| Problem. Is there a curriculum paradigm? The Tanners (1995) have clearly traced the origins of the experimentalist curriculum paradigm and have contributed significantly to the evolution of the model originating with Dewey (1900, 1902). The experimentalist paradigm continues to be challenged, misapplied, and ignored by curriculum theorists, developers, and reformers. This problem is illustrated in the national discipline-centered reforms called for in America 2000 and Goals 2000, the national standards movement, and the resurgent alternative school movement (specifically charter school and school voucher movements). The Tanners contend that the failure of many of the leading education reform efforts in the twentieth century can be traced to setting the school curriculum against the nature of the learner and failing to link the school curriculum the democratic prospect. The needed harmony of these factors—namely (1) the nature of the learner, (2) the social situation (the democratic prospect), and (3) the structure and function of the curriculum—is embodied in to the curriculum paradigm. Therefore, for example, when the interests of the learner and the democratic prospect are subordinated to narrow nationalistic interests in the name of education reform, failure of the reform is predictable according to the Tanners. This study aims to investigate the origins and evolution of the experimentalist paradigm, and to document those sources that have contributed to the paradigm, those that have challenged the paradigm, those that have made use of the paradigm, and those that have ignored the paradigm.; Method. This historical and interpretive study will review the literature pertinent to the evolution, critiques, and applications of the experimentalist curriculum paradigm for the purpose of verifying and expanding on the work begun by the Tanners (1995). This historical study will entail a review, analysis, and evaluation of sources of importance that have contributed to the evolution of the fundamental factors of the paradigm: the child, society (democratic prospect), and organized knowledge; the relationship between the fundamental factors of the paradigm and the method of intelligence; and the relationship between the fundamental factors of the paradigm and the macrocurriculum functions. The data collected will be used to reconstruct the evolution of the experimentalist paradigm and to elaborate on its current status in the field.; Conclusions. There is a curriculum paradigm that has evolved experimentally since the beginning of the twentieth century to the present. The history of the experimentalist paradigm can be traced beginning with the work of Dewey (1900, 1902, 1916, 1929, 1933), Inglis (1918), Bode (1931), Giles, McCutchen, and Zechiel (1942), Taba (1945), and Tyler (1949) through to the present work of the Tanners (1995). This scientific model allows for the prediction, analysis, and evaluation of educational problems and potential solutions to those problems. Despite all the evidence pointing to its validity, the paradigm is generally not recognized in the curriculum field and not recognized by educational reformers and reform movements. The consequences have been ominous: the failure of reform after reform, and the subsequent counterreforms to undo the damages of the reforms. Reforms and counterreforms have followed the sociopolitical tides of the times with the consequence that much movement is generated without effecting problem solutions for educational progress. In the meantime, generations of children and youth are not well served. |
