CURRICULUM DESIGN AND ORGANIZATION

Curriculum design can be equated with curriculum organization for it is defined

as “the arrangement of the elements into a substantive whole.” This definition assumes

that the curriculum developer has already thought of, or perhaps formulated, the

curricular aims, goals, and objectives, and selected the appropriate curriculum content,

learning experiences, and evaluation procedures. The organization of these

components of a curriculum into a coherent, meaningful, curriculum plan is termed

curriculum design. This curriculum design is influenced by the philosophical,

psychological, sociological, and historical orientation of the curriculum developer and

ideally, by the characteristics of a sound curriculum.

Furthermore, designing a curriculum takes into account horizontal and vertical

organization. Vertical organization refers to the longitudinal arrangement of content as

reflected in the presence of sequence, continuity, and vertical articulation in the

curriculum. Horizontal organization refers to the arrangement of content, skills, and

processes from the viewpoints of scope and horizontal integration (Reyes, 2000).

Vertical Organization

Reyes (2000) furthermore discusses that a curriculum designer should ensure

that sequence, continuity, and articulation (also referred to as vertical integration) are

present in the arrangement of curriculum content, skills, and processes.

Sequence refers to the vertical arrangement of the curriculum content (including

skills and processes) such that new learning is based on previous learning. This
consideration applies whether one is designing a lesson, subject/course, discipline/field

of study, or program. Proper sequencing of learning experiences (e.g. learner’s

interaction with content, or engagement in skill-building activities) entails analysis of

what contents, skills, or processes are prerequisite for the next. A well-sequenced

curriculum provides for cumulative and continuous learning. Decisions concerning

sequence in the curriculum are based on the following considerations:

 logical structure of the course/field of study;

 chronological learning;

 psychological principles of learning;

 learner’s interests and needs; and,

 analysis of how people use knowledge in their work or social functions.

The sequence of content in mathematics, for instance, is based on the logical

structure of the discipline. Mathematics starts from the simplest concepts, principles,

and operations to the most complex. One cannot understand calculus if he has not yet

taken prerequisite courses like algebra, trigonometry, and analytic geometry.

Sequence based on chronological learning is best exemplified in courses like

history, political science, and world events which orders content “as it seems to, or

does, occur in the world”. Content, skills, and processes may also be sequenced on the

basis ofthe characteristics of learners at the different stages of their growth and

development to ensure that learning experiences are within their level of maturity and

capabilities. The developmental theories of Piaget, Kohlberg, and other scholars provide

useful information in this area.

 Whole-to-part, concrete-to-abstract, simple-to-complex, and similar other learning

principles also guide the sequencing of the curriculum from the psychological viewpoint.

Learners’ interests and needs, another basis for sequencing content, are actually

anchored on the psychological growth stages of man. Young children are interested in

play activities, storytelling, dancing, singing; and their needs (physiological, safety, and

affiliation) are at the lowest hierarchy in Maslow’s motivation theory. As they grow older,

their needs progress to the higher levels of the hierarchy (esteem, recognition,

achievement, self-actualization). Their interests likewise shift to those of adults (such as

hobbies and recreation; love, sex, and marriage; economic sufficiency). Information

regarding these changes in the learners as they go through the different stages of their

development can serve as a basis in making decisions concerning curriculum

sequence. Lastly, sequence may be based on an analysis of the activities an adult goes

through to successfully execute a performance or an activity (e.g., typing, dancing,

accounting, playing musical instruments). The hierarchical order at which the required

knowledge and skills are needed in the performance of such activities guides the

sequencing of curriculum content.

Decisions concerning curriculum sequence are guided by one or more of the

aforementioned bases. For example, while it is true that the content of history is based

on the chronological occurrence of events, the offering of World History is usually

preceded by Philippine History; and it is offered in high school or in college, not in the

elementary grades, in view of the needs and interests of the young learners.
Continuity

Points of interest in the vertical organization of a curriculum include sequence,

continuity, and integration. Sequence is the vertical arrangement of elements of content

in which the next element is directly related to the first. Continuity, on the other hand,

refers to the repetition of related elements of contents which do not directly follow one

another (i.e., one element is temporarily separated from the first by one or more

unrelated elements), Continuity allows for the recurrence of knowledge, skills, or

processes, with increased depth, breadth, and competence. An example of continuity in

the curriculum is knowledge of concepts and skills in manipulating numerical fractions in

elementary mathematics and algebraic fractions in high school. The two courses do not

successively follow one another, but the learning experiences in the latter are built on

past experiences in the former, although to a greater complexity and abstraction.

Vertical integration or articulation is a third consideration in vertical organization.

