Chapter 2




            This section consists of different topics related to the development of a curriculum for adult teacher education. The topics discussed were the following: (a) conceptual framework, (b) rationale for a teacher

education curriculum, (c) elements of a teacher education curriculum, (d) contents of a teacher education curriculum in adult education, (e) curriculum development, (f) curriculum implementation, (g) forces affecting curriculum development, and (h) curriculum evaluation. The topics on curriculum development addressed in this section provided very useful data for the development of the final product of this project.


Conceptual Framework


Pratt (1994) observes that curriculum planning must address the problems that affect the world in which education in general, and curriculum in particular inhabit. These problems provide the theoretical framework for a curriculum. Pratt observes that "the function of curriculum is to enhance human well‑being" (p. 5). Longstreet & Shane (1993) point out that curriculum design follows a systematic and logically based framework. The purposes of schooling, which respond to the needs of society, provide the basis or conceptual framework that guide the curriculum. In Oliva's curriculum model (1993), the needs of society and the needs of the individuals living in society provide the framework that guides the curriculum development process. Taba (1962) observes that "any enterprise as complex as curriculum development requires some kind of theoretical or conceptual framework of thinking to guide it" (p. 413). In the case of a curriculum for teacher education in adult education, Knowles concept of andragogy provides this theoretical or conceptual framework suggested by Taba. Knowles (1970) defines andragogy as "the art and science of helping adults learn" (p. 38). This concept of andragogy responds to the development of a new and distinctive theory of adult learning developed by adult education theorists in North America and Europe. Knowles' andragogical concept is one of the first attempts to conceptualize the field of adult education. Knowles (1984) observes that


by 1970‑ and certainly by 1980‑ there was a substantial enough body of knowledge about adult learners and their learning to warrant attempts to organize it into a systematic framework of assumptions, principles, and.strategies. This is what andragogy sets out to do. (p. 18)


Knowles' andragogical concept presents five underlying assumptions about the nature of the adult learner. These are (a) the learner is increasingly self‑directed in his or her learning, (b) the learner's experience is a rich source for learning, (c) the learner's readiness to learn‑stems from his or her life tasks or problems, (d) learning itself focuses on tasks or is problem centered, and (e) the learner's motivation is derived from internal incentives or curiosity. Any educational curriculum to prepare adult education teachers should take into consideration these assumptions which clearly establish the unique qualities of the adult learner.


One implication of the concept of andragogy for teachers of adults is that adults cannot be taught the same way children are taught. Knowles (1970) points out that just as adults have a different orientation to learning from that of children, so it would seem to follow that a different orientation toward learning is required on the part of educators of adults from the orientation traditionally inculcated in educators of children. (p. 48)


Andragogy requires teachers who are person­centered, who do not simply teach subjects but rather help persons learn. This implies preparing teachers of adults who can function as learning facilitators. Knowles' concept of teaching adults using methods and techniques designed for adult students is supported by Galbraith (1990) who advocates teaching adults with the appropriate methods and techniques.


The andragogical concept developed by Knowles suggests that adults have their own phases of growth and resulting developmental tasks, readiness to learn, and teachable moments. Havighurst (1952) divides the adult's stages of growth into three phases: early adulthood, middle age, and later maturity. For each of these phases, Havighurst identifies specific developmental tasks. Each of the developmental tasks produces a "readiness to learn" which at its peak presents a "teachable moment." In reference to Havighurst's developmental tasks, Merriam and Caffarella (1991) state that "Although the timeframe and some of the tasks suggested by Havighurst are somewhat dated, the idea of specific life tasks giving rise to a teachable moment is not" (p. 105). The need for adult education teachers to know about adult development and developmental tasks is also supported by Whiting et al. (1988) who observe that


recognition of the developmental level of each learner is as crucial as correct diagnosis of instructional level. Teachers who possess an understanding of adult development are more able to facilitate learning and design activities most beneficial to students. (p. 11)


Knowledge of the physical, psychological, and psychosocial development of the adult is of extreme

importance for a teacher education curriculum in adult                         education. Knowles' andragogy takes into consideration the many changes adults experience in these three areas.


