CHAPTER 3

MoDELS OF
CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT
structure
3.0. Introduction
3.1. Learning Objectives
3.2. Models of Curriculum Development
3.3. Tyler's Model (1949)
3.4. Hilda Taba,1962 Model
3.5. Salyor and Alexander Model
3.6. Nicholls and Nicholl's Model (1972)\
3.7. Willes and Bendi Model (1989)
3.8. Futuristic Model (1989)
3.9. Need Assessment Model
3.10. Hunkins Decision Making Model
3.11. Glathorn Naturalistic Model
3.12. Weinstein and Fantini Model
3.13. Post-Positivist Model

3.0 INTRODUCTION
hs chapter deals with various models of curriculum development like Tyler's
Model, Hilda Taba Model, Nicholls and Nicholl's Model, Willes and Bendi Model,
Futuristic Model and Need Assessment Model, Hunkin's Model, Glathorn
Naturalistic Model, Weinstein and Farntini Model and Post-Positivist Model.
|3.2 MoDELS OF CURRICULUM DEVT
3.1 LEARNING OBJECTIVES EOPMENT
The learners after completion of studying this chapter will be able to
Know tlhe Tyler's Model, Hilda Taba Model and others
Understand these models
Applythese models in different situation
Develop skills in these models.

3.2 MODELS OF CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Before discussing the models more distinctive procedures
are found in
educational literature. It is well to mention two less technical
organizing educational content. These are widely utilized, evenmeans of
selecting
in cases whereL and
procedures are employed.
1. Section and organization based on what is
familiar to the
of the group of teacher. individual
teacher
2. Selection and organization based on
what
collectively believe in sound and good for students.teacher, individually Or
Although largely subjective these two approaches may include
the other procedures, and their utilization varies a great deal one fromelements
one
from
situation to another. Particularly, in dealing with courses of learning
teachers are governed by thenm. study and units therein.

Textbook procedure
Of all procedures all
procedures for selecting and organizing curriculum
experiences, the text-book procedure isself-explanatory. The content of a
curriculum based on this approach is determined in alarger part. It course
or a
writers of textbooks are sufficiently expert to know assumes that the
youths who are to pursue and give curricular
what is appropriate for the
experiences and use the textual
material in teacher learning process. While such persons
much basic data and do a real service in bringing generally have access to
together and
they are capable accurately of diagnose pupil background andorganizing materials,
need. The text-book
serves as a tool to the teachers and students. In
determining the course content and
activity, the teacher's role is to select the textbook that serves as a basis for the
students.
Education becomes successful when an effective planning is there and it should
be clear on its means and ends. Curriculum should be
developed with perspecaye
 CURRIcULUM DEVELOPMENT 3.3
MODELS OF
systematic endeavor such as stating with goals, content, methods,
whichis a very material and evaluation. It also depends on various sources
learming experience,
students, society, disCiplnes Or subject matter. Besides it focuses on for
what context, what purpose, the process to be adopted, etc. The
whom, in
curriculumis designed and developed based on approach, style, source etc. Broadly
development.
bene are two approaches to curriculum
1. Scientific/ Technical

2. Non- technical / Humanistic

Scientific/ TechnicalApproach
This approach is very scientific, rational and systematic approach which
demands an effective and rigorous planning as means to attain expected results. It
would be convenient to know the achievement of goals through systematic
evaluation processes. Bobbit and Charter are the prominent pioneers of this
onnroach. Bobbit calls curriculum construction the railroad. When the direction is
laid, it becomes very easy to follow it form infancy to the higher level.
Activity analysis : The following sequence is followed by Bobbit
Discover the activities which ought to make up the lives of students and along
with these the abilities and personal qualities necessary for proper performance.
Desire educational objectives : Actual activities of human beings by considering
their experiences. Wret Charter a contemporary Curriculumn planner to is always
preceded by modification in conception of the aim of education. He considers the
selection of school content and experiences are influenced by aims. Ideals that
desires to address. According to Charter, curriculum construction follows four
steps:
Selecting objectives

