Reading Response 2

Prompt:
Curriculum development from a traditionalist perspective is widely used across schools in canada and other countries. Think about:
¹⁾ The ways in which you may have experienced the Tyler rationale in your own schooling
²⁾ What are the major limitations of the Tyler rational/what does it make impossible
³⁾ What are some potential benefits/what is made possible
Be sure to refer to the assigned article in you post; you may also include information from the lecture if you wish.

¹⁾ I feel like almost every science class I experienced, as well as every math class I have ever taken (including university level classes) make sure of the Tyler Rational fairly explicitly. The truly unfortunate thing is that for the most part my high school teachers really were trying their best to stay away from this. I my high school had a really good group of science teachers, unfortunately none of them were accredited, which meant that I spent the end of every semester writing departmentals. The fact that we had these provincial exams looming over our heads definitely put added stress on our teachers and affected the way that they were able to teach. It would be really interesting to see if any of my past teachers have since been accredited and see if that has affected the way they they teach.

²⁾ They Tyler Rational really limits a teachers ability to manage their classroom. They are left with a method of organizing lessons, but one that does not allow for deep conversations that could foster better understanding of a subject by students. As pointed out by Smith (2000) the Tyler Rational “lead[s] to a focus… on the parts rather than the whole [and] on the trivial rather than the significant” (p. 5). This pressure put on trivial and parted-out knowledge makes it tough for teachers to challenge students to think critically about the subject they are learning. This lack of critical thinking is something that students will end up taking with them after they leave the classroom. This could likely lead to the unfortunate understanding of knowledge as a static one-and-done type of thing, when really the ability to continually analyze and interpret new data while engaging with your previous understanding is the true benchmark of knowledge.
The Tyler Rational also removes a teacher’s ability to differentiate lessons and account for cultural differences they experience within their classroom. This lack of differentiation and the built-in belief that all students are the same and can learn from the same prescribed lessons is faulty at its core. Arguably the best part of working with students is being able to make the lesson something they can completely engage with and being able to see them learning at their full potential. The issues with a lack of differentiation also rear their head when you look into the issue of cultural differences. Being able to alter lessons to make them more locally informed not only creates a lesson that makes more sense to your students but is also a lot more engaging.

³⁾ Engaging with this part of the prompt has actually been very challenging for me. The truth is, the benefits that I have been able to identify are really just problems in disguise. The truth is the Tyler Rational is easy. It’s easy to follow, and makes it very easy to create a lesson. This makes it both appealing to new teachers who are not 100% confident in their lesson making abilities, as well as seasoned teachers who have gotten used to it. Unfortunately easy doesn’t necessarily mean good. I feel that if we truly care about the education we are doling out then stopping at the easiest method isn’t in anyone’s best interest. It could also be argued that the Tyler Rational’s ability to “make the student experience teacher proof” (Smith 2000, p. 4) is a good thing. It could be argued that using the Tyler Rational protects students from misleading lessons given by inexperienced or uneducated teachers. Once again though, I would argue that this benefit isn’t all that straight forward. I feel that this point, wile being important, isn’t actually engaging with the core of the issue. What if, instead of teacher proofing our lessons we instead made sure that teachers were educated well enough to teach any lesson at a deep level.

References:
Smith, M. (2000). Curriculum Theory and Pratice . Retrieved from https://infed.org/mobi/curriculum-theory-and-practice/