Tyler based his research on purpose, experience, effectiveness and attainment. Within an educational curriculum standpoint there can be flaws found as to why this may or may not be the answer when determining how youth deserve or need to be educated.
A major piece that won’t resignate acroos the board within the teacher population is how every teacher does not share the same philosophy about teaching and achieving relationships within their students. A teachers philosophy is their identity and they work toward their goals and objectives based on how they find they can make a difference in their daily lectures or activities. If they were to follow the Tyler model, it would take the personal connection a teacher requires to build a rapport and connect with their students. TeacHing isn’t just about curriculum, it’s about teaching communication and building trust within each individual student and neglecting this aspect of teaching is putting the students at a disadvantage.
Preparing students for the next step and real world ideals is not realistic within the Tyler model and there is no far sightedness or looking ahead within the study. We as teachers want our students to think about what might be in the future and encourage out of the box thinking – critical thinking that is necessary to help problem solving objectives in real life situations. Yes we as teachers guide our students, but ultimately they choose their own paths, we give them the tools to make logical and sound decisions that will help them with success in whatever they set out to do.
I understand Tyler’s wants a strict, cut from the same cloth type of research, but when it comes to the student population, there is nothing of such that is similar as all students think and learn at different capacities, and we as teacher s must learn