            Andragogy deals with adults, their needs, interests, problems, and characteristics. Andragogy             provides adult education teachers the knowledge about adults they need to have and with the competencies and       skills necessary to teach adults.


Rationale for a Teacher Education Curriculum in Adult Education


            The need for the education and training of adult             educators lies in the fact that the teachers of adult students have not been prepared in adult education.  The education adult education teachers receive in             colleges and universities prepares them to teach children or adolescents but not to teach adults.


In discussing this situation, Rivero (1986) observes that


furthermore, in traditional forms of adult education such as basic education, in the vast majority of countries the teachers have been trained to work with children, and they take on jobs in evening or night schools for adults for economic reasons, while their principal activity continues to be teaching children or young people. (p. 36)


The immense majority of adult education teachers are prepared either in elementary or secondary education. As a consequence, the methods and techniques they employ are those they learned in their preparation as elementary or secondary teachers. In this respect, Libbert (1988) pints out the following:


Most adult educators working in the field of Adult Basic Education are trained as elementary and/or secondary education teachers. Without staff development, the principles and techniques they would most likely use in the classroom are the ones they learned in their training as educators of children. (p. 8)


Although Libbert (1988) refers to staff development in his comment, the need for a curriculum that prepares educators of adults can be inferred.  This curriculum would provide adult educators the principles, methods, and techniques necessary to teach adult students.


Knowles, andragogy concept suggests that the teaching of adults should take into consideration the developmental stages of adult life which include the adult's past experiences, needs, and responsibilities. Therefore, the methodology used in teaching adults must differ from the one used in elementary and secondary schools. In terms of the training given to current adult education teachers, Rurley (1985) suggests that "the pre‑service‑in‑service training for instructional staff must be mindful of the characteristics unique to adult learners and reflect such both in the methodology and materials used to facilitate their learning process" (p. 3). Rurley coincides with Rothwell and Kazanas (1989) who suggest that in conducting training or staff development activities it is necessary to consider the characteristics of the trainees or of the learners which implies considering the unique characteristics of the adult learners.


The need for teaching adult students employing an andragogical approach is also supported by MacFarland (1985) who observes that "the many notions associated with andragogy must be employed to meet the needs of returning adult learners; teaching from a pedagogical perspective is simply not appropriate for adults" (p. 7). The implication for a teacher education curriculum to prepare teachers of adult students seems to be that this curriculum should be developed from an andragogical perspective.


Hansford (1983) reviews some basic concepts in the area of adult education. One of the areas Hansford discusses is the teaching of adults.  In this respect, she observes that "The techniques of pedagogy which stress the teaching of immature by the mature, the enlightenment of the unknowing by experts, and the content‑centered syllabus presented in a teacher­  centered environment are totally inappropriate for            adult learners" (p. 4). Hansford's observation is supported by Seaman and Felleng (1989) who recommend          that adult students should be taught with techniques designed for adults because of the uniqueness of adult learning. This observation reinforces the need there is for developing a teacher education curriculum in adult education.



Elements of a Teacher Education Curriculum in Adult Education


Pratt (1994) contends that planning a curriculum does not follow a fixed sequence in terms of curriculum elements, but that at some point the intention of the curriculum must be made clear. There should be an overall aim to establish the purpose of the curriculum.


The curriculum should also include a rationale that justifies the commitment of resources to the pursuit of the aim. Specific objectives that guide actual instructional decisions are an integral part of the curriculum.


Herrscher (1992) states‑that any curriculum should include some basic elements. These are (a) philosophy statement, (b) rationale, (c) content, (d) learning outcome statements, (e) learning activities, (f) assessment of competency attainment, and (g) learning environment. These seven elements must be in concert with one another for the curriculum to have integrity and alignment.


