UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
College of Education
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
CUS3701: Curriculum Studies
Assessment 2 — Semester 1, 2026
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
CUS3701
Module Code:
Curriculum Studies
Module Name:
Assessment 2
Assignment:
15 June 2026
Due Date:
50
Total Marks:
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for CUS3701 — UNISA 2026
,UNISA | CUS3701 Curriculum Studies — Assignment 2
Question 1: Tyler’s Objectives Approach vs Stenhouse’s Process Approach
Question: Discuss the differences between Ralph Tyler’s objectives approach and Lawrence
Stenhouse’s process approach to curriculum development. Refer to the teacher’s role, the
learner’s role, curriculum planning, teaching methods, and assessment.
Curriculum development theory has long been shaped by two contrasting schools of thought:
the product-oriented model championed by Ralph Tyler, and the process-oriented model pro-
posed by Lawrence Stenhouse. Understanding where these two thinkers diverged is not just
an academic exercise; it has direct implications for how South African classrooms are designed
and run today (Tyler, 1949; Stenhouse, 1975).
1.1 The Teacher’s Role
Under Tyler’s model, the teacher is essentially a technician, someone who receives a pre-
planned curriculum and delivers it as written. The curriculum is designed by experts outside
the classroom, so the teacher’s main task is faithful execution, not interpretation. There is
little expectation of professional creativity here (Tyler, 1949).
Stenhouse saw that as a serious problem. For him, the teacher is a researcher, a professional
who constantly interrogates their own practice. Teaching, in Stenhouse’s view, is an intellec-
tual activity, not a mechanical one. The teacher should reflect on what is happening in the
classroom, adapt, and refine the curriculum as they go (Stenhouse, 1975). In South African
schools working with CAPS, this distinction still surfaces: teachers are largely expected to fol-
low prescribed content and timelines, yet effective practitioners do what Stenhouse described,
reading their learners and adjusting accordingly (Sepadi and Molapo, 2024).
1.2 The Learner’s Role
Tyler’s framework positions the learner as a passive recipient. The curriculum sets out what
learners must know, and they are expected to absorb it. Success is measured by how well they
reproduce the predetermined outcomes at the end of a course.
Stenhouse had a fundamentally different picture. Learners, in his process model, are active
participants. They explore, question, and construct meaning alongside the teacher. There is
genuine two-way communication between teacher and student rather than a one-directional
transfer of information (Stenhouse, 1975). This learner-centred philosophy echoes later in
Page 2 of 19
, UNISA | CUS3701 Curriculum Studies — Assignment 2
South Africa’s Curriculum 2005, which drew heavily on outcomes-based thinking that placed
learner agency at the centre of classroom experience (Frontiers in Education, 2023).
1.3 Curriculum Planning
Tyler structured curriculum planning around four sequential steps: setting objectives, select-
ing content, organising learning experiences, and evaluating whether the objectives were met.
The logic is linear and top-down. Think of it almost like a recipe: follow the steps and the
outcome should be predictable (Tyler, 1949).
Stenhouse rejected that linearity. He argued that curriculum should be open to critical scrutiny
and capable of being changed by the people implementing it (Stenhouse, 1975). Planning, in
his world, is a starting point, not a blueprint. This makes Stenhouse’s model harder to stan-
dardise nationally, which partly explains why South Africa drifted back toward more prescrip-
tive policy documents like CAPS after the perceived chaos of Curriculum 2005 (Chisholm,
2005).
Key Distinction
Product vs Process: Tyler’s product model asks, “Did learners achieve the objec-
tives?” Stenhouse’s process model asks, “Was the educational experience worth having?”
These are genuinely different questions, and the answer to each shapes an entirely
different kind of classroom.
1.4 Teaching Methods
Tyler’s model is comfortable with direct instruction and structured learning activities, pro-
vided they align with stated objectives. The method matters less than whether it produces
the right output. Efficiency and measurability are prized (Tyler, 1949).
Stenhouse emphasised active, inquiry-based learning. The quality of the process, not just the
measurable endpoint, was what mattered to him. A lesson that sparked genuine curiosity
was more valuable than one where learners ticked the right boxes. Discussion, discovery, and
collaborative exploration were all central to his vision (Stenhouse, 1975).
Page 3 of 19
College of Education
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
CUS3701: Curriculum Studies
Assessment 2 — Semester 1, 2026
⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄ ⋄⋄
CUS3701
Module Code:
Curriculum Studies
Module Name:
Assessment 2
Assignment:
15 June 2026
Due Date:
50
Total Marks:
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for CUS3701 — UNISA 2026
,UNISA | CUS3701 Curriculum Studies — Assignment 2
Question 1: Tyler’s Objectives Approach vs Stenhouse’s Process Approach
Question: Discuss the differences between Ralph Tyler’s objectives approach and Lawrence
Stenhouse’s process approach to curriculum development. Refer to the teacher’s role, the
learner’s role, curriculum planning, teaching methods, and assessment.
Curriculum development theory has long been shaped by two contrasting schools of thought:
the product-oriented model championed by Ralph Tyler, and the process-oriented model pro-
posed by Lawrence Stenhouse. Understanding where these two thinkers diverged is not just
an academic exercise; it has direct implications for how South African classrooms are designed
and run today (Tyler, 1949; Stenhouse, 1975).
1.1 The Teacher’s Role
Under Tyler’s model, the teacher is essentially a technician, someone who receives a pre-
planned curriculum and delivers it as written. The curriculum is designed by experts outside
the classroom, so the teacher’s main task is faithful execution, not interpretation. There is
little expectation of professional creativity here (Tyler, 1949).
Stenhouse saw that as a serious problem. For him, the teacher is a researcher, a professional
who constantly interrogates their own practice. Teaching, in Stenhouse’s view, is an intellec-
tual activity, not a mechanical one. The teacher should reflect on what is happening in the
classroom, adapt, and refine the curriculum as they go (Stenhouse, 1975). In South African
schools working with CAPS, this distinction still surfaces: teachers are largely expected to fol-
low prescribed content and timelines, yet effective practitioners do what Stenhouse described,
reading their learners and adjusting accordingly (Sepadi and Molapo, 2024).
1.2 The Learner’s Role
Tyler’s framework positions the learner as a passive recipient. The curriculum sets out what
learners must know, and they are expected to absorb it. Success is measured by how well they
reproduce the predetermined outcomes at the end of a course.
Stenhouse had a fundamentally different picture. Learners, in his process model, are active
participants. They explore, question, and construct meaning alongside the teacher. There is
genuine two-way communication between teacher and student rather than a one-directional
transfer of information (Stenhouse, 1975). This learner-centred philosophy echoes later in
Page 2 of 19
, UNISA | CUS3701 Curriculum Studies — Assignment 2
South Africa’s Curriculum 2005, which drew heavily on outcomes-based thinking that placed
learner agency at the centre of classroom experience (Frontiers in Education, 2023).
1.3 Curriculum Planning
Tyler structured curriculum planning around four sequential steps: setting objectives, select-
ing content, organising learning experiences, and evaluating whether the objectives were met.
The logic is linear and top-down. Think of it almost like a recipe: follow the steps and the
outcome should be predictable (Tyler, 1949).
Stenhouse rejected that linearity. He argued that curriculum should be open to critical scrutiny
and capable of being changed by the people implementing it (Stenhouse, 1975). Planning, in
his world, is a starting point, not a blueprint. This makes Stenhouse’s model harder to stan-
dardise nationally, which partly explains why South Africa drifted back toward more prescrip-
tive policy documents like CAPS after the perceived chaos of Curriculum 2005 (Chisholm,
2005).
Key Distinction
Product vs Process: Tyler’s product model asks, “Did learners achieve the objec-
tives?” Stenhouse’s process model asks, “Was the educational experience worth having?”
These are genuinely different questions, and the answer to each shapes an entirely
different kind of classroom.
1.4 Teaching Methods
Tyler’s model is comfortable with direct instruction and structured learning activities, pro-
vided they align with stated objectives. The method matters less than whether it produces
the right output. Efficiency and measurability are prized (Tyler, 1949).
Stenhouse emphasised active, inquiry-based learning. The quality of the process, not just the
measurable endpoint, was what mattered to him. A lesson that sparked genuine curiosity
was more valuable than one where learners ticked the right boxes. Discussion, discovery, and
collaborative exploration were all central to his vision (Stenhouse, 1975).
Page 3 of 19
