1. b) The Literature Review On Major Types Of Curriculum 5 Types Of Curriculum (John Goodlad) "Curriculum is often taken to mean a course of study. When we set our imaginations free from the narrow notion that a course of study is a series of textbooks or specific outline of topics to be covered and objectives to be attained, broader more meaningful notions emerge. A curriculum can become one's life course of action. It can mean the paths we have followed and the paths we intend to follow. In this broad sense, curriculum can be viewed as a person's life experience." (Connelly and Clandinin, 1988). This definition provides a view that is more consistent with curriculum that is more meaningful, relevant, interesting, and engaging. Yet even these distinctions are not sufficiently precise to encompass the several different types of curriculum. It is important to note that the word curriculum (as defined from its early Latin origins) means literally “to run a course.” If students think of a marathon with mile and direction markers, signposts, water stations, and officials and coaches along the route, they can better understand the concept of types of curriculum (Wilson, 2005). In addition to the above statement, John Goodlad and associates (1979) suggested several key distinctions. As Goodlad
analysed curriculum, he determined that there were five
different forms of curriculum planning. The ideological curriculum is the ideal curriculum as constructed by scholars and teachers. The formal curriculum is that officially approved by state and local school boards. The perceived curriculum is the curriculum of the mind of teachers, parents, and others think the curriculum to be. The operational curriculum is the observed curriculum of what actually goes on hour after hour in the classroom. Finally, the experiential curriculum is what the learners actually experience
According to Goodlad the ideal curriculum is defined as the beliefs, opinions, and values of the scholars in the disciplines and in schooling regarding what ought to be included in the curriculum and how it ought to be developed. It is an abstraction that may not exist with any degree of consensus from subject area to subject area or from one specialist to another. The formal curriculum also known as expectations for what should be done in the school constitute the formal curriculum which is derived from sources outside the classroom and consist of such things as state or district guidelines, school department syllabus, listings of course offerings, legislative decrees, national curriculum projects, commercially prepared learning materials, school board policies, district statements of philosophy, and even demands by community groups or parents for the inclusion or exclusion of specific content. Based on John Goodlad most often the formal curriculum consists of written statements about what should be done. Also, parts of it reside in the more or less unspoken expectations of people outside the classroom. The instructional curriculum referred by Goodlad as the teachers bring their own values, beliefs, and competencies to bear as they plan their teaching. Often they adapt the formal curriculum because they perceive that their students have certain unique needs and/or interests. On the other hand, sometimes they attempt to use a given curriculum without regard for the individual differences that exist in their classrooms. In additional, Goodlad define the operational curriculum as the aspect of curriculum as "what actually goes on in the classroom." It takes into account the alterations made in the instructional curriculum as teachers actually engage with students in the teaching-learning process.
Finally, Goodlad stated the experiential curriculum. This perspective has two different facts: 1) student perceptions of the curriculum that is offered to them, and 2) what is actually learned? student outcomes. A study from November Kappan article addressed that, "Once the contextual domain is sufficiently well described, the obvious next step is a longitudinal study searching out the connections with achievement indicators. Such a study is long overdue, but at present, in our view, it is premature.
7 types of curriculum (Glatthorn) While those distinctions in general seem important, the terms are perhaps a bit cumbersome and the classifications are not entirely useful to curriculum workers. It seems to be more useful in the present context to use the following concepts with some slightly different denotations: the recommended curriculum, the written curriculum, the supported curriculum, the taught curriculum, the tested curriculum, and the learned curriculum and hidden curriculum. i)
The Recommended Curriculum
The recommended curriculum is that which is recommended by scholars and professional organizations. The best source for the recommendations of professional organizations is Kendall and Marzano (1997). According to Glathorn, the recommended curriculum is the one recommended by the individual scholars, professional associations, and reform commissions; it also encompasses the curriculum requirements of policymaking groups, such as federal and state governments. Similar to Goodlad’s “ideological curriculum,” it is a curriculum that stresses “oughtness,” identifying the skills and concepts that ought to be emphasized, according to the perceptions and value systems of the sources. According to . Dugger, Meade, Delany, & Nichols, 2003, citizens of today must have a basic understanding of how technology affects their world and how they coexist with technology. Attaining technological literacy is as fundamentally important to students as developing knowledge and abilities in the traditional core subject areas. Students need and deserve the opportunity to attain technological literacy through the educational process. So, the advancements in technology also play a role. The widespread use of technology in the nation’s schools has influenced several of the professional associations to include in their recommendations aspects of technology across the curriculum.