Dividing cbjectives into ideals and activities

Analysing them into limits, working units

Collectingthe methods of achievement

Curriculum as a field of study emerged as an independent field in 1932. In 1938

Teachers Colleges at Columbia university established a department of curriculum
and teaching.
 MoDELS OF
|3.4 CURRICULUM
3.3 THE TYLER MODEL
best models. He published
DEVELOPMENT
Tvler nmodel is one of
instruction
the
in 1949 in which he discussed
Basic.
the
Principles
Curriculum
evam1ning the
and
problems of curriculum and instruction. rationale for
defhno
He suggested for curriculum inquiry the following needs tobe
1. Purposes of school
these purposes
2. Educationalexperiences related to
experiences
3. Organization of these
4. Evaluation of the purpOSes
objectives. Curriculum planners should
Here this model is connoted to sources: inentify
the general cbjectives form three broad
1. Subject matter
2. Learners

3. Society
through two screene :e
These identified objectives need to be filtered / refined spesife
going for
philosophy of the school and psychology of learning that help in
instructional objectives.
on the learning experiernces and the
The attainment of objectives depends can be selected from
perception that the learner brings to the situation. Experience
development. Then the
the Educator's know how about the learning and human
should be interwoven within
basic elements such as ideas, concepts values and skills
principle which deals
the subjects. Finally, he says that evaluation is an important
Tyler did not visualize any
with effectiveness of planning and action. As such
and Hunkins could
diagrammatic representation of the model. However, Ornstein
visualize the diagrammatic representation of the model.
Society Philosophy

Tentative
Specific
Sources Screens objectives
objectives

Subject Learner Psychology

matter

Selected
Evaluation experiences
 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 3.5|
MoDELSOP

3.4 HILDA TABA MODEL (1962)

Rationale Hilda Taba believes that the persons who transacts
Grass- Roots
curriculumshould be involved in developing it. Taba does not appreciate the top to
downor administrative approach where the curriculum is designed by the people at
andimplemented at the grass roots. Also, she feels it is a wrong approach the
thetop the grass roots model. However the stages/ steps involved even in this
suggests
modelare similar to the Tyler model. She says that the curriculum should be
designed by using inductive approach. Teacher should begin the process by
preparingthe teaching/ learning units for their students i.e. fromn the specific lesson
design.
it should go to general
The following are seven major steps:
1. Diagnosis of needs : The process of designing curriculum starts with the
jdentification of the student's needs for whom it is designed.
2. Formulation of objectives:Based on the needs of learners, the teacher will
be able to understand what the specific objectives the learner needs to
achieve.

