Monday, April 20, 2009
Curricular Models
A curriculum can be planned around one of three models: linear/control, consensus, or dialogue/freedom. Each model is based upon a different philosophical perspective and allows for varying levels of student input.
In the linear/control model, specific learner outcomes are pre-determined by experts, and students are expected to perform specific tasks based on teacher-led instruction. It is the teacher’s role to give students the necessary tools to achieve these learning objectives, and evaluation would occur through pre-testing/post-testing. This model is based upon the realist or empiricist philosophy and allows for the least amount of student control. In an elementary general music classroom following the linear/control curricular model, one would see activities such as rote/echo singing, a sequenced introduction to rhythmic and melodic patterns, folk dances and other organized movement, skill practice such as mallet technique, and teacher-selected listening examples.
The consensus model allows for slightly more student input and is based upon the pragmatic philosophy. It is the teacher’s role to act as a guide after identifying student needs and concerns, leading them to gain “understandings, values, and skills through group planning” (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1995, p. 275). Evaluation is undertaken cooperatively. Student choice would play an important role in an elementary music classroom under this model. While the teacher might choose a particular song or piece to perform, students could work together to determine their preferred form, instrumental arrangement, expressive elements, etc. Singing games with structured vocal improvisation would provide student choice, as would various other compositional, improvisational, or arranging activities. A teacher would choose repertoire based upon student interest.
Leading even further away from teacher control is the dialogue/freedom model in which students decide on their own learning outcomes. Based on the naturalist philosophy, the teacher acts only as a facilitator, also leaving students in charge of their own assessments. The general/vocal elementary music classroom under this model would provide plenty of opportunities for unstructured improvisation, exploration, and play. Composition and notation would find their place when students would want to remember something they created for a later date by writing it down. Movement activities would be less structured, or students would create their own dances.
Although the formal curriculum may lean heavily toward one of these models, the instructional curriculum in practice may combine elements of each model, depending on what the teacher feels best meets the needs of the students, the level of interest students express in various activities, and student readiness.
Abeles, H. F., Hoffer, C. R., & Klotman, R. H. (1995). Foundations of music education (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education.
In the linear/control model, specific learner outcomes are pre-determined by experts, and students are expected to perform specific tasks based on teacher-led instruction. It is the teacher’s role to give students the necessary tools to achieve these learning objectives, and evaluation would occur through pre-testing/post-testing. This model is based upon the realist or empiricist philosophy and allows for the least amount of student control. In an elementary general music classroom following the linear/control curricular model, one would see activities such as rote/echo singing, a sequenced introduction to rhythmic and melodic patterns, folk dances and other organized movement, skill practice such as mallet technique, and teacher-selected listening examples.
The consensus model allows for slightly more student input and is based upon the pragmatic philosophy. It is the teacher’s role to act as a guide after identifying student needs and concerns, leading them to gain “understandings, values, and skills through group planning” (Abeles, Hoffer, & Klotman, 1995, p. 275). Evaluation is undertaken cooperatively. Student choice would play an important role in an elementary music classroom under this model. While the teacher might choose a particular song or piece to perform, students could work together to determine their preferred form, instrumental arrangement, expressive elements, etc. Singing games with structured vocal improvisation would provide student choice, as would various other compositional, improvisational, or arranging activities. A teacher would choose repertoire based upon student interest.
Leading even further away from teacher control is the dialogue/freedom model in which students decide on their own learning outcomes. Based on the naturalist philosophy, the teacher acts only as a facilitator, also leaving students in charge of their own assessments. The general/vocal elementary music classroom under this model would provide plenty of opportunities for unstructured improvisation, exploration, and play. Composition and notation would find their place when students would want to remember something they created for a later date by writing it down. Movement activities would be less structured, or students would create their own dances.
Although the formal curriculum may lean heavily toward one of these models, the instructional curriculum in practice may combine elements of each model, depending on what the teacher feels best meets the needs of the students, the level of interest students express in various activities, and student readiness.
Abeles, H. F., Hoffer, C. R., & Klotman, R. H. (1995). Foundations of music education (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomas Higher Education.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment