Curriculum Development Models

Why This Matters

Curriculum development models aren't just abstract theories—they're the blueprints that determine what gets taught, how it's taught, and why certain knowledge matters in American schools. When you're tested on these models, you're really being asked to demonstrate your understanding of educational philosophy, power dynamics in schooling, and the relationship between schools and society. Each model reflects different assumptions about who should control curriculum decisions, what counts as valid knowledge, and how learning actually happens.

Don't just memorize the names and steps of each model. Instead, focus on what problem each model was designed to solve and whose voices it prioritizes in the curriculum-making process. Ask yourself: Does this model favor efficiency or democracy? Does it start with objectives or with student needs? These distinctions are exactly what FRQ prompts will ask you to analyze—so know the underlying philosophy, not just the surface features.

---

Technical-Rational Models

These models treat curriculum development as a scientific, systematic process with clear inputs and measurable outputs. They prioritize efficiency, alignment, and accountability—reflecting industrial-era values that still dominate much of American education policy.

Tyler's Rational Model

• Four fundamental questions structure all curriculum decisions—purposes, experiences, organization, and evaluation form a logical sequence that remains the foundation of most curriculum planning today
• Objectives-first approach ensures that content selection and teaching methods flow directly from clearly stated goals, making the curriculum easier to assess and standardize
• Linear and systematic design reflects behaviorist psychology and scientific management principles, prioritizing measurable outcomes over emergent learning

Backward Design Model

• Starts with desired outcomes before planning instruction—educators identify what students should understand and be able to do, then work backward to design learning experiences
• Assessment-driven planning means tests and performance tasks are designed alongside objectives, not as afterthoughts, ensuring alignment between what's taught and what's measured
• Emphasizes transfer and understanding over coverage and memorization, pushing educators to focus on enduring understandings rather than isolated facts

Wiggins and McTighe's Understanding by Design (UbD)

• Essential questions drive curriculum design—these open-ended, thought-provoking questions encourage inquiry and help students see connections across content
• Three-stage framework moves from identifying results to determining evidence to planning learning experiences, providing a concrete structure for backward design principles
• "Uncoverage" over coverage challenges teachers to go deep rather than wide, prioritizing conceptual understanding that students can apply in new contexts

---

Teacher-Centered and Grassroots Models

These models push back against top-down mandates by positioning teachers as curriculum experts rather than mere implementers. They recognize that those closest to students often have the best insights into what works in actual classrooms.

Taba's Grassroots Model

• Bottom-up approach starts curriculum development with teachers rather than administrators or policymakers, valuing practitioner expertise and classroom realities
• Seven-step inductive process moves from diagnosing student needs through formulating objectives, selecting and organizing content, choosing learning experiences, and evaluating—always grounded in teacher judgment
• Teacher collaboration is built into the model's DNA, making it particularly relevant to discussions of professional learning communities and curriculum leadership

Saylor, Alexander, and Lewis Model

• Comprehensive framework integrates planning, implementation, and evaluation as interconnected phases rather than separate activities
• Societal needs and student interests both inform curriculum decisions, balancing external demands with learner-centered concerns
• Continuous feedback loops make revision an ongoing expectation, treating curriculum as a living document rather than a finished product

---

Process-Oriented and Deliberative Models

Rather than prescribing fixed steps, these models emphasize ongoing dialogue, context-sensitivity, and adaptive decision-making. They view curriculum development as inherently messy and political—requiring negotiation rather than technical solutions.

Walker's Deliberative Approach

• Dialogue among stakeholders replaces top-down directives—curriculum emerges from conversations among teachers, administrators, parents, and community members with different perspectives
• Platform, deliberation, design framework acknowledges that curriculum makers bring beliefs and values (their "platform") that must be negotiated through genuine deliberation before any design occurs
• Context-responsive flexibility recognizes that good curriculum decisions depend on local circumstances, rejecting one-size-fits-all solutions

Oliva's Model

• Dynamic and ongoing process treats curriculum as perpetually evolving rather than a fixed product to be implemented and forgotten
• Contextual factors including culture, community values, and social conditions shape every curriculum decision—no curriculum exists in a vacuum
• Collaborative development brings educators, administrators, and community members together, distributing curriculum authority across multiple stakeholders

---

Critical and Transformative Models

These models challenge the assumption that curriculum should simply transmit existing knowledge and values. Instead, they position education as a tool for social critique, empowerment, and change—asking whose knowledge counts and whose interests the curriculum serves.

Freire's Critical Pedagogy Model

• Problem-posing education replaces the "banking model" where teachers deposit information into passive students—instead, teachers and students investigate real-world problems together
• Dialogical learning means teachers and students are co-learners who construct knowledge through authentic conversation, challenging traditional power hierarchies in classrooms
• Critical consciousness (conscientização) is the ultimate goal—students learn to recognize and challenge oppression, connecting education directly to social justice and liberation

Eisner's Artistic Approach

• Curriculum as art rejects purely technical views of teaching, emphasizing creativity, intuition, and the qualitative dimensions of educational experience
• Educational connoisseurship and criticism offers alternative assessment approaches that capture the richness and complexity of learning that standardized tests miss
• Expressive outcomes complement instructional objectives—some valuable learning can't be predetermined but emerges from the aesthetic and emotional dimensions of classroom experience

---

Cognitive and Developmental Models

These models ground curriculum decisions in how students actually learn and develop. They draw on psychological research to structure content and experiences in ways that match cognitive development and build lasting understanding.

Bruner's Spiral Curriculum

• Revisiting concepts with increasing complexity allows students to build on prior knowledge, returning to key ideas at developmentally appropriate levels throughout their education
• Any subject can be taught to any child in some intellectually honest form—this radical claim challenges assumptions about what young learners can handle
• Discovery learning positions students as active constructors of knowledge rather than passive recipients, emphasizing inquiry and exploration over direct instruction

---

Quick Reference Table

---

Self-Check Questions

1. Which two models both start with clearly defined objectives but differ in whether those objectives emphasize behavioral outcomes or conceptual understanding?

2. If an FRQ asks you to discuss how teachers can be positioned as curriculum leaders rather than mere implementers, which model provides your strongest evidence—and what specific features would you cite?

3. Compare and contrast Freire's Critical Pedagogy and Eisner's Artistic Approach: What assumptions about traditional curriculum do they both challenge, and how do their visions for transformation differ?

4. A district wants to develop curriculum that responds to local community values while also meeting state standards. Which model's framework would best guide their process, and why?

5. How does Bruner's Spiral Curriculum complement Understanding by Design? In what ways might a curriculum designer use both models together?