The impact of technology is best evidenced by Monica Martinez (2010), president of New Tech Network, who notes that with the advent of digital media, network teaching, and learning platforms, we now have an unprecedented opportunity to reimagine teaching and learning. In addition, based on Jim Cox, president of JK Educational Associates, Inc. in Anaheim, California First, “We must define what we mean by standards. Second, we must create a set of standards that are “doable” in the classroom. Finally, teachers must view standards as an important part of their work. I call these the three Ds, definition, doability, and desirability.” Raising standards in the core curriculum subjects continues to gain momentum in states and school districts across the country. In essence, “the process of setting standards for state assessments should follow the suggestions of many experts—good judgment and pragmatism must guide the final standard setting” (Pellegrino, 2007, p. 541). In this regard, states have begun to use academic standards to make clear what students should learn and what teachers should teach. The curriculum recommended by state governments, as well as learned societies, will help curriculum coordinators and teachers make decisions about developing their instructional programs. ii)
The Written Curriculum
The written curriculum, as the term is used here, is the curriculum that appears in state and locally produced documents, such as state standards, district scope and sequence charts, district
curriculum guides, teachers'
planning
documents, and curriculum units.
The written curriculum is found in the documents produced by the state, the school system, the school, and the classroom teacher, specifying what is to be taught. At the district level, the documents usually include a curriculum guide and a scope-and-sequence chart; many school systems make their
curriculum documents available though their databases and the Internet. The written curriculum also includes materials developed by classroom teachers.
Glatthorn (1980) questioned such
comprehensiveness and recommended that the written curriculum be delivered to teachers as a loose-leaf notebook, containing only a scope-and-sequence chart, a review of the research, a list of course objectives, and a brief list of materials to be used. He believed, this simpler format would make the written curriculum more likely to be used. As school administrators and curriculum leaders, the authors believe that the written curriculum must be authentic. Schmoker (2007) supports this belief by saying, “There is every reason to believe that these capacities [the ability to read, write, and think effectively], if acquired across the disciplines, will change lives by the millions and will redefine the possibilities of public education” (p. 488). Similarly, Steven Wolk (2010), associate professor at Northeastern Illinois University, believes that we need visionary educators who see bold purposes for school and who understand that what students read in school has profound, lifelong effects. As an aspect of early authentic literacy discussions, Walker (1979) was one of the first to note that written curriculum can be both generic and site specific. In general, however, the guides seem to reflect the preferences and practices of a local group of elites: a director of curriculum, a supervisor of that subject area, a principal with a strong interest in curriculum, and experienced teachers. They, in turn, seem most influenced by the practice of “lighthouse” districts. It is important to note that we are entering a new kind of shared leadership in the 21st century. Teacher leadership continues to evolve as teachers gain a “global” view of what affects their vision of good schools and good teaching (Hanson, 2010). The authors know that people will support what they help create and all stakeholders, especially teachers, share the commitment of curriculum leadership.
Waters, Marzano, and McNulty (2003) compiled more than three decades of research on the effects of instruction and schooling on student achievement and found a substantial relationship between leadership and student achievement. The results of this study continue to provide practitioners with specific guidance on the curriculum instructional, and school practices that, when applied appropriately, can result in increased achievement. Walcott (1977), however, discovered in his ethnographic study of a district monitoring plan that most teachers have historically viewed such attempts to control the curriculum as intrusive and counterproductive and will work hard to subvert such plans. Popham (2009) echoes Walcott’s predictions, stating that “teachers must understand that we’re talking about a test-supported process instead of a test” (p. 86). Moreover, these concerns about testing seem to resonate with educators across the country. Predictably, written curriculum, especially sitespecific ones, are of uneven quality. The best of them seem to represent a useful synthesis of recommended curriculum and local practice; they seem well conceptualized, carefully developed, and easy to use. Thus, the written curriculum is the one usually meant by leaders who say, "We're going to develop a mathematics curriculum."
iii)
The Supported Curriculum.
The supported curriculum includes those resources that support the curriculum-textbooks, software, and other media. Stallings (1980) concluded that “the body of knowledge emanating from the research on teaching in the 1970s suggests that teachers should allocate more time to academic subjects, keeping in mind ability levels, and students should be kept engaged in the tasks” (p. 12), which is relevant today as well. During the 1980s, Berliner (1984) also cited examples of the dramatic differences in the way time is allocated in elementary school classrooms. One fifth-grade teacher devoted only 68
minutes a day to reading and language arts; another teacher, 137 minutes. Karweit (1983), however, questioned one aspect of this concern for time. In a review of the research on timeon-task, Karweit noted that, “by a variety of criteria for the importance of an effect, the most outstanding finding relating the effects of time-on-task to learning is that the effects are as small as they are” (p. 46). the concern over quality textbooks continues to grow. Dr. Gay Ivey (2010), professor of Early, Elementary, and Reading Education at James Madison University, notes, “When it comes to subject-area reading materials, we are stuck in a rut” . Further, “to create lifelong readers, we need to give them reading materials that leave them wanting to know more. . . . Instead of focusing on how to get students to remember what they read, our best bet is simply to provide texts that are more memorable” It should be noted that supportive curriculum involves aspects other than textbooks. It helps a teacher to establish a definition of change, identify key principles related to change, and introduce students to key skills as well as specify standards that need to be covered. According to Glatthorn, the supported curriculum plays a central role at several stages of the curriculum cycle. First, in developing curriculum, educators should focus specifically on the supported curriculum, paying special attention to time allocations and the materials of instruction. Second, in implementing the curriculum, administrators should be sure that adequate support is provided. iv)
The Taught Curriculum
The taught curriculum is that which teachers actually deliver day by day. Based on Gehrke, Knapp, & Sirotnik, 1992, the taught curriculum is the one that teachers actually deliver. Researchers have pointed out that there is enormous variation in the nature of what is actually taught, despite the superficial appearance of uniformity. Statistical evidence provides a strong warrant that how we organize and operate a school has a major effect on the instructional
exchanges in the classroom (Bryk, 2010). Bergman and Bergman (2010) agree, noting that good teaching is like good writing—the principles of good writing can help teachers improve their style. v)
The Tested Curriculum
The tested curriculum is that which appears in tests and performance measures: state tests, standardized tests, district tests, and teacher-made tests. The tested curriculum is the one embodied in tests developed by the state, school system, and teachers. The term "test" is used broadly here to include standardized tests, competency tests, and performance assessments. Berliner did a survey in 1984 to point out that achievement was lower in schools where there was not a close fit between what was taught and what was tested. Students were put at a disadvantage when the teaching and testing did not match, and their grades and scores were probably not a valid measure of what they had learned. Finally, there were serious legal consequences when poorly fitting tests were used to make decisions about promotion and graduation. The courts ruled that when tests were used for purposes that denied constitutional guarantees of equal protection or due process (as in retention or denial of graduation), schools needed to provide evidence that those tests assessed skills and concepts actually taught in the classroom. As noted author James Popham (2007) states, “If we plan to use tests for purposes of accountability, we need to know that they measure traits that can be influenced by instruction. . . . Instructionally insensitive tests render untenable the assumptions underlying a test-based strategy for educational accountability. (p. 147)” Soon, educators began facing greater problems with local testing. Schools, under pressure, then began to rely on strategies to get immediate but lacklustre results. According to
Chappuis, Chappuis, & Stiggins, 2009, this move often creates a dilemma of selecting an assessment method that is incapable of reflecting intended learning, which then compromises the accuracy of results. Hence, many teachers are now using state-approved, online-based programs to ease the alignment of local testing to state and national standards. Teachers are also using data analysis of student strengths and weaknesses. Teachers can also create preand post-tests online easily and quickly. Valid and reliable test questions aligned with state and national standards are selected from large banks of test items. Online testing programs also provide possible teaching strategies to address specific areas of need. vi)
The Learned Curriculum
The learned curriculum is the bottom-line curriculum, what students learn. Clearly it is the most important of all. according to Rutgers Professor William A. Firestone (2009), “The accountability culture is often not as effective as the student learning culture for promoting achievement.” Firestone adds, “What takes a district from accountability to the student learning culture is a mix of board and community support and leadership from the top” . Thus, students invent strategies for managing ambiguity and reducing risk to achieve success in an accountability-oriented classroom,. They will restrict the output they provide teachers, giving vague and limited answers to minimize the risk of making public mistakes. They also attempt to increase the explicitness of a teacher’s instructions, asking the teacher for more examples, hints, or rephrasing of the question. Furthermore, they pressure teachers to simplify curriculum complexity, strongly resisting any curriculum that forces them to think, inquire, and discover.