The philosophy statement presents a philosophical position for the program and relates it to the institutional mission. The rationale builds a case for the importance of the content for the learner. The content defines the parameters of the material to be covered in the program. The learning outcome statements detail the cognitive, affective, and/or psychomotor learning outcomes the program is designed to help learners attain. The learning activities specify the appropriate facilities of learning, including instructional resources and media. The assessment of competency attainment outlines procedures to be used in documenting competency attainment. The learning environment specifies those environmental factors and program policies essential for learning.


McNeil (1990) indicates that some of the more common elements used as the basis for curriculum

e organization are (a) concepts, (b) generalizations, (c) skills, and (d) values. In terms of concepts, McNeil suggests that curriculum plans or programs are based on key concepts such as culture, growth, number, space, entropy, and metaphor among others. By generalizations, McNeil means conclusions drawn from careful observations. Skills are generally regarded as proficiency plans for curriculum organization. They are commonly used as the basis for building continuity in programs. Values are cherished beliefs that are not questioned but taken as absolutes for governing behavior. The organizing elements depend on the purpose of the curriculum.


Knox and Associates (1986) refer to Schwab for whom there are four curriculum elements. These are the student, the teacher, the subject matter, and the milieu. These basic elements must be related and interact with one another.


Boone (1985) observes that a planned curriculum consists of certain elements. These are (a) a statement of broad‑based educational needs, (b) objectives keyed to those needs, (c) teaching strategies for achieving the objectives, and (d) macro­outcomes of the planned program. Taba (1962) indicates that the aims and objectives, the content and learning experiences, and the evaluation program become macroscopic elements of the curriculum. Based on these elements, the particular elements of the curriculum are then identified.


Contents of a Teacher Education Curriculum in Adult Education


Peters and Jarvis (1991) suggest that adult practitioners should have certain kinds of knowledge which are necessary to teach adult students. This knowledge consists of (a) what practitioners learn from work experience, (b) the body of knowledge that relates to specialties in the field, (c) the body of knowledge that undergirds all specialists, and (d) the findings of scholarly disciplines related to the field.


McNeil (1990) recommends that in planning the contents for the development of curriculum the institution's purposes must be considered. one reason for doing this is that selecting an appropriate curriculum model or set of procedures depends on the central purpose of that school.


Galbraith and Zelenak (1989) suggested that adult educators should have the following competencies: (a) understand and take into account the motivation and participation patterns of adult learners, (b) understand and provide for the needs of adult learners, (c) be knowledgeable in the theory and practice of adult learners, (d) know the community and its needs, (e) know how to use various methods and techniques of instruction, (f) possess communication and listening skills, (g) know how to locate and use educati3nal materials, (h) have an open mind and allow adults to pursue their own interests, (i) continue his or her education, and (j) be able to evaluate and appraise a program. These suggested competencies provide adult education teachers the knowledge and skills required of an andragogue.


A curriculum for preparing adult educators should consider not only the courses in adult education to be offered, but also the kinds of experiences the students in these courses will go through. In this respect, Carter (1983) distinguishes between form and substance when he points out that "Form is illustrated by numbers of credits, courses to be taken, and other requirements to be met. A focus on substance includes attention to what is to occur in the experiences of students as they engage in courses" (p. 80). Carter suggests four types of experiences for adult education students that although intended for a graduate curriculum in adult education can be applied to an undergraduate curriculum in adult teacher education. One of these experiences would be that students study critically and analytically what the literature on adult education says and also what is presented by faculty members. A second type of experience provides for the students to experience directly aspects of the practice of adult education. This presupposes including activities such as field experiences or even internships as part of the curriculum. A third type of experience would provide for exercises in reflecting. The students would reflect on what they learn so as to expand their knowledge and vision of the field of adult education. A fourth type of experience would provide opportunities for applying conceptual ideas and‑ processes in what Carter calls "nonthreatening environments" in which equally nonthreatening feedback is received. These nonthreatening environments should be as similar as possible to real environments in which adult education occurs.


