Futurism is a curriculum philosophy aimed at learning to think creatively, to be able to quickly switch from one activity to another, to operate with both tasks given and the conditions of the content of a particular lesson (Palupi, 2018). According to futurism supporters, the modern education system for them, even in the best educational institutions, was erroneous and ineffective. The theories and methods it used seemed irrelevant to their contemporaries, because society had managed to move from the industrial era to the super industrial one. This philosophy is focused on the formation of a common culture and the creative development of each student. The development of students’ creative project thinking had to take place through a variety of artistic activities: design thinking. The founder of the idea of design thinking is Herbert Simon in 1969 (Palupi, 2018). Later, this idea found support in the 90s of the twentieth century from David Kelly, who began to actively introduce it into education.
The necessary components of futurism are the creation of a new motivated educational space. In the conditions of problem-based project learning, cognitive thinking, constructive imagination and practical creative activity of students will develop. This will require the introduction of a variety of artistic techniques and technologies into the curriculum. Futurist teachers are attracted by integrated educational technologies that open up to the child the opportunity to engage in several types of art at once. Therefore, it will be necessary to add music, dancing, modeling, theater activities, foreign languages to the school curriculum.
Behaviorism is an educational philosophy, the main idea of which as a psychological and pedagogical concept is that the behavior of a child is a controlled process (Cruickshank, 2018). Behaviorism turned out to be not only a psychological theory, but also the strongest system of educational views. Behaviorists were able to expand the scope of psychological interests to pedagogical interests. The founder of the theory is J. Watson, who in the 20th century called for studying not consciousness, but human behavior (Cruickshank, 2018). This was followed by the works of B. Skipper, K. Hull, E. Tolman, in the concept of which the student was understood primarily as a reacting, learning being (Cruickshank, 2018). According to the theory, they are programmed for certain reactions, actions, behavior. In the field of curriculum development, the most outstanding is the American scientist B. Bloom, who wrote a Taxonomy of learning goals.
From the point of view of behaviorism, education is a process of behavioral technique. According to its supporters, the environment in which people live programs them for certain behavior. Based on the above, it follows that people’s behavior can be manipulated. And the task of education is precisely to create such environmental conditions that will contribute to optimal human behavior. Thus, changes in the curriculum will be conditioned by the introduction of rewards and punishments aimed at the formation of behavioral patterns of personality.
Tyler’s Curriculum Rationale is a four-component system used to measure learning outcomes (McPhail, 2020). The results are measured by compiling a list of learning tasks that indicate how the student’s behavior should change after completing the training. Upon completion of training, data on changes are analyzed and compared with indicators of achievement of training goals. Tyler’s Curriculum Rationale was developed in 1942; its founder is considered to be the American philosopher, Ralph Tyler (McPhail, 2020). It is often called an objective model and a targeted approach. It affects the curriculum plan change, shifting the focus from the process to the result.
To create a curriculum for effective learning, according to the Tyler’s Curriculum Rationale, it is to be based on four components. First, it is necessary to determine which educational goals need to be implemented. Next, a teacher should choose which teaching methods to choose to achieve these goals. The third step will be to figure out how the training will be organized to achieve efficiency. At the final stage of curriculum development, the scientist suggests determining the methods of evaluating the effectiveness of training. Tyler’s Curriculum Rationale does not involve an assessment of return on investment when analyzing the effectiveness of training. Moreover, it does not include an assessment of the impact on changing the educational behavior of students.
Focus Philosophy or Model
In my opinion, the principles of the philosophy of behaviorism are the most suitable for the curriculum change plan I have chosen. The main component on which this model is based is the idea of algorithmizing (Yazçayır & Selvi, 2020). In the pedagogical process focused on the implementation of the ideas of behaviorism, it is most simple to organize effective teaching of a foreign language. This is due to the fact that the structure of algorithmic classes helps to build topics for study according to the level of complexity, depending on what type of tasks need to be performed.
Values and Hidden/Implied Curriculum
The hidden curriculum is, firstly, the organization of the institution itself, gender relations at work, gender stratification of the teaching profession (McKimm & Jones, 2018). Secondly, it includes the content of the subjects, and thirdly, the style of teaching. In schools, students learn who is important to society, who influenced the course of history and the development of science, what opportunities and what responsibilities exist for different people in society. Educational institutions, along with other agents of socialization, determine identities, as well as the available opportunities for personal, civic and professional choice. Hidden/implied curriculum values dominant gender roles, embeding a model of the generally accepted norm in students and dictate female and male status positions.
Given the presence of a hidden/implied curriculum, it is necessary to adjust the features of the social structure of the educational institution. Firstly, an educational institution should not reflect the gender stratification of society and culture as a whole (Kumala et al., 2021). When compiling curriculum change, the equal status of girls and boys should be demonstrated. This can be done using the texts of the curriculum literature, as well as thematic tasks.
First of all, teaching at school has long been broadcasting such values as universal values. The first value is based on the biblical saying “You shall love your neighbor as yourself ” (KJV Holy Bible, 2022, 56). Students will learn tolerance to people of other faiths, other races, sexual orientation and gender. This quality is very important when learning a foreign language, as in the learning process there will be a collision with another culture. Therefore, the strategy is to approach differences and accept them based on the principle of positive attitude towards other people. The second value that will be instilled in students as a result of curriculum change will be gender equality. The strategy will be based on ensuring equal educational opportunities for both males and females. Gender stereotypes will be destroyed during games and visits to clubs that will not be divided into sections for boys and sections for girls.
References
Cruickshank, V. (2018). Considering Tyler’s curriculum model in health and physical education. Journal of Education and Educational Development, 5(1), 207-214. doi: 10.22555/joeed.v5i1.1443
KJV Holy Bible (2022). New York, NY: Christian Art Publishers.
Kumala, F. N., Nita, C. I., Yasa, A. D., Ghufron, A., Pujiastuti, P., & Rahayu, C. P. (2021). Digital literacy analysis of elementary-school students in Malam. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 542(21), 126-130. doi: 10.2991/assehr.k.210413.030
McKimm, J., & Jones, P. K. (2018). Twelve tips for applying change models to curriculum design, development and delivery. Medical Teacher, 35(5), 1-7. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1391377
McPhail, G. (2020). The search for deep learning: A curriculum coherence model. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(4), 420-434. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2020.1748231
Palupi, D. T. (2018). What type of curriculum development models do we follow? An Indonesia’s 2013 curriculum case. International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology, 6(2), 98-105. doi: 10.15294/ijcets.v6i2.26954
Yazçayır, N., & Selvi, K. (2020). Curriculum evaluation model. Elementary Education Online, 19(1), 343-356. doi: 10.17051/ilkonline.2020.661847