is aform of the measured curriculum.

22 PART ONE CURRICULUM AND PHILOSOPHY

Cognitive processes as a conception of curric-ulum is less tied to specific content than is aca-demic rationalism. Cognitive processes are thoughtto be "content-free" in the sense that they are gen-eralizable from one subject area to another. Theconcept emphasizes the ability to think, reason, andengage in problem-solving activities. The specificcontent used is somewhat less important than theprocesses to be learned. This conception, too, hasits strong proponents-Bruner (1961) and Bloom(1956), for example. Many curricula include thisconception of outcomes as a major part of their in-tent and substance.

Curriculum development in both of these con-ceptions occurs in a similar way. The technologicalapproach of the Tyler rationale (1950) is com-monly used as a basis for planning and implement-ing curricula. The subject-centered design also iscommonly employed, using concepts such as be-havioral objectives, sequential organization ofcontent, time on task, appropriate practice, andachievement tests. However, teachers using thecognitive processes conception might operatemore from the information processing models ofteaching as conceptualized by Joyce and Weil(1980), while academic rationalists might more of-ten employ behavioristic models.

Social Reconstruction and Self-Actualization

The last two conceptions of curriculum, social re-construction and self-actualization, are quite dif-ferent and require different approaches to theirdevelopment. The concepts from the measuredcurriculum are not automatically transferable toresearchand practicebased on these conceptions.

Social reconstructionists look to society as abasis for the substanceof curriculum.In their view,the problems and dilemmas of society are whatought to be studied by students with the intent ofcreating a more just, equitable, and humane soci-ety. Studentsmust be involvedin studyinghow ob-stacles can be overcome so that a more idealsociety can be created. This becomes the contentof the curriculum. Students are not to learn aboutthem simply through a subject-centered design,

L

however. The traditional textbook coverage in so-ciology or political science is not what these cur-riculum advocates favor. They want the studentsout in the community,using original sources, inter-viewing people, formulating solutions, testing hy-potheses, and solving real problems-not justreading about them.

This design is societal centered rather thansubject centered. The disciplines are used only asthey relate to the problems being studied. Scienceis not studied as science nor history as history, butboth subjects may be essential to understandingand developing possible resolutions to a local pol-lution problem. If so, students are expected to drawupon both disciplines. Through this conceptionand design of curriculum, students learn how tolearn. They attack real problems, become mean-ingfully involved as citizens of the society, and be-gin to critically examine and help mold a bettersociety.

Traditional concepts and processes from themeasured curriculum are not applicable in practicefor social reconstruction. No defined body of con-tent can be spelled out in behavioral objectives.Time on task cannot be tracked easily sinceschooling is extended beyond the classroom. Timemay even be "wasted" in tracking down importantresources. Efficiency is not inherent to this design.Achievement also takes on a different definition,relating not to a body of prescribed content orskills but rather to how effectivelythe problem wasstudied and potentially resolved.

Testing as a form of evaluation is not applica-ble since each student or group of students mayhave studied different problems, used different re-sources, and posed different solutions. Other formsof evaluation emphasizing process more than con-tent must be used. Students must be more involvedin the planning, implementation, and evaluation ofsuch a curriculum. In a social reconstructionist ap-proach, curriculum development is not conductedprior to classroom interaction as in the measuredcurriculum. The curriculum must be developedjointly with the students.

The planning and implementation of a socialreconstructionist's curriculum using a societal-

~

THREE ALTERNATIVE CURRICULUM CONCEPTIONS AND DESIGNS 23

based design would be distinctively different fromother conceptions and designs. Rather than usingbehavioral objectives,practice would be guided bygoals or general objectives such as those proposedby Zahorik (1976) or by problem-solving objec-tives as suggested by Eisner (1979). The use ofgeneral objectives such as learning how to study aproblem or studying about discrimination, or ofproblem-solving objectives such as investigatingthe control of pollutants within the community orhow the school could be a more democratic institu-tion, allows for greater diversity in what is learnedby students. All students are not expected to havethe same experience or learn the same content.General objectives or problem-solving objectivesopen up the parameters for teaching and learning.

