For effective designing, planning, implementation and evaluation of a curriculum there is a need to follow a well-documented and systematic plan. There are a number of models for curriculum development, namely linear, prescriptive curriculum development models such as Tyler’s model of planning; cyclic curriculum development models, such as Nicholls and
36
Nicholls’ model, and dynamic curriculum development models such as Walker’s deliberative approach to planning that focus on how the curriculum planning is to be done (de Villiers, 2001).
2.15.1 Linear, prescriptive development model
Tyler’s model is an example of a linear, prescriptive development model. It describes how the curriculum should be built, focusing on four basic questions about the behavioural objectives, the selection of learning experiences, organization of learning experience and evaluation (Lunenburg, 2011). This model of curriculum development has been classified by Ornstein and Hunkins (2004) as one of the technical scientific models, viewing curriculum development as a plan for structured learning, using a rational and rigorous approach in completing tasks, to ensure achieving the desired goals. This model is used frequently in curriculum development and has the advantage of having the ability to be applied to any subject and any level, and provides easy, logical and rational steps for the development of curriculum. However, this model has its disadvantages, as it is primarily a behavioural model and those who are directly involved in the teaching of students are not involved in the curriculum development (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2004). Furthermore, research shows that teachers do not use such a series of steps, and this model does not give guidelines about which objectives should be selected. Additionally, this model only focuses on intended behavioural objectives and gives no regard to other aspects such as clinical reasoning. There is a need for more discussion, deliberation and consensus when working with a curriculum (Lunenburg, 2011; Lee, Steketee, Rogers & Moran, 2013).
2.15.2 Cyclic curriculum development model
The proponents of the cyclic curriculum development model highlight the interaction and interrelations that are to be seen and experienced in the process of curriculum development (de Villiers, 2001). Nicholls and Nicholls’ model is an example of a cyclic model and it provides five components in the process of developing a curriculum: situational analysis; selection of objectives and organisation of content; selection and organisation of methods and evaluation of learning, with situational analysis being the main difference from Tyler’s model (de Villiers, 2001). With this model the actions are interrelated and interactive; it is not objectives-driven like the linear models and emphasizes the need for curriculum evaluation (Reading & Reid, 2004).
37 2.15.3 Dynamic curriculum development model
Walker’s deliberative approach is an example of a dynamic curriculum development model, which focuses on what is actually occurring in practice and includes a three-step sequence of platform, deliberation and design (Walker, 1971; de Villiers, 2001). The platform step unpacks the personal beliefs of those involved in the curriculum development process; deliberation involves having dialogue and debates about the platform and the design provides a set of abstract relationships between the components of the curriculum and is the end result of curriculum development (Walker, 1971; de Villiers, 2001). This approach is advantageous as it reflects the reality and stresses how important it is for the planners to spend time in dialogue (Walker, 1971; de Villiers, 2001).
The linear-prescriptive and cyclic models have the disadvantage of not acknowledging the influence of design and implementation; both models do not explicitly provide opportunity for discussion and dialogue about the foundations of a curriculum (de Villiers, 2001). The dynamic curriculum development models provide this advantage by allowing deliberative phases, and stakeholders can participate in providing their input for the platforms and philosophical foundation of the curriculum (Walker, 1971; de Villiers, 2001).
2.15.4 The model for curriculum development in nursing
De Villiers (2001) proposes a process model of curriculum development in nursing that specifies the phases involved in curriculum development, as well as the steps to be followed to complete specified curriculum development tasks from planning to evaluation, with potential to provide fundamental curriculum changes.
This process curriculum development model seems like an extended dynamic curriculum development model, as it provides three similar phases, namely planning, design and implementation. In the first two phases a series of activities on deliberation and verification are carried out, before the implementation phase during which an evaluation is carried out (de Villiers, 2001). Table 2-2 highlights the three phases and the aspects of the curriculum that are focused on in each phase. The processes followed and the activities carried out are also given. The model allows a dynamic movement between the phases, and deliberation and verification are important before a new aspect is considered.
38 Table 2-2: The process model curriculum
Phase Aspects Process Activities
Planning Foundations of propositions Deliberation and verification Formulation of foundations Situational analysis Structure of curriculum Identification of core competencies Draft integration Design Educational plan Deliberation and verification
Design plan and
implementation strategy Implementation strategy
Integration framework Compile framework
Application Implementation Monitoring Applied framework
Evaluation Comprehensive Implemented framework
Considering that this process model of curriculum development in nursing has the potential to effect fundamentals changes, it was modified to fit the research project and applied as the model of choice for this project, with the focus on the first two phases, namely planning and design.
In this project this process model of curriculum development provided the advantage of allowing discussion about the HIV and AIDS-related core competencies and the outcomes and integration of core HIV and AIDS competencies to be applied through a process of deliberation and verification. This provides a further advantage of being able to review previous work during the process and make adjustments as required. For this study the Competency Outcomes and Performance Assessment (COPA) model was used as a conceptual and procedural framework to achieve this.