Other Types Of Curriculum Wilson (1990) noted that, “Anything and everything that teaches a lesson, planned or otherwise. Humans are born learning, thus the learned curriculum actually encompasses a combination of all of the below -- the hidden, null, written, political and societal etc.. Since students learn all the time through exposure and modeled behaviors, this means that they learn important social and emotional lessons from everyone who inhabits a school -- from the janitorial staff, the secretary, the cafeteria workers, their peers, as well as from the deportment, conduct and attitudes expressed and modeled by their teachers. Many educators are unaware of the strong lessons imparted to youth by these everyday contacts” Overt, explicit, or written curriculum simply that which is written as part of formal instruction of schooling experiences. It may refer to a curriculum document, texts, films, and supportive teaching materials that are overtly chosen to support the intentional instructional agenda of a school. Thus, the overt curriculum is usually confined to those written understandings and directions formally designated and reviewed by administrators, curriculum directors and teachers, often collectively. following represent the many different types of curricula used in schools today. i) ii)
Overt, explicit, or written curriculum Societal curriculum
As defined by Cortes (1981). Cortes defines this societal curriculum as:
The
...[the] massive, ongoing, informal curriculum of family, peer groups, neighborhoods, churches organizations, occupations, mass, media and other socializing forces that "educate" all of us throughout our lives. iii)
The hidden or covert curriculum
That which is implied by the very structure and nature of schools, much of what revolves around daily or established routines. Longstreet and Shane (1993) offer a commonly accepted definition for this term, . . . the "hidden curriculum," which refers to the kinds of learnings children derive from the very nature and organizational design of the public school, as well as from the behaviors and attitudes of teachers and administrators.... " Examples of the hidden curriculum might include the messages and lessons derived from the mere organization of schools -- the emphasis on: sequential room arrangements; the cellular, timed segments of formal instruction; an annual schedule that is still arranged to accommodate an agrarian age; disciplined messages where concentration equates to student behaviors were they are sitting up straight and are continually quiet; students getting in and standing in line silently; students quietly raising their hands to be called on; the endless competition for grades, and so on. The hidden curriculum may include both positive or negative messages, depending on the models provided and the perspectives of the learner or the observer.
iv)
The null curriculum
Eisner offers some major points as he concludes his discussion of the null curriculum. The major point I have been trying to make thus far is that schools have consequences not only by virtue of what they do teach, but also by virtue of what they neglect to teach. What students cannot consider, what they don’t processes they are unable to use, have consequences for the kinds of lives they lead. Eisner (1985, 1994) first described and defined aspects of this curriculum. He states: “There is something of a paradox involved in writing about a curriculum that does not exist. Yet, if we are concerned with the consequences of school programs and the role of curriculum in shaping those consequences, then it seems to me that we are well advised to consider not only the explicit and implicit curricula of schools but also what schools do not teach. It is my thesis that what schools do not teach may be as important as what they do teach. I argue this position because ignorance is not simply a neutral void; it has important effects on the kinds of options one is able to consider, the alternatives that one can examine, and the perspectives from which one can view a situation or problems. …” From Eisner’s perspective the null curriculum is simply that which is not taught in schools. Somehow, somewhere, some people are empowered to make conscious decisions as to what is to be included and what is to be excluded from the overt (written) curriculum. Since it is physically impossible to teach everything in schools, many topics and subject areas must be intentionally excluded from the written curriculum. But Eisner’s position on the “null
curriculum” is that when certain subjects or topics are left out of the overt curriculum, school personnel are sending messages to students that certain content and processes are not important enough to study. Unfortunately, without some level of awareness that there is also a well-defined implicit agenda in schools, school personnel send this same type of message via the hidden curriculum. These are important to consider when making choices. We teach about wars but not peace, we teach about certain select cultures and histories but not about others. Both our choices and our omissions send messages to students. v)
Phantom curriculum
The messages prevalent in and through exposure to any type of media. These components and messages play a major part in the enculturation of students into the predominant metaculture, or in acculturating students into narrower or generational subcultures. vi)
Rhetorical curriculum
Elements from the rhetorical curriculum are comprised from ideas offered by policymakers, school officials, administrators, or politicians. This rhetorical curriculum may also come from those professionals involved in concept formation and content changes; or from those educational initiatives resulting from decisions based on national and state reports, public speeches, or from texts critiquing outdated educational practices. The rhetorical curriculum may also come from the publicized works offering updates in pedagogical knowledge. vii)
The electronic curriculum
Those lessons learned through searching the Internet for information, or through using eforms of communication. According to Wilson, (2004) this type of curriculum may be either formal or informal, and inherent lessons may be overt or covert, good or bad, correct or incorrect depending on ones’ views. Students who use the Internet on a regular basis, both for recreational purposes (as in blogs, wikis, chatrooms, list serves, through instant messenger,
on-line conversations, or through personal e-mails and sites like Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube) and for personal online research and information gathering are bombarded with all types of media and messages. Much of this information may be factually correct, informative, or even entertaining or inspirational. But there is also a great deal of other e-information that may be very incorrect, dated, passé, biased, perverse, or even manipulative. The implications of the electronic curriculum for educational practices are that part of the overt curriculum needs to include lessons on how to be wise consumers of information, how to critically appraise the accuracy and correctness of e-information, as well as how to determine the reliability of electronic sources. Also, students need to learn how to be artfully discerning about the usefulness and appropriateness of certain types of information. Like other forms of social interaction, students need to know that there are inherent lessons to be learned about appropriate and acceptable “netiquette” and online behaviours, to include the differences between “fair and legal usage,” vs. plagiarism and information piracy.