Classroom activities and evaluation proce-dures in social reconstruction would be developedthrough the use of criteria as proposed by Raths(1971) instead of according to the concepts of ap-propriate practice and achievement tests. Ratherthan activities which primarily provide appropriatepractice for the behavior and content of the objec-tives, activities would be planned which permitstudents to make informed choices and reflect ontheir consequences; take risks of successor failure;and share the development, implementation, andevaluation of a plan. Evaluation procedures wouldfocus on the provision of such activities and whatis learned through them, not on the mastery of con-tent or skills.

Teacher accountability would shift from a fo-cus on how well students learn content to suchconsiderations as processes used, community in-volvement achieved, and the diversity of relevantresources available to and used by the students.Learning in this design would not be sequential orlike a stairstep as in the measured curriculum, butmore like Eisner's (1979) spider-web model oflearning. Teachers would draw most often fromthe social interaction family of teacher models asconceptualized by Joyce and Weil (1980).

Curriculum as self-actualization is even fur-

ther removed from the traditional curriculum prac-tices and research of the measured curriculum. Inthis conception, students become the curriculum

developers, selecting for study what they are inter-ested in, intrigued by, and curious about. The cur-riculum is not preplanned by adults, but evolves asa student or a group of students and their teacherexplore something of interest. Growth is viewed asthe process of becoming a self-actualizing person,not learning a body of content or a set of cognitiveprocesses or studying the problems of society.Content is important to the extent that it is relevantand meaningful to the individual student, not as itis defined by someone else. The design becomesindividual centered with the role of the studentrather than that of the teacher being dominant.

In this conception and design, traditional con-cepts guiding practice are incompatible. Objec-tives are too directing; time on task becomesunmanageable as students pursue different ideas,at different paces, and in different ways; achieve-ment testing is impossible when students learn dif-ferent things; and appropriate practice becomesidiosyncratically defined based on students' owninterests. The classroom becomes an enriched,stimulating environment to challenge and appealto students, an active, noisy place where studentsinteract with each other as needed, and an exten-sion of a learning resource laboratory with diverseand plentiful materials. Students and teachers be-come co-learners embarked on a study plan of theirown making.

For this conception of curriculum as self-actualization, new concepts and procedures mustbe developed and legitimatized. Eisner's (1979)concept of expressive outcomes seems uniquelyfitted to this conception and design, and educa-tional criticism and connoisseurship are bettersuited as a mode of evaluation (Eisner, 1979). Thepersonal family of teaching models would be mostrepresentative of how teachers and students wouldinteract (Joyce & Weil, 1980).

Macdonald, Wolfson, and Zaret (1973) pro-pose learning organized around a continuous cycleof exploring, integrating, and transcending. Theyalso identify self-evaluation as an important aspectof this conception. Accountability according tothem should be social accountability. Is the schoolexemplifying the values which the society desires

24 PART ONE CURRICULUM AND PHILOSOPHY

to foster within young people? Other compatibleconcepts will need to be developed through anexploration of this design in practice, an opportu-nity curriculum workers do not frequently have.From such a curriculum students learn to developtheir unique talents and interests, to value learningas a process, to become even more creative, curi-ous, and imaginative, and to become more inte-grated, humane, caring human beings.

NEEDED CHANGESIN CURRICULUM RESEARCH

The procedures and concepts used in research helpdetermine what is "seen" in the curriculum. When

researchers structure interviews, questionnaires,and observation around behavioral objectives, timeon task, appropriate practice, and achievementtesting, those are the concepts which are docu-mented. Rather than rely exclusively on those con-cepts used in the practices of the measuredcurriculum (upon which much of the current re-search on curriculum is based), alternative ap-proaches to curriculum research must be appliedfor different conceptions and designs.

More naturalistic observations in classrooms

for the self-actualization conception and individual-based design are needed. New approaches to deter-mining individual perceptions of growth and relat-ing those to classroom practices would be one wayto proceed. Eisner's (1979) concepts of educationalconnoisseurship and criticism seem to have consid-erable compatibility and already offer an alternativeapproach to traditional curriculum research. Casestudies of classrooms using the social reconstruc-tion conception and societal-centered design maybe needed as research documentation.