The integration of theory in addition to practice in the training of adult educators was a recommendation made by Rivero (1986) in an international conference on adult education. Theory would include, among other topics, (a) a study of the local milieu and conditions in order to adapt actions to concrete and actual needs of the interested social groups; (b) initiation into the knowledge of the elements of empirical sociology, of psychosociology and of social psychology to know about the milieu and its behavior; (c) knowledge of the principles and structures of the modalities of learning at adult age taking into consideration those factors which promote and hinder or delay learning, and (d) the role and use of teaching aids in education from the most elementary ones to those supplied by modern technology. Although these recommendations were made specifically for the training of adult educators, what was recommended in terms of theory can very well be incorporated in a teacher education curriculum to prepare adult education teachers.


Nunes and Halloran (1987) identify seven competencies and skills adult educators should develop. These are (a) understanding the adult learner, (b) knowledge of field content and methodology, (c) employment of teaching techniques, (d) communication skills, (e) professionalism, (f) management of learning environment, and (g) interpersonal skills. These competencies arid skills should be included in a curriculum for teacher education in adult education. Adult education today occurs in diverse settings other than schools, colleges, and universities. Some of  these settings are the government, human services, business, and industry among others. Colleges and universities must now take the responsibility for preparing adult educators for all these settings.  Demetrulias and Dutsch (1982) suggest that the preparation of adult educators to work in these diverse settings should include knowledge about theories of adult development and their educational implications, the adult learning process, curriculum design, assessment of student progress, interpersonal skills, the integration of theory and practice, and some type of practicum or internship experience.


Knowles' (1988) suggestions of topics for the preservice training of Adult Basic Education instructors could also be used as contents for a teacher education curriculum in adult education. These topics include (a) the nature of the adult education program in which the background information is given, (b) general characteristics of the students in the program, (c) adult education basic program objectives, in which the general and specific objectives of the program are discussed, and (d)‑pedagogical techniques for basic education, which concentrates on methods and techniques of adult education. These topics could be developed into courses for an adult teacher education curriculum.


Curriculum Development


Longstreet and Shane (1993) view curriculum development from a political perspective. They observe that "Curriculum. development includes the process of determining how a curriculum design shall be prepared for classroom implementation, who shall participate in this preparation, and how the actual classroom implementation will occur. Curriculum development is fundamentally a political undertaking" (p. 95).


Ornstein and Hunkins (1993) indicate that not everyone agrees on what curriculum is or what curriculum development involves. They state that "Curriculum development draws on the principles (usually technical or scientific) and consists of those processes (humanistic, humane, and artistic) that allow schools and school people to realize certain educational goals" (p. 191). Ornstein and Hunkins observe that in the process of curriculum development there are numerous models that can be followed. These models can be classified as technical‑scientific or nontechnical scientific. The model chosen will depend on the purpose of the curriculum.


Sork and Cafarella (1991) view curriculum development as systematic planning. This systematic planning is according to them "a powerful tool for designing effective, efficient, relevant, and innovative educational programs or curricula" (p. 235). It consists of the following steps: (a) analysis of the planning context and client system, (b) needs assessment, (c) development of program objectives, (d) formulation of the instructional plan, (e) formulation of the administrative plan, and (f) design of a program evaluation.


Zais (1976) observes that there are three interrelated processes related to curriculum work which are: (a) curriculum construction which refers to the decision making process that determines the nature and design of a curriculum, (b) curriculum development which consists of the procedures for carrying on the construction process, and (c) implementation which refers to the process of putting into effect the curriculum produced by curriculum construction and development. In terms of curriculum development, different models have been produced. Four of them are: (a) the Administrative (Line=Staff) model, (b) the Grass‑Roots Model, (c) Beauchamp's System, and (d) the Andragogy Model.