3. Selection of content : The objectives will provide clear direction while

selecting the content/subject matter or the curriculum as a whole. The
selected content should be valideted against objective.
4. Organization of the content : Once selection of content is done, the content
needs a systematic organization by following the basic principles involved
in content orgarization. It also depends on the required sequence, learners',
maturity/interests and academic achievement levels.
5. Selection of learning experience : Teachers should plan the appropriate
learning experiences suitable to the content. The method and other learning
environment should be planned to acquire the content.
6. Organisation of learning experiences /activities :The learning experiences
should be systematically organized in a sequential manner. Also, the
organization of experiences depends on the sequence of the content. The
teacher should also plan or organize keeping in view the learners.
7. Evaluation and means of evaluation : In order to assess or appraise the
achievement of objectives, it is necessary to plan the suitable evaluation
procedures for the students and teachers.
8. Limitations : However there are limitations of this model in spite of being a
g0od model designed with a grass roots consideration.
t 1S good for the individual context to design. But if it has to be generalized, it
|3.6 MoDELS OF
CURRICULUM
needsDEVELContOPMEeNxtT s
would be difficult to take care of such a wide variety of learner's
subjects, society etc.
In spite of such limitations, this is a great attempt made to recognize the
importance of grass roots or field workers to be involved in the task
and
top level administrators suggesting it. then some
3.5 SAYLOR AND ALEXANDER MODEL
This is another svstematic and scientific approach to curriculum
The major steps followed in this model the following.
1. Goal: Objectives and Domains: Curriculum designers start
development.
with the
objectives and the domain identification that needs
attention. Then, majtheor
objectives which are framed are organized within the
In this model, four major domains are taken into curriculum
consideration (1) domains.
development (2) human relations, (3)continued learning skills and personal
Specialization. (4
Selecting the above goals, objectives and domains needs careful observation
and consideration of the views,
demands of the community, legal
requirements of the state and research outcomes and philosophy of
specialists.
2. Curriculum design: In the first stage the designer makes a clear
visualization of the framne work for curriculum and goes to the next step of
selecting a suitable, conternt, then organization, learming
curriculum transaction mode and tries them in a particular opportunities,
Curriculum also takes into account the academic domain.
the needs of the disciplines, the learner ad
society.
3. Curriculum implementation : The designed curriculum
the teachers through the is implanted y
to enable the
instructional plans, suitable material and method
learners to acquire the content.
4. Curriculum evaluation: At this final stage, the curriculum is evaluateu v
taking all the measures and using appropriate
is foolproof and good to implement, needs anytools-whether
modificationtheor curricu
drastically
needs changes in it.
It can be depicted in a
graphical way :
Saylor and Alexander model

Determine goals
and objectives Select and create Select evaluation
curiculum design |Develop implementation procedure
plans
 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 3.7
MODELSOP
NICHOLLS AND NICHOLLS MODEL (1972)
3.6
Nicholls and Howard Nicholls' Model known as Nicholls and Nicholls'
Audrey
a cyclical model that makes it flexible and more relevant to curriculum
Modelis by the teachers. It starts with situational analysis. It is somewhat
development
similarto
thefirst step of the Oliva Model but not as broad as to specifying the need
the society.It is limited only to the school. The second step is the selection of the
of and
objectives. The same as Tyler
considers different sources when selecting the objectives but
Eisner,this model
matter is not taken into consideration and again the society" is limited to
the subject
school and the immediate or local environment. The third step is the selection
the advocates the
organization of content. The same as Taba and Eisner, this model established
and and organization of the content with the use of the four
proper selection
criteria: significance, interest and learnability. The fourth step is the
validity,
of methods. This step is analogous to the selection and
selection and organization opportunities of Tabaand Eisner,
organization of learning experiences and and response of Eisner
respectively.It also overlaps with the modes of presentation
presenting the content to the learners.
hecause the "method" involves the manner of
previous models it also concludes in
The last step is evaluation. The same as the
evaluation.

ADVANTÁGES

1. It is Logical sequential organization.

2. It is Situational Analysis is in first step.
3. It is Flexible model.
this model.
4. Elements of curriculum are interdependent in
Dynamic model in middle of it
5. It is a cyclical model (rational Model and
this model stands.
learning process.
6. This model is like amap for particular teaching and

DISADVANTAGES
process
I. It is Time Consuming,as situational analysis is long time
2. It is difficult to maintain logical sequential analysis.

3.7 WILLESAND BONDI MODEL (1989)

Willes and Bondi (1989) developed a model of crriculum development in order
to fully institute the curriculum development system. They have adopted
 MODELS OF
CURRICULUMD
3.8
comprehensive planning process.
this
Such a process can promote the
model each of hierarchical | educational levels .of a
DEVEL
developmentOPMENT
bonafide
State curriculum. In
represents stages of curriculum development and carries the responsibility the
for within
the proess.
Reponsibility
Level
offices
State Provides curriculum Frameworks and standards to district
curricull ue
Apprises administrators of State direction; institutes district and
members
design team made up of all superintendent cabinet include mission and
District principals; refers final district curriculum plan (to
goals) to principals for development of curriculum plans at individuai sites
Site adninistrator institutes school curriculum development committee
School composed composed of all teachers, classified representatives, school
site council members and other key parents and community members