However the research methodologies and con-structs are developed and used in relation to the al-ternative approaches to curriculum, they musthonor and be compatible with the unique expectedoutcomes of each and the different concepts uponwhich practice is based. To do otherwise is to de-stroy the potential any alternative in curriculumconception and design has to enhance the growthof students. This undoubtedly will require the use

of ideas other than our traditional research con-cepts such as validity, reliability, objectivity, andgeneralizability.

Research methodology and the type of re-search study conducted must accommodate the al-ternative shifts in curriculum conceptions anddesigns which are developed to guide practice. Re-searchers must learn to operationalize new con-cepts, to ask differentquestions, to viewcurriculumfrom different conceptions. The new research con-cepts and procedures must be compatible with thepractices and reflective of the differing educationaloutcomes each design will encourage.

CONCLUSION

For the purposes of this chapter, the placement ofbasic concepts and procedures has been perhapstoo narrow and somewhat rigid in order to makethe case for using alternative concepts and pro-cesses for different conceptions and designs. Itmay well be that several concepts have applicabil-ity in more than one conception and design. Onlyas they are given rigorous study in research andpractice will this become clear, however.

The extent to which schooling can accommo-date these designs-and newer ones being devel-oped-is a matter for debate and experimentation.However, much more can be accomplished withalternative conceptions and designs than is eventhought about now.Curriculum does not have to beeither one conception or another. With the use ofvarying conceptions and designs in each class-room, schools might well become much more at-tractive, challenging, and relevant places forstudents. And schooling as a process may becomemore responsive to the needs and desires of boththe individual student and society.

The field of study called curriculum is alive,but not as healthy as it might be. Its health couldbe enhanced by enriching the diet currently re-stricted to the measured curriculum with more di-verse nutrients from the storehouse of alternativeconceptions and designs. This enrichment is afundamental task to which future curriculumworkers must address themselves.

THREE ALTERNATIVE CURRICULUM CONCEPTIONS AND DESIGNS 25

ENDNOTE

1. The other most influential book was Dewey's Democ-

racy and Education (1916).

REFERENCES

Adler, M. J. (1982). The Paideia proposal. An educa-

tional manifesto. New York: Macmillan.Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational ob-

jectives: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans,Green.

Bobbitt, F. (19 I8). The curriculum. Boston: HoughtonMifflin.

Bruner, J. (1961). The process of education. Cambridge,MA: Harvard University Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York:Macmillan.

Eisner, E. W. (1979). The educational imagination. NewYork: Macmillan.

Eisner, E. w., & Vallance, E. (1974). Conflicting concep-

tions of curriculum. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Jackson, P. W. (1981). Curriculum and its discontents.

In H. A. Giroux, A. N. Penna, & w. F. Pinar (Eds.),

DISCUSSIONQUESTIONS

Curriculum and instruction: Alternatives in edu-

cation (pp. 367-381). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.Joyce, B., & WeiI, M. (1980). Models of teaching. Engle-

wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Macdonald, J. B., Wolfson, B. J., & Zaret, E. (1973). Re-

schooling society; A conceptual model. Washington,DC: Association for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment.

Raths, J. D. (April, 1971). Teaching without specific ob-jectives. Educational Leadership, 28,714--720.

Schwab, J. (1978). The practical: A language for curric-ulum. In I. Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.), Science,

curriculum and liberal education (pp.287-321).

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Shane, H. G. (1981, January). Significant writings that

have influenced the curriculum: 1906-8 I . Phi Delta

Kappan, 62 (5), 311-314.

Tyler, R. W. (1950). Basic principles of curriculum and

instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Zahorik, J. A. (1976, April). The virtue of vagueness in

instructional objectives. Elementary School Jour-nal, 76,411-419.

1. Which type of curriculum conception is most relevant to contemporary education?Which is the most irrelevant?

2. Which method of evaluation is most relevant to contemporary education?3. Suppose you are the curriculum director and can determine the curriculum for your

school. Which type of curriculum conception and method of evaluation wouldguide your selection? Would you use a single approach to curriculum design andevaluation?

4. What is the relationship between types of curriculum conceptions and educationalphilosophies?

5. How might schools become more relevant and challenging places for students?