Vertical integration refers to the arrangement of the curriculum in such a way that

relationships among topics or courses in a given field of study across grade/year levels

are emphasized. lf vertical organization is present in the curriculum, unnecessary

repetition of content and gaps in knowledge can be avoided.

Vertical integration can be accomplished if teachers of different courses that

belong to the same field of study plan together to map out the scope and sequence of

their respective courses. For example, Grade I English teachers can confer with English

teachers in the preparatory school and in Grade II to find out where English I should

start and end. This activity will enable these three groups of teachers to know each

other’s expectations as to pre-entry and terminal knowledge and skills of pupils of

English on those educational levels. They will also know which content elements to

repeat, reinforce, or review. Vertical integration across programs (pre-elementary,

elementary, secondary, tertiary) is difficult, especially if a school offers only one of those

programs. In the De La Salle University System, which consists of one pre-elementary-

elementary-secondary school and four tertiary-level institutions, syllabi in the general

education courses in freshman college programs are shared with feeder member

schools. This arrangement enables the school offering secondary education to better

prepare the graduates for college.

Horizontal Organization

Horizontal organization is the arrangement of topics, themes, or courses offered

at the same point in time (i.e., same grade or year level, or same semester/ trimester).

Horizontal organization is concerned with scope and horizontal integration, Sometimes,

it is simply referred to as integration. Scope refers to the boundaries or coverage of the

curriculum in terms of breadth and depth. It answers questions like: “What topics,

themes, ideas, concepts, principles, theories, and other forms of knowledge (subject

matter) as well as skills, competencies, and activities should be covered?” The basic

issue in making decisions about content is finding out which knowledge is most worthy

of inclusion in the curriculum, considering knowledge explosion. Opinions regarding this

issue vary, depending on the philosophical, sociological, psychological, and historical

orientations of the curriculum decision maker. However, with the advancement in

technology which allows for the easy storage, retrieval, and processing of information,

there is apparently less need for the teaching of facts and information that was practiced
many years ago. Emphasis should be focused on information retrieval and processing

skills, on learning how to learn, and on development thinking and creative skills.

Knowledge, skills, and attitudes that enhance the learner’s self-concept and enable one

to be a productive and responsible member of the community (local, national, global)

should also be part of curriculum content, An equally important content, especially in the

curriculum of sectarian schools, are spiritual, moral, and religious values and Church’s

teachings.

Another problem that confronts curriculum developers with respect to content is

the choice between breadth without depth or depth without breadth. One solution to this

problem is to minimize the teaching of the knowledge domain (who, when, what, where,

how), in favor of the thinking processes (why). This will allow for both breadth and depth

in the curriculum.

Horizontal integration is the second consideration in the horizontal organization

of the curriculum. Horizontal integration refers to the arrangement of content based on

the relatedness of topics, themes, skills, or processes in two or more subjects/courses

in the same grade/year, semester, or trimester.

Horizontal integration is accomplished by integrating separate subjects that are

related (e.g., arithmetic, geometry, statistics, and algebra in Mathematics I, II,III, and IV

under the New Secondary Curriculum; and phonics, reading, spelling writing, and

literature in Communication Arts). Another approach is the planning of a lesson or a

minicourse which integrates related concepts, principles, or themes from two or more

subjects. For example, Global or Peace Education can be a minicourse that integrates

lessons in science, mathematics, history and government.

 Balance is another important consideration in curriculum organization. It refers to

the appropriate emphasis placed on different aspects of content, learning experiences,

and intended outcomes of the curriculum. The curriculum is not balanced if cognitive

learning outcomes are given undue focus to the impoverishment of affective and

psychomotor outcomes, especially in the lower grades. Balance is also absent if there is

a lopsided emphasis on the development of the mathematical-logical and linguistic

intelligences of the learners which results in the neglect of their other intelligences

(musical, spatial, bodily- kinesthetic, intrapersonal, and interpersonal). The curriculum

may also be too knowledge-oriented, too society-centered, or too learner-centered

when in fact, it should consider all these three bases of the curriculum. Such curriculum

is lopsided and not balanced. Balance is present if the curriculum makes provisions for

the needs and interests of the learners and their total development, and prepares them

to be responsible citizens and world managers who can envision and realize a preferred

or desired future for the present and future generations. In this light, answer should be

given to such questions as: “How much of curriculum content and learning experiences

must be devoted to social, economic, political, and other social concerns and to the

transmission of the cultural heritage of a country? How much will be devoted to the

accumulated body of knowledge in the different courses and fields of study that

comprise the curriculum? How much emphasis must be given to the learners’ interests,

needs, and demands? What should be the ratio of general education courses to the

major courses? The elective and the optional courses? What should those courses

be‘?”
 Curriculum developersshould make a list of all the courses that they offer per

program, together with the actual and desired time allotment (number of

units/hours/minutes) per course. The list will show the discrepancy between the actual

practice and what is desired, which can serve as a basis in designing for balance.