The Administrative Model utilizes "top down, line-staff" procedures, where initiatives for curriculum development usually begin with a high‑level official. This official appoints a steering committee made up of top administrative officers and key teachers who initiate the whole process of curriculum development. The steering committee appoints other committees which are responsible for the construction and implementation of the curriculum.


This model has been criticized as being undemocratic in principle because in it curriculum development originates, is directed, and controlled from the top downward along hierarchical line‑staff channels. Curriculum development is better produced when it is the result of the collaboration of those involved in the process and not imposed by anyone.


The Grass‑Roots Model is initiated by teachers in schools, employs democratic group methods of decision making, proceeds on a "broken front," and is geared to the specific curriculum problems of particular schools s or even classrooms. It establishes that successful implementation of a curriculum will take place only if teachers have been involved in the construction and development processes and that not only professionals should be involved in the planning process but also the students, parents, and community members. The major weakness of this model is that not always problems can be solved on a "one man‑one vote" basis, but it is necessary to consult the authority of specialized knowledge.


Knowles' andragogical model for curriculum development includes seven phases, which according to Brookfield (1991) "are replicable in a variety of programs in almost every kind of institution throughout the world" (p. 101).  These seven phases are (a) the establishment of a climate conducive to learning, (b) the creation of an organizational structure for participative planning, (c) the diagnosis of needs for learning, (d) the formulation of directions of learning, (e) the development of a design of activities, (f) the operation of the activities, and (g) the rediagnosis of needs for learning (evaluation). Knowles observes that when andragogy is applied to curriculum planning and development, the process turns out to be different from the traditional curriculum planning and development employed in youth education. Curriculum planning and development for adult education curricula should be done taking into consideration the unique characteristics of the adult learner.

Beauchamp's curriculum development model (1964) identifies five critical decision making areas for curriculum development. The first area is the arena for curriculum engineering, which refers to the scope of the development process. For example, the arena may be a classroom, a school, a school district, or even the entire state. The second area is the selection and involvement of people. These people include (a) specialized personnel, (b) representative groups composed of specialized personnel and selected classroom teachers, (c) all professional personnel in the school system, and (d) lay citizens. The third area in Beauchamp's model is organization and procedures for curriculum planning. This area defines the procedures to be followed by those who establish curriculum goals and objectives, select the content and learning activities, and determine the overall. design. The fourth area is curriculum implementation. Beauchamp advises careful planning in this area to anticipate possible implementation barriers. The fifth area is curriculum evaluation. This area has four dimensions: (a) evaluation of the teacher's use of the curriculum, (b) evaluation of the curriculum design, (c) evaluation of student outcomes, and (d) evaluation of the curriculum engineering system. Data collected from this evaluation will help improve the curriculum. The "top‑down" organizational orientation of this model constitutes its major weakness. Although Beauchamp's model is not a recent one, the five areas described for curriculum development are still applicable.


Curriculum Implementation


Pratt (1994) points out that implementing a curriculum conveys change which implies social action that builds a climate of acceptance for the change. Implementing a curriculum includes the following steps: (a) establishing a climate of trust, (b) implementing changes that meet the recognized needs, (c) consult widely, (d) establishing clear goals and limited scope, (e) developing an ethos of collegiality, (f) using personal contact, (g) providing systematic in‑service training; (h) providing time and resources, (i) trying not to change everyone, and (j) not despairing.


According to Pratt, these steps should facilitate the implementation process.


            Miller and Seller (1985) in discussing curriculum implementation indicate that curriculum implementation is a process and that a plan must be developed for curriculum implementation. The curriculum implementation plan, according to them, has seven primary components which are (a) a study of the new program, (b, identification of resources, (c) role definition, (d) professional development, (e) timeliness, (f) communications system, and (g) monitoring the implementation. This plan will help identify difficulties and deal with implementation problems more effectively.


