Curriculum Development

1. A Reflection of Chapter 7:
Curriculum Development
Shauna Martin
EDUC 671-Dr. Brown
April 22, 2015

2. Explanation
I decided to take another look at the technical-scientific
and nontechnical-nonscientific curriculum models that we
discussed in Chapter 7.
Curriculum development encompasses all of the
foundations we have learned this semester. The two
resources that I consulted showed me that a curriculum
worker’s philosophy, psychology, and motivations factor
largely into how curriculum is created.

3. Promising Curriculum Models I by
Margaret Hilton
The chapter, “Promising Curriculum Models I,” from Margaret Hilton’s
book, Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and 21st
Century Skills: A Workshop, discusses research that was conducted
on two curriculum models for science. The purpose of the
examination was to determine whether or not the designs aligned with
21st century skills. Science was the chosen content area because the
discipline requires students to learn concrete content and the skills
needed to access the content. The guiding questions for the research
were the following:
 What are the promising models or approaches for teaching these
abilities [21st century skills] in science education settings? What, if
any, evidence is available about the effectiveness of those
models?
 What are the unique, domain-specific aspects of science that
appear to support development of 21st century skills?

4. Margaret Hilton - continued
Douglas Clark (2009) – Scientific Argumentation Model
The framework for 21st century learning includes three groups of skills:
creativity and innovation, critical thinking and problem solving, and
communication and collaboration. Douglas Clark’s (2009) model of using
online environments to engage students in argumentation was analyzed.
He refers to the model as “scientific argumentation” and believes the
model lends itself easily to domains other than science. Within Clark’s
(2009) model are four learning environments that support students with
the constructing, critiquing, and communicating sound and valid
arguments (Hilton, 2010, p. 41). The four models were all web-based and
utilized either synchronous or asynchronous online collaboration. The
research on Clark’s (2009) model showed that while the models
intertwine 21st century skills with the science content, the 21st century
skills are not explicitly taught to students.

5. Margaret Hilton - continued
Rodger Bybee (2009) – 5E Model
The second model that was used was Rodger Bybee’s (2009) 5E model.
This model originated from the push towards more rigorous science
curriculum after the Soviet Union launched Sputnik. Bybee (2009)
expanded on the 1960s model, which led to his 5E model. According to
Hilton (2010), “These changes led to the current 5E model: (1) engage,
(2) explore, (3) explain, (4) elaborate, and (5) evaluate” (p. 46). The 5E
model allowed students “to explore scientific phenomena and their own
ideas” (Hilton, 2010, p. 46). Bybee asserted that this curriculum model
follows Piaget’s philosophy of how students learn. Like Clark’s (2009)
model, the results from Bybee’s (2009) model showed that the 5E model
did not explicitly teach 21st century skills, though it did intertwine them
because of the design of the tasks.

6. New Essential Curriculum by
Heidi Hayes Jacobs
Heidi Hayes Jacobs (2010) championed the idea of a “New Essential
Curriculum” in her book Curriculum 21: Essential education for a
changing world. In the first two chapters of her book, Jacobs (2010)
discussed the idea that curriculum development and design have not
changed since The Committee of Ten that was established in 1892 by the
National Educational Association (p. 8). She went on to note that “Four
key program structures affect curriculum: the schedule (both short and
long term); the way we group our learners; personnel configurations; and
the use of space (both physical and virtual” (Hilton, 2010, p. 13). Her
contention was that curriculum developers have a hard time creating
effective curriculum because of the antiquated program structures that
are in place—the schedule, grouping of learners, personnel, and space.
Jacobs’s (2010) argument is also centered on the structure of school,
and by extension, curriculum, not being child-centered. Jacobs
suggested in Chapter 2 that upgrading the curriculum model begins with
a revamping of assessment types to reflect 21st century skills.

7. Reflection
The two resources that I consulted, Hilton (2010) and Jacobs (2010), are
examples of various curriculum models that are employed in the field of
curriculum. For me, researching curriculum models felt like a practical and fitting
way of wrapping up the course. Chapter 7 of Ornstein and Hunkins (2013) dealt
with curriculum development and the technical-scientific models and
nontechnical-nonscientific models of curriculum. What I found interesting about
two articles I reviewed is that all of the examples of curriculum models seem to
use a blended approach. Clark (2009) and Bybee (2009) both used science
curriculum models that took the learner into consideration while also using a
scientific methodology that aligned with standards. Jacobs (2010), I feel, came
the closest to a nontechnical-nonscientific approach to curriculum because of her
push to completely revise the education system so that it takes learners into
account. However, parts of her argument centered on the need for a national set
of standards (her book was written in 2010 before Common Core). I feel that her
focus on a national set of standards is more aligned with the technical-scientific
approach.

8. References
 Hilton, M. (2010). Exploring the Intersection of Science
Education and 21st Century Skills : A Workshop
Summary. Washington, DC, USA: National Academies
Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com
 Jacobs, H. H. (2010). Curriculum 21 : Essential
Education for a Changing World. Alexandria, VA, USA:
Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development
(ASCD). Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com