Curriculum Theories Synopses and Comparative Presentation

Matrix of Theoretical Models
Behavioral was the dominant school of thought in psychology through the 1950's. With proponents of the theory that included Pavlov, Thorndike, Skinner, Watson, and Premack, the theory adheres to a view that identified the learner as a passive participant to environmentally produced stimuli. The act of an individual responding to an environmentally produced stimulus becomes conditioned overtime as dependent upon reinforcement. Behavior is therefore based on an external stimulus and response (Learning Theories KnowledgeBase, 2010).
Operant behaviorism as prescribed by Skinner and Keller (as cited in Becker, 1991) is often the most associated approach aligned to curriculum theory. An operant behaviorist approach to learning is measured by the ability to condition an individual to react or respond in an intended manner based on experience or stimulus. To influence learning is to control the type and frequency of an experience to arrive at an intended response by the individual (Ormrod, 2008). As it applies to curriculum, the behaviorist includes processes of discrimination learning, chaining, and verbal learning that when carefully sequenced and explicitly taught lead the learner into the ability to apply and address additional complex cognitive structures (Becker, 1991). The theory's current influence on curriculum and instruction is frequently associated with Response to Intervention; a model that applies carefully structured assessment and progress monitoring practices with a tiered approach to curriculum and instruction (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2009). Curriculum that subscribes to an operant behavioral approach such as Direct Instruction programs, are often successfully used where all else fails; with our most at-risk students identified as needing the most effective and intense instruction available (Engelmann, 2007).
Experiential Curriculum Theory
The experiential theory influence on curriculum in America can be traced back to the 19th century and is most notably associated with proponents that include Rousseau, Dewey, and Evers. The primary focus of experiential education was to include within the general curriculum an element of individual development that was arguably missing from the more traditional approach that focused specifically on intellectual and social development. The process to infuse curriculum that included material that addressed individual development proved difficult and ultimately centered on an attempt to include activities and experiences that students showed an elevated interest in (Posner, 2004). Ives and Obenchain (2006), suggested that while conducting research on the effects that experiential education had on higher order thinking in secondary schools, established three critical elements that experiential education-based curriculum should adhere to: First, learning should include opportunities for student-direction. Second, learning through EE [Experiential Education] includes curriculum connections to the real world. Critical reflection is the third element of EE and permeates aspects of an EE program (p. 65).
Gibboney (2006) argued in a reflective article about the influences of Edward Thorndike versus John Dewey on school reform that theory and ideas proposed by John Dewey have been set aside from curriculum in the 20th century. Ives and Obenchain (2006) mirrored this concern and attributed it to a narrowing of curriculum as lead by the essentialist or back-to-basics movement similarly influenced by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2002. Both authors encourage educators to continue to adhere to experiential theory in an attempt to influence curricula to encourage better educational experiences for students.
Traditional Curriculum Theory
Contrary to the Experiential Curriculum theory, “…assumes that the curriculum is more or less the same as the very process of living and that no two individuals can or should live precisely the same lives” (Posner, 2004. p. 48). Traditionalists recognize there is critical knowledge, basic skills, and societal ideals that provide a society with the very backbone needed to survive. An example of the importance of this aspect can be understood by conducting a simple review of history. In each societal existence there remains a common need for members of the society to understand and adhere to basic principles set by the greater society for the safety and growth of the group’s existence. While these basic principles have changed over time as societies have evolved, we exist now in a society that places a strong emphasis on basic skills in reading, writing, and mathematics. If those basic skills are not taught by teachers or learned by students within the society, the population would find itself lacking in potential for increasing individual and societal growth.
The needs for critical knowledge should not be viewed as limiting. It is the building blocks from which creativity stems. Further, command of fundamental knowledge facilitates acquisition and engagement in higher order thinking. Thus, regardless of the negative connotation of teaching students to mastery in basic skills [reading, math, and writing] these skills provide the very foundation of knowledge needed to advance learning. It is only through the manipulation of norms that we have the potential to be creative.

Compare | Contrast | * In experiential and behavioral curriculum theory are the same because they both look at real life experiences and observation (Tanner and Tanner, 2007). * Traditional and behavioral curriculum theory students have no knowledge coming into a classroom and non-visible processes may not be applicable. * Traditional and experiential curriculum theories are similar because there was a considerable quantity of uneducated individuals and influence focus on guiding useful skills. | * In experiential curriculum theory deals with urbanization and behavioral curriculum deals with technological. * Traditional curriculum depends on textbooks and teachers guidance, whereas experiential curriculum theory connects to real life (Parkay, Anctil, & Hass, 2010). * Behavioral curriculum theory deals with little to no cognitive process, while traditional curriculum theory considers that students come in with no knowledge. |

References
Becker, W.C. (1991). Toward an integration of behavioral and cognitive psychologies through instructional technology. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 7(1) pp. 1-18.
Engelmann, S. (2007). Teaching needy kids in our backward system: 42 years of trying. Eugene,
OR: ADI Press.
Gibbony, R. A. (2006). Intelligence by Design: Thorndike versus Dewey. Phi Delta
Kappan, 88(2), pp. 170-172.
Ives, B., & Obenchaini, K. (2006). Experiential education in the classroom and academic outcomes: For those who want it all. Journal of Experiential Education, 29(1), pp. 61-67.
Learning Theories Knowledgebase. (2010). Behaviorism at learning-theories. Retrieved from www.learning-theories.com/behaviorism.html National Center on Response to Intervention. (2009). What is RTI. Retrieved from www.rti4success.org. Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Human learning (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Parkay, F. W., Anctil, E. J., & Hass, G. (Eds.) (2010). Curriculum leadership: Readings for developing quality educational programs (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Posner, G. J. (2004). Analyzing the curriculum (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. (2007). Curriculum development: Theory into practice (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill/Prentice Hall.