The study of the new program (or curriculum) has several purposes. One of them is considering whether the origin of the program is internal or external to the system. This early consideration is important because usually the implementation of a curriculum within the organization is likely to be more widely accepted than the implementation of a curriculum coming from an external source. Another purpose for studying the program or curriculum is to determine the potential impact it will have on the teachers' beliefs, methodologies, and resources. Still another purpose is to examine both implicit and‑explicit changes this program or curriculum will bring.


Resources to be considered include (a) print and audio visual resources, (b) human resources, and (c) financial resources. Resources identification will help in identifying and satisfying needs in any of these three areas or in all of them.


Role definition will help make sure that important tasks in the implementation of the curriculum are not overlooked. It also prevents conflicts in fulfillment of tasks assigned.


Professional development includes all those activities (workshops, seminars, orientations, conferences) that will enable all those responsible in the implementation of the curriculum develop the knowledge and skills necessary to do their part of the job. Careful planning of this component of the implementation plan is advised by Miller and Seller (1985) .

A timeline or implementation schedule should be provided. All groups involved in the implementation of the curriculum should provide input in terms of time necessary for each stage of the implementation schedule. Establishing an effective communications system is key to successful curriculum implementation. Those involved should decide as a group on the most effective communications system to be established.


Monitoring, which constitutes formative evaluation, has the purpose of gathering information about the implementation and use of these data to make any changes to facilitate and support the efforts of those utilizing the curriculum. Summative valuation will help decide whether or not to continue with the program or curriculum.


Forces Affecting Curriculum Development


McNeil (1990) views curriculum development as policy making. In the process of curriculum as policy making, there are external and internal participants who influence curriculum policy making. Some of the internal participants include the teachers, the principals, the superintendents, and the students.  External participants include the local school board, the local communities, the regional and state agencies, the testing agencies, the federal government, the suppliers of textbooks and materials, and the pressure groups.


Oliva (1988) observes that curriculum development responds and is affected by social forces, philosophical positions, psychological principles, accumulating knowledge, and educational leadership at its moment in history. The influence of educational groups and individuals has been responsible for the implementation of curricular innovations and permanent changes.


Zais (1976), for whom curriculum development can. be seen as a policy‑making activity, mentions forces such as the private accrediting agencies, the state departments of education, the private testing agencies, and the associations of teachers of special subjects as groups which influence curriculum development; since they establish minimum curriculum standards. Another group that influences curriculum development ,is the group of the alternative generators. These groups influence curriculum because they provide either funds, materials, or expertise. Some of them are the suppliers of curriculum materials, the corporate education industry, the federal government, private foundations, university professors, and professional educators and their journals. These are all external forces which affect curriculum development


Evaluation of a Teacher Education Curriculum in Adult Education


The purpose of evaluating a curriculum according to Sork and Caffarella (1991) is making judgements about the merit or worth of a curriculum. The results of the evaluation will determine what has to be changed or improved so that the curriculum can accomplish its goals and objectives. Steele (1991) observes that, "Evaluation should use information in such a way that 'the process improves adult education programs" (p.260).


Knowles (1988) indicates that program or curriculum evaluation has two main purposes: one is the improvement of organizational operation, including such aspects as planning process, structure, decision‑making procedures, personnel, physical facilities, recruitment, training, public relations, and administrative management, and the second is the improvement of its program, including such aspects as objectives, clientele, methods and techniques, materials, and quality of learning outcomes. Secondary purposes of evaluation include defense against attack, justification for expansion, support for the status quo, boosting of morale, personal appraisal and promotion, and institutional reorganization. In relation to the secondary purposes of evaluation, Knowles (1970) states the following:


The basic purpose of evaluation is to stimulate             growth and improvement. Whatever other worthy purposes exist are only facets of the all­ inclusive effort to assess present conditions as a             basis for achieving better ones. Evaluation that does not lead to improved practice is sterile. (p. 223 )


In curriculum evaluation, two types of evaluation must be considered. One is formative evaluation and the other is summative evaluation. Formative      evaluation is done while the program is in process to improve the program. Summative evaluation is done when the program is completed. According to Steele (1990)        summative evaluation is designed for the following:

(a) to account for program decisions and investments,

(b) to identify ways to enhance future offerings, and

(c) to determine future needs. In order for the evaluation of a curriculum to be complete, these two                         types of evaluation should be conducted.