Based on school curriculum, teachers design overall instructional

Classroom programme as well as individual classroom representation
of the programme

Willes and Bondi (1989) used the terms analyze, design, implemernt and evaluate
todescribe four stages in curriculum development. These planning process include
four broad stages of involvenment.
They are :
1. The Analysis Stage : In this stage scrutiny of pluses and minuses of the
current program plan, including determination of future needs and
requirements is made.
2. The Design Stage : In this stage selection of preferred direction for future
and preferred methods and solutions is processed.
3. The Implementation Stage : In this stage the action plan to facilitate
initiation of the program plan is developed.
4. The Evaluation Stage : In this stage collection of data to allow
determination of programme effectiveness is undertaken.

3.8 FUTURISTIC MODEL.

The futuristic curriculumn embodies a learner-centered approach to education n
which students come to understand their strengths and weaknesses as learners a
in which students are able to be empowered to become
life-long learners. Lea
experiences are designed to assist students to integrate new knowledge and to i
this new knowledge towards new insights by comparing, contrasting, inducing
 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 3.9
MODELSOF
analysing- In addition, learning experiences provide opportunities for
deducingand knowledge meaningfully for informed decision-making and for
use
students to
sluative and futuristic thinking and problem-solving.
three approaches toimplement this vision are:
The
Content will be provided through multiple representations with multiple
strategies for acting upon it
Curriculum will be constructed as modules and accessed via networks
Materials, experiences and supports will be drawn from a wide range of
curriculum
sources and integrated into the core structure of the

NEED ASSESSMENT MODEL

3.9

Model
Burton and Merrill's Four Phase
Merrill is
The four phase model for needs assessment proposed by Burton &
applicable for practitioners in a variety of disciplines, and recognizes both internal
needs
and external clients. Additionally, this model focuses on "the application of
course" and
assessment in the development of instructional materials at the level of a
intentionally does not address societal and organizational results. Doing so, the
learned
authors acknowledge, relies on the assumption that the acquisition of skills
in a course will contribute to desired societal outcomes and organizational outputs.
This rolling-up - from inputs to process to products - may result in an internally
individual or
efficient plan of operation where inputs and processes are linked to
the
Small group payoffs and assumes, rather than ensures, that higher level results at
societal and organizational levels will follow. Burton & Merrill's model utilizes
instructional goals, rather than measurable performance objectives, which are
presumed to possess the specificity necessary for practical and reliable decision
making, and to be accurate.

Darraugh's Six Step Model

The "six-step model for needs assessment" described by Darraugh in this short
article appears to parallel Rossett's (1987) Training Needs Assessment model in its
determination of actuals, optimal, attitudes, and causes. Darraugh does provide
readers with fifteen questions that are recommended as essentials to the needs
to the
dDsessment process. While these questions may provide an orientatiorn
article are not
Parpose of a needs assessment, the six steps briefly described in the
nked to societal, organizational, nor individual accomplishments and provide little
3uidance in the procedures of conducting a useful needs assessment.
 MoDELS OF C
|3.10
Gilbert's Performance Matrix
CuRRICULUM DEVELOPMENRA
why and how
Gilbert provides an insightful discussion of people differ im
oncerning various solutions to performarnce discrepancies. His fo
Pmonimprovement
process - well before the popularity ofiquality management s is on focus
as the means by which individual and organizational "performance
efficiently with available resources. In
discrepancies can be closed most of a
communicating his model, Gilbert provides two versions Performance
one full-scale and another
truncated version for application. His Matrix:
Performance Matrix does not specifically address how desired res
lh POSed proposed
assessed and linked at the societal, organizational, individual and srmall
levels. Gilbert asserts that "at whatever level we ultimately wish to group draw
conclusions about performance; we must begin by identifying the context at ahicher
level". HOwever, his discussion of a holistic framework that starte
"philosophical" level and cascades down to "tactical" and "logistical" levels is
reduced in application to "simplified performance matrix" which does not extend
bevond a conventional focus on one's organization. Gilbert's Perfornmance Matrix
does go beyond behaviour to the achievement of internal accomplishments
necessary for the closure of individual and organizatiornal performance
discrepancies.
Gordon's Front-End Analysis Model
Gordon approaches needs assessment as an analysis activity, and does not so
much identify and document gaps in results as discusses inputs and processes which
the organization can employ when prescribing training and non-training solutions to
its internal clients. The Front-End Analysis Model rolls-down from desired
individual results, though it does not formally address desired small group,
organizational, or societal results. Instead, it acts to identify resource unavailability
and/or faulty processes for shortcomings in individual performance. While the
quality and availability of inputs and processes are essential for organizational
success, Gordon does not acknowledge systemic errors which, according to W.
Edward Deming, are the cause of 80% of performance discrepancies. Further, the
model operates in a primarily reactive mode in which gaps between goals and
actions (processes not performance) are shaped by end user's preference and
convenience, rather than data-based organizational requirements.
Hannum and Hansen's Needs Analysis Model
Hannum & Hansen's support beginning with a top-down, societal needs
assessment, but elect in their model to examine only gapsin results at the level ofthe
individual performer and suggest that their model be solely Lused to document
 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 3.11
NoDELSOF
prooss
inefficiencies,Clearly, efficient processes are essential to the successful
operationoffany
organization. However, discrepancies that are not demonstrated to
a relationship
with actual gaps in results may not necessarily yield effective
have
results. As such, Hannum & Hansen's model functions in a"needs analysis" mode
withoutthe prior and (we suggest) essential phase of needs assessment which they
choose to
omit. Nevertheless, the model is reasonably strong on research methods
for the collection of hard (independently verifiable) and soft (not
withguidelinesverifiable) data which are applicable in a variety of settings.
independentily

Harlless's Front-End Analysis Model

Vadless concentrates on performance analysis and cause analysis as tools for
findingthe most efficient way to correct a performance problem. His focus on results
(ratherthan solutions) aligns his work withthe other predominant needs assessment
models,and his focus on differentiating symptoms from performance problems can
guide many useful assessments. Applications of the model use 13 questions to drive
the analysis process; for instance: Do we have a performance problem? How will we
know when the problem is solved? What are the alternate subclasses of solution?

Johnson's Training Requirements Model

Johnson acknowledges that his needs assessment model is focused on "training
requirements plarning" and does not address the identification of performance
problems that are likely candidates for training solutions. But within this limited
context and without a clear focus of performance, Johnson does offer several
guidelines for determining the role of training within an organization. The model
suggests that the process begins the identification of management's perception of
training and the role of training within the organization. Then in an approach that
parallels other business processes, Johnson recommends the use of a "market
survey" for the identification of desired training programs. Based on the results of
the "market survey" training requirements (including what knowledge, skills, and
aptitudes to be taught) are defined and analysed. The "training requirements
planning" continues through the evaluation of training with short-term and long
term feedback.

Kaufman's Organizational Elements Model

Kaufman's Organizational Elements Model (OEM) is the only needs assessment
Iramework reviewed that formally addresses the linkages between every results
focus (societal, organizational, small group and individual). The OEM framework
Suggest that a needs assessment begin with a focus on societal results (referred to as
Mega level results) and roll-down to organizational (Macro level) and inividual or
 MoDELS OF
CURRICULUM
3.12
small group (Microlevel) results. Functional, both proactively and reactively, the
used to identify the impact of
DEVELOPMENT
acthon levelstemplate
dynamic
OEM is ata all that can be
organizationa
of results. Though a direct distinction is not made beetween
individuals and small groups Kaufman's outside-in approach to planning and
inside-out approach to implementation yields findings which may be applied to
data-based decision making. Also included in his approach are several algorithms
and toolkits which are intendedto aid intheimplementation of needs assessments.

