I have experienced the Tyler rationale in my own schooling for majority of my life. I am 31 years old and everything I seemed to be taught had the intention of producing a student and person who is rooted in Western culture. Mathematics, English and Science were always the focused subjects and the ones that matter the most. When seeking to get transcripts to apply for University, the main classes that mattered to determine how “capable” I am of being a student in University, was defined by the grades particularly in those three subjects.

The major limitations of Traditionalists and viewing curriculum and education as product is that it favours the dominant group. As we discussed in lecture, that it is based off of the ‘male, pale and stale’.  Other limitations include considering individuality and thinking for oneself. The goal for traditionalists seems to be to learn from “the greats” and anything outside of that is not deemed as necessary, which limits one from thinking outside of the box and seeking new ways of thought.

What is made possible and the benefits from the Traditionalists is that there is a foundation built. Because of this foundation, both educators and learners can both continue to build on that foundation. For example, learning how to master specific subjects. Although this can be seen as a negative, this can be carried over into any subject, not necessarily the Mathematics, Sciences and Literature.

sources used:

Traditional vs. Progressive Education

Comments are closed.