Analyse theories and models of curriculum development, and explain the ways

they can be applied when developing the curricula for your specialist subject.

A curriculum has been defined as "a body of knowledge-content and/or subjects" (Blenkin et
al., 1992, p. 23), where learning is usually planned and guided inside or outside the school
(Kelly, 2009). Teachers are part of the process by which curricula are transmitted or delivered
to students by the most effective methods. The process and product models are two distinct
modes of curriculum delivery. Product models tend to be more formal, standardised, and
heavily dependent on setting behavioural objectives. However, it is criticised as the curriculum
exists prior to and outside of student learning experiences which leaves students with little
voice in the learning process. It is generally regarded as a summative model as its success or
failure is measured on whether pre-specified objectives or outcomes have been achieved. This
entails setting objectives, drawing up a plan, applying this in the classroom, and measuring
outcomes through exams or tests (Smith, 2000).

On the other hand, the process model is regarded by many as better than the product model,
where education is often seen as a technical exercise (see above). The process model
focuses on what happens in the classroom and what people do to prepare and evaluate. The
student experience is at the centre of the learning process, where activities and assessments
are tailored to the students' needs. The process model is more formative, and the teacher has
more input in the content and assessment. This allows students to engage more in the
teaching, learning and assessment process, which adds more value. Furthermore, based on
the students' needs, the teacher can create additional relevant material to support students
and cover topics other than those prescribed (Blenkin et al., 1992).

The ESOL curriculum in my current context has been developed by Trinity college and is
based on a set of specified standards. The curriculum is based on the process model, as the
students' needs are at the programme's centre. Although the base curriculum has been set,
teachers have the flexibility to use appropriate and relevant resources to tailor their lesson
activities according to the diversity of the classroom. The Trinity curriculum contains
summative assessments in the form of standardised tests. However, the student journey is
less prescribed, and teachers can focus more on areas where the students are weak and

Page 1 of 4
incorporate additional skills such as employability and ICT. This flexibility in the curriculum also
allows teachers to spread the learning over time rather than concentrating it into shorter
periods. This can be related to Bruner's (1966) spiral model of learning, where topics are
introduced and repeated with increasing complexity levels. This is the opposite of Tyler's
(2013) linear model, where knowledge is not repeated, and students move from one stage
once assessed. In my current setting, by linking new learning to previously covered areas,
students are able to retain the knowledge acquired and apply it in new contexts.

5. Analyse theories and models of reflection and evaluation, and explain ways in
which you can apply them when reviewing your own practice.

There are many simple tools that teachers can use to reflect and evaluate the success of
lessons and activities. One such tool is the SWOT analysis tool, which is also commonly used
in the business and education sectors. A SWOT analysis aims to identify the Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. Teachers can use this tool in a classroom to
improve student learning opportunities and outcomes. A SWOT analysis should be conducted
before and after the lessons to help teachers reflect on their teaching and assess learning
outcomes.

Another relatively simple tool for teachers is Gravells' (2017) E.D.A.R. method, which involves
reflecting on the Experience, Describing it, followed by an Analysis and Revisions. By asking
themselves simple questions at each stage, teachers can acquire a deeper understanding of
activities and lessons and how they would do them differently if done again. When using such
methods, I attempt to integrate other models of reflection and evaluation to acquire a more
comprehensive point of view. For example, when using either a SWOT analysis or the
E.D.A.R. method, I also adopt Brookfield's (2017) critical lens method, highlighting the
importance of being critical when reflecting. From a teacher's perspective, this involves
reflecting and evaluating lessons from a teacher, learner, colleague, and literary perspective.

Kolb's (1984) four-stage experiential learning cycle (illustrated below) is an established theory
that teaching practitioners use to reflect on what they need to change. According to Kolb
(1984), teachers will employ the same strategies until they reflect and become aware that
something needs changing.

Page 2 of 4
 (Kolb, 1984)

The experiential learning cycle allows teachers to understand their experiences in the
classroom; thereafter, they are able to modify their behaviour. The first stage is where the
teachers implement the lesson as planned, after which they should reflect and think about
what happened. The third stage involves interpreting the lesson and planning what to do
differently. Subsequently, based on experience and reflection, teachers should predict what is
likely to happen next or what actions should be taken to refine the task.

References

Blenkin, G. M., Edwards, G., & Kelly, A. V. (1992). Change and the Curriculum. Paul
Chapman.
Brookfield, S. D. (2017). Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher. John Wiley & Sons.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Harvard University Press.
Clements, P., & Jones, J. (2010). The Diversity Training Handbook: A Practical Guide to
Understanding and Changing Attitudes. Kogan Page.
Dacre-Pool, L., & Qualter, P. (2018). An Introduction to Emotional Intelligence. Wiley.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The General Causality Orientations Scale: Self-
Determination in Personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134.
Fleming, N. (2001). Teaching and learning styles: V.A.R.K. strategies. I.G.I. global.
Fleming, N., & Mills, C. (1992). Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. To
Improve the Academy, 11(1), 137–155.

Page 3 of 4
Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bloomsbury.
Gravells, A. (2017). Principles and Practices of Teaching and Training: A Guide for Teachers
and Trainers in the F.E. and Skills Sector. Learning Matters.
Greer, I. (2019). The Vocational Assessor Handbook: Including A Guide to the Q.C.F. Units for
Assessment and Internal Quality Assurance (I.Q.A.). Kogan Page.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (1994). Styles of learning. In Gower Handbook of Leadership and
Management Development. Routledge.
Husmann, P. R., & O'Loughlin, V. D. (2019). Another Nail in the Coffin for Learning Styles?
Disparities among Undergraduate Anatomy Students' Study Strategies, Class Performance,
and Reported V.A.R.K. Learning Styles. Anatomical Sciences Education, 12(1), 6–19.
Kelly, A. V. (2009). The Curriculum: Theory and Practice. In Southern Medical Journal (6th
ed.). SAGE publications.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and
Development. Prentice-Hall.
Leite, W. L., Svinicki, M., & Shi, Y. (2009). Attempted Validation of the Scores of the V.A.R.K.:
Learning Styles Inventory with Multitrait–Multimethod Confirmatory Factor Analysis Models.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(2), 323–339.
Sadler-Smith, E. (2001). The relationship between learning style and cognitive style.
Personality and Individual Differences, 30(4), 609–616.
Smith, M. K. (2000). What is Curriculum? Exploring Theory and Practice. Curriculum Theory
and Practice: The Encyclopedia of Pedagogy and Informal Education.
Tyler, R. W. (2013). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Page 4 of 4