Performance Analysis Model

Mager and Pipe's the individual
Mager& Pipe's model extends as far as performer
The scope of Additionaly,the model is
and, by extension, the
organization itself.
making only
fundamental y
adjustments to the status quo at th
reactive, primarily intended for
group performance. Mager Pipe hold that cost-henaf.
levelof individual and small selection but do not explicitly detail a process by
solution
is the best approach to generated. Additionally, Mager& Pipe do not directh
which alternate solutions are
continuous improvement despite Quality
address formative evaluation and decision making-a goal of the "Performance
Management's emphasis on data-based
Analysis Flow Diagram":
Model
Ostroff and Ford's Levels Perspective
models for needs assessment derived
Ostroff & Ford's model is one of several This text
in Business and Industry.
from McGehee& Thayer's 1961 text Training according to three "content areas":
areanalysed
proposes that training requirements expand this framework by including
organizational, task, and person. Ostroff& Ford
"levels" dimension (consisting of organizational, sub-unit, and individual) as well
a
as arn "application" dimension (incorporating
the issues of conceptualization,
discreet analyses can be
operationalization, and interpretation). Twenty-seven
constructs between and acros
conducted based on similarities and differences of such
various "levels". In addition to the significant logistical difficulty of managing
methods regarding
an analysis, Ostroff & Ford provide no examples, tools, or assessment as a
application of their model. Further, their model approaches needs organizational
Merrill, and does not link
rolling-up process, similar to Burton & Perspective
means to ends and external consequences. Without a doubt, the "Levels this study,
modelsin
Model" is one of the most dense and theoretically conceived
however the model does not consider external impact.

Robinson and Robinson's Performance Relationship Map the

Assessment,"
Similar to Gordon's "Front-End Analysis Model of Needs solutions
Performance Relationship Map emphasizes both training and non-training
 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 3.13
MoDELSOF
individualand small group performance discreparncies. The authors suggest that
businessgoals, objectives, and strategies for a unit, division, department, or entire
to
organizationserve as the basis against which all performance requirements are to be
anchored. Applying a Performance Relationship Map includes involving a wide
variety of stakeholders into defining performance problems, and bases solution
selection in value-added for the individual performer and the organization as a
whole, rather than for external clients and society. Instead, key performance
requirements are identified according to perceived importance of job practices and
competencies versus the current skill level of performers. While this approach is
internally efficient it does not causally link individual performance to organizational
or societal success.

Rossett's Training Needs Assessment Model

Perhaps one of the most widely used training requirements analysis models
murrently in use by business and industry, Rossett's reactive model seeks to lessen
the gap between "optimal" and 'actual" individual and small group performance.
The procedure for this activity involves responding to initiating performance
discrepancies by first identifying the source of problems (causal analysis), thern
gathering opinions and ideas from primarily soft data sources using the largely
qualitative methods of collection. Rossett holds that findings are to be used for
decision making, but does not demonstrate how individual and small group results
ensure desired organizational and societal payoff. Training Needs Assessment
provides many useful tools which may be employed during needs analysis and can
be quite helpful to practitionersnew to data collection.
Rothwell and Kazanas Needs Assessment for Planning Model
Rothwell & Kazanas take great pains to establish operational definitions of the
constructs associated with needs assessment. Differentiating the planning process,
rom the tangible plan and the implementation of the needs assessment, the authors
establish a model that is relatively consistent with the definitions used in this study.
Ineir guide to conducting needs assessment functions well as a management and
mplermentation plarn and is strong concerning sampling and data collection. AS
with Burton & Merrill's "Four Phase Needs Assessment Model", Rothwell&Kazanas
Moael relies on two main assumptions. First, the authors presuppose that intended
results will necessarily follow from individual and small group application of skills.
Second, theyand assume that instructional goals possess the rigor necessary for decision-
making, willReview contribute to individual, small group, organizational and societal
Consequernces. of the Rothwell&Kazanas model may be useful in the
evelopment of a needs assessment management plan, though its utilization could
 3.14 MoDELS OF CURRICULOM
lead an Organization away from identified and required DEVELOPMENT
consequences of an
ntervention unless based in a rigorous results-based needs assessment.
Rummler and Brache's Relationship Map
The Relationship Map is a proposed improvement to the organizational
common in many fields. The major contribution of the maps
Relationship Map is the
provision of a horizontal systems perspective which includes recognition of internal
and external clients, outputs delivered to customers outside the
the flow of work which transforms inputs to products and outputs. organization,
This
and
mapping
provides asystems view which can be useful to needs assessment initiatives, The
application of this tool with other models (especially the societal results focus of
Kaufman's OEM) may increase the utility of the needs assessment effort. In a latter
chapter of their text Rummler&Brache go on to explain how their Map can be used
to design an efficient organizational structure by comparing current and desired
processes. While the authors discuss this activity from the organizational, process,
and job/performer levels, their concern is primarily with resource availability and
process efficiency. Though external environmental factors are discussed as inputs to
the organizational system, the model does not seem to address the reverse the
societal impact of organizational outputs. Due to this disposition, the Relationship
Map might infer that the results achieved by the organization will deliver beneficial
results to external clients and society.

Wedman's Performance Pyramid Model

John Wedman's Performance Pyramid Model offers a
comprehensive systems
model, guiding performance improvenment initiatives by building on both the
foundational pyramid framework that is at the centre and examining the supporting
components that form a performance system--inputs, processes, and results. The
result is a useful model for systemically accomplishing significant results, liiking
together the various systems (e.g., expectations & feedback; incentives, rewards &
recognition; capacity; knowledge and skills; vision, mission &objectives) to provide
a holistic performance systems perspective. You can use the Performance Pyramid to
analyse current performance problems within your organization and to assess the
various interventions as option making improvements.
Witkin and Altschuld's Three Phase Needs Assessment Model
The Three-Phase Model proposed by Witkin&Altschuld is actually an analysis,
assessment and action plan framework embedded within one method. These
processes occur over three phases: pre-assessment (exploration), assessment (data
gathering), and post-assessment (utilization). As the first and last phase go beyond
 MODELS
OFCURRIcULUM DEVELOPMENT
SOF 3.15
thesope of
nceds assessiment as defined here, the model is actually a plan for
prnblem
jidentification and resolution. As a reactive model, the authors describe
as a means by which to cope with current and future problems
nts raints via risk identification techniques, rather than anticipating and
and fture opportunities.
the
This philosophical underpinning is significant
contributes to absence of formal concern with societal payoffs of
lecause it
onganizationalaction. Rather, the focus of Witkin & Altschuld's model tends to be
process
improvement and the achievement of the organization's goals for
tduals and smallgroups. Organizational payoff is assumed to flow directly
he accomplishment of these goals with external clients functioning only in the
ntextof demand and consumption of organizational outputs.

Temke and Kramlinger's Figuring Things Out Model

The Zemke and Kramlinger's Figuring Things Out (FTO) model is composed of
iactors that affect pertormance in an organization. The factors are detailed in three
primary arenas: performer, local performance environment, and organizational
dlimate. The authors suggest that an FTO study begins by capturing the
organizational climate and culture data, including how the mission and goals of the
anganization are translated into actions at the functional/operational levels. The
FTO model mirrors many conventional task analyses. Comparable to Rossett's
Training Needs Assessment, Zemke and Kramlinger devote most of their effort to
providing tools and guides for collecting both hard and soft data within an
Organization. The FTO model, like many of the needs assessment models examined
n this digest, infers that the results achieved by the performer will be beneficial to
nternal and external clients as well as society.