Unit 5 – Curriculum Development form Inclusive Practice Contents: Unit 5.1 - Critically analyse the significance of theories, principles and models of inclusive curriculum to the design and implementation of programmes of study, within two different contexts.Unit 5.2 - Produce a critical reflection on the significance of these principles, models and theories of inclusive curriculum the planning and delivery of teaching in own specialist area.Unit 5.3 – Produce a written reflection on the impact of these insights on own practice and professional development.Bibliography and References Page:1-567-89-10
Curriculum Development for Inclusive Practice Unit 5.1 – Critically analyse the ...view middle of the document...
Hillman, 2011 DTTLS
Most theorists would argue curriculum defines what happened in an educational setting, where it comes from and what it consists of is open to debate. The “educational setting” of CLM is more defined, specifically designed by Training Development Advisors to prepare soldiers to cope with the in-barracks and operational demands placed upon them. In order to analyse CLM effectively it is useful to consider the following curriculum models:
1. Product (Behaviourist)
2. Process (Humanist)
3. Situational (Both)
4. Knowledge (Cognitivist)
The CLM curriculum derives from a “Formal Training Statement” whereby Director Training Army sets out the core, legislative and accreditation requirements to be obtained. The curriculum covers a range of subjects such as learning effectively, motivation theories and understanding how the Army supports UK security policy. Basic skills are measured through the process of written assessments and formal discussions; students must demonstrate knowledge and ability at Basic Skills Level 2. The curriculum is designed to exercise the student’s cognitive domain by “scaffolding” the assimilation of knowledge and information, the effective domain is measured by “attitudinal” lessons such as Equality and Diversity, Values and Standards of the British Army and Cultural Awareness. The curriculum seeks to go beyond simple awareness of values and beliefs, it encourages students to rationalise their attitudes by self-reflection and perhaps change the way they conduct themselves.
At first glance one could argue the curriculum is solely aligned to Bloom’s Taxonomy of learning (Curzon 2004:165) however, the curriculum is also influenced by Tyler’s Product (Behaviourist) Model. (Walkin 1990:100) Each lesson within CLM is supported by Instructional Specifications and Enabling Objectives, these provide “guided learning” by stating clear aims and objectives with results that can be measured and achieved. Students demonstrate competence through written tests, formative questioning and classroom discussions. The design and application of the CLM curriculum can also be rooted to Stenhouse’s Process Model, CLM requires students to “use and develop the content, not simply receive it passively” (Armitage et al, 2007:187). The focus is on the “how” of learning and encourages students to link their learning to experiences, allowing them to make informal decisions based on what they have learned. The CLM curriculum also benefits from Lawton and Skilbeck’s Situational Model by focusing on the “cultural context of learning”. (Armitage et al, 2007:188) The current Operational environment drives the requirement to embed counterinsurgency and cultural awareness linked to Afghanistan. You could argue the CLM curriculum is mainly based on the Product Model but draws considerable strands from the others in order to make it relevant, logical and current.
The CLM curriculum is best described by Doll