Decisions on the desired time allotment will reflect the emphasis placed on the different

courses. These decisions can be based on extant literature that reflects the best

thinking on the problem, the educational philosophy ofthe school, and the curriculum

orientation ofthe decision makers, not to mention DECS orders and memoranda. It must

be mentioned, however, that balance does not mean equal emphasis, but rather,

covering what is deemed essential and important for the learners and for society. In the

last analysis, balance is relative, and it takes objectivity or freedom from biases and a

broad perspective to design a balanced curriculum.

CURRICULUM DESIGNS

There are a number of curriculum designs that a curriculum developercan

choose from. These designs may be broadly categorized into the following major

groups:

 traditional or subject-centered designs,

 learner-centered designs,

 problem-centered or society-centered designs, and

 unified designs.
Traditional Designs

Traditional designs are subject-centered. The emphasis is on making the

learners absorb as much knowledge as possible concerning a particular course or

broad field. One traditional design is subject-centered or subject specific (e.g., phonics,

writing, spelling, and reading are offered as separate subjects with specific time slots).

Another is the correlated design where the subject boundaries are still present but

related topics in two or more courses are highlighted (e.g., using measurements in

mathematics in a lesson in dressmaking or home economics). The best traditional

design is the broad field which is a fusion of two or more related subjects/courses. To

illustrate, Social Studies is a broad field which consists of history, geography, and civics.

Reading-phonics, spelling, and writing are now combined into the broad field, Language

Arts. Traditional designs are easy to develop and to implement because these are

highly structured. However, these designs have been the subject of criticism because

these do not make provisions for the differential needs and interests of the learners.

What can be done perhaps is to make provisions for differentiated assignments/projects

to cater to the different needs and interests of the students, even if the curriculum

design is subject-centered.

The subject-centered curriculum design has several features that cause

proponents to favor it. The continued use of this design through the years means that

people are familiar with it and comfortable using it. Furthermore, its long use gives a

sense of “tried and proven,” or, “It was good enough for me; therefore, I trust it for my

children.” (Henson, 2001)

 A more tangible quality of the subject-centered curriculum is its tight organization.

The content is rigidly sequenced. When using this design, teachers can, and almost

always do, follow the sequence of the textbook. This makes the task of keeping track of

where each lesson ends and where the next one begins easy. This tight organization

helps the teacher avoid accidental duplication of content and makes the testing simple.

Easy design of tests was mentioned earlier as strength of the textbook. Since the

subject-centered design is characterized by use of textbooks, it benefits from the

strengths and suffers from the weaknesses of textbooks.

According to Tanner (2007), the tightly organized subject-centered curriculum is

easy to implement. Courses can be added to or deleted from a school’s program (or

even added to or deleted from a student’s individual curriculum). Thus transferring from

one school to another, and even from one state to another, is easy. This advantage is

realized by high school students who go on to colleges out of state. Of course, for

transfer students the college may stipulate a particular additional course or courses.

Still another advantage of the subject-centered curriculum design is its efficiency.

The Well-organized, compact curriculum enables students to cover a lot of content in a

short time. This advantage becomes clear when contrasted with an inquiry curriculum

(which requires students to discover relationships for themselves before they learn

them), with case studies (which require students to sift relevant information from

irrelevant information), with simulations and games (which are student-paced), with

mastery learning (which permits students to remediate and recycle), or the discussion

method (Which also requires much more time to cover the material).
 Among the limitations of the subject-centered curriculum is its failure to consider

the unique needs and interest of the students and its detachments from contemporary

events in the world. Perhaps the most severe criticism against the Subject-oriented

learning has combined with the increasing fragmentation of knowledge to create an

information mania in our schools that makes simply digesting facts a priority and

eliminates consideration of the goals to which facts and ideas might be applied.

Research indicates that while many underachieving students have poorer

auditory and visual skills, their kinesthetic and tactile capabilities are high. Implications

are that teachers may need to use a greater variety of instructional methods.Obviously,

the subject-centered curriculum design makes comparatively little use of such

necessary reinforcement.

The subject-centered curriculum can be effective when used by those teachers

who are willing to alter their teaching styles and lower the level of instruction to the point

at which the student can become a successful learner.

Realizing that the neat containers called subjects, that had been designed to hold

and dispense knowledge had limitations, educators decided to enlarge the containers.

The results were referred to as broad-fields curriculum. The instruction in this curriculum

design must focus on the use of the concepts (content generalizations) and the contexts

in which they occur in order ascertain their practical connections.

According to Henson (2001), researchers have found that when students take

notes during a lecture they are far more likely to record bits and pieces of the lecture

verbatim or simply paraphrase information rather than organize the lecture material into
some sort of conceptual framework or relate the new information to what they already

know.

Learner-Centered Designs

The learner-centered design may be based on the anticipated needs and

interests of the learners based on their stage of development. Usually, this curriculum is

built upon the normal activities children engage in, such as playing, storytelling,

drawing, and the like. In this kind of curriculum, content is not organized into subjects

like mathematics, English, or science. Instead, content may be subdivided into

courseworks such as storytelling, playing, singing, etc. The three Rs will be integrated in

these activities. Another probable design under this category may be based on the

actual needs and interests of the learners as they arrive in school. They choose what

they want to learn and the teacher merely serves as a guide (e.g., where to get the

necessary information). After a learner has completed his investigation of the problem

that he has chosen, hemakes a presentation to the teacher or takes a test on the

problem. With this design, no curriculum plan is made by the teacher because the

learner himself decides what he wants to learn.

Learner-centered designs have been criticized as neglecting the intellectual

development ofthe learners, especially in the elementary grades where the learners are

supposed to be equipped with the basic understanding and skills needed for the next

higher level of schooling. The thesis requirement in the graduate school and in some

tertiary schools is anchored on the learner-centered design. These educational levels

also make provision for broad fields design and for society-centered design, through the
social action/community outreach program. This shows that the curriculum can be a

combination of different designs (Reyes, 2000).

Society-Centered Designs

A third type of curriculum design is society-centered. As the name suggests, the

curriculum content is heavily loaded with societal concerns, problems, and issues. One

such design is aimed at making the students adapt to the changes in society and to

solve societal problems within their level of capabilities. Another contemporary view of

the society-centered design is based on the reconstructivist philosophy of education.

This curriculum design is aimed at making the school, the teachers, and the students

the agents of social change. Hence, curriculum content is heavy with present and future

problems of the society and with contemporary building processes to enable learners to

plan and realize societal improvement at the local and global levels.

Among the traditional curriculum designs, the traditional design, particularly the

broad field, is the most popular not only in the Philippines but in most parts of the world.

The popularity of the said curriculum design will continue although curriculum content is

bound to undergo changes. A practical guide for curriculum developers in the context of

community concerns should be formulated to help them become socially responsible,

proactive individuals (Reyes, 2000).

OTHER CURRICULUM DESIGNS

Other curriculum designs include the Trump Plan, the Spiral Curriculum, Mastery

Learning, and Problem-Solving Curriculum (Henson, 2001).

 During the late 1950s, the Trump Plan was developed. This design was different

from existing designs because it focused on grouping. Students were required to spend

40 percent of their time in large groups, 20 percent in small groups, and the remaining

40 percent in independent study or in small groups if they preferred.

Like the core curriculum, the Trump Plan had strength in its variety. The Trump

Plan included variation in methods, materials, and even in the length of the school day

and the school year, including year-round curricula, Its emphasis on individual and

small-group work appeals to current educators. Eighty percent of today’s teachers use

small-group assignments weekly, and 90 percent work with individual students weekly.

The spiral curriculum is built on two psychological foundations: connectionism

and constructivism. It also employs developmentalism, recognizing that students are not

ready to study certain concepts until they reach the required level of development and

until they have had the necessary experiences.

Mastery learning is a curriculum design that purports to offer the opportunity for

all students to succeed by giving individual students all the time they need to master the

objectives, by affording them opportunities to remediate and recycle without penalty,

and by using formative evaluation which is given during instruction, not to assign grades

but to improve learning by improving the curriculum and instruction. Obviously this

dedication to meeting the diverse needs of all students appeals to those contemporary

educators who are dedicated to meeting the needs of students from all cultural

backgrounds.

The problem-solving curriculum has long been a favorite design for educators

who espouse learner-centered education. lt was hoped that, by discovering the answers
to problems, students would more thoroughly understand the broader content

generalizations required to master a discipline. The problem-solving curriculum has

received a renewed level of interest in American schools because it enables students to

learn the topics at a greater depth and affords them opportunities to tie new information

to prior understanding.

Most mastery learning programs are individually based, making them attractive to

those teachers who are dedicated to meeting the needs of diverse groups of students.

These curriculum designs are all different, but they all have certain features in

common, such as scope (breadth), sequence, continuity, articulation, and balance.

Success with any of these designs depends on teachers understanding the

underpinning philosophies and on the quality of instruction used with the designs.

Bibliography

Henson, K. (2001). Curriculum planning. Integrating multiculturalism, constructivism,

and education reform. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Reyes, F. (2000). Engineering the curriculum. A guide for educators and school
managers. Manila : De La Salle University Press, Inc.

Tanner, D. (2007). Curriculum development. Theory into practice. New Jersey : Pearson
Education, Inc.