Curriculum or program evaluation is a process.  Because it is a process, it consists of several steps.

Knowles (1970) suggests the following steps in the evaluation process: (a) formulating the questions you want answered; (b) collecting the data that will enable you to answer those questions; (c) analyzing the data and interpreting what they mean as answers to the questions raised; and (d) modifying your plans, operations, and program in the light of your findings. Rankin (1990) observes that "evaluation is the process of making judgments from data collected and analyzed" (p. 6). According to Rankin (1990), the steps in conducting an evaluation are the following: (a) prepare an agreement between the evaluator and the sponsor, (b) specify what is to be evaluated such as the purpose, the audience and the procedures, (c) define the criteria to be used to determine the merit or worth, (d) collect data by using an appropriate set of methods, (e) analyze data, (f) report findings, and (g) draw conclusions and make recommendations. The results of the evaluation will be used in improving or making changes in the curriculum.


Several evaluation models have been developed which can be used according to the curriculum to be evaluated. According to Herrscher (1991), under the Goal Free Evaluation Model an external evaluator(s) does the evaluation. The evaluator is not told what the program's goals are. The evaluator collects and analyzes data and then offers conclusions and recommendations. Then the evaluator is told what the goals are and comparisons are made. It might happen that large discrepancies in the program are discovered and changes have to be made.


According to Herrscher (1991), the Judicial Evaluation Model takes the court room as a model. There is a judge who using the evidence of accomplishment or not accomplishment of goals presented to him or her by two groups of people who know the curriculum or program, decides whether or not the goals have been accomplished.


Issac and Michael (1990) indicate that the Context‑Input‑Process‑Product is another evaluation model frequently used in curriculum evaluation. Its main purpose is to provide information to decision makers using four types of evaluation: context, input, process, and product. Brookfield (1991) comments about this model that "Evaluation of a program should include scrutiny of the program's origins, implementation, and continuing operations, as well as its final achievement. In this approach formative evaluation is regarded as being of equal importance to summative evaluation" (p. 270).


             Pratt's (1980) tridimensional curriculum evaluation model evaluates three dimensions of the curriculum which are efficiency, effectiveness, and acceptability. For Pratt (1980), efficiency means "the production of output relative to input of energy and resources" (p. 421). Effectiveness refers to the accomplishment of the curriculum objectives.  Acceptability refers to the process of determining to what extent this curriculum is accepted and supported by all those involved or affected by the curriculum.




Many conclusions can be drawn from the literature review conducted. The majority, if not all, of the adult education teachers do not have an academic preparation in adult education. Teachers of adult students are elementary or secondary teachers who teach adult students using the same method and techniques they employ with children or adolescents. There is a need for an adult teacher education curriculum to provide teachers with knowledge and skills in adult education.


The andragogical model of Knowles (1970) seems to be the most appropriate model for an adult teacher education curriculum. Knowles, model is based on principles and practices of adult education; therefore, adult teacher education curriculum should follow this model. There are some basic elements a curriculum should include and which must be related to one another. These include a philosophy statement, a rationale, goals and objectives, competencies, outcomes, contents, an implementation plan, and an evaluation plan. The contents of the curriculum will depend on it purpose.


Curriculum planning should follow the strategic planning approach which considers the influence of environmental forces. Winstead and Ruff (1986) state that strategic planning can assist an organization in assessing the influence the external environment will have in its plans for implementing new programs or even new curricula. They observe that strategic planning is "a continuous and systematic look at an organization, focusing on organizational strengths and weaknesses; and assessing the environment in which the organization is competing" (p. 2).


[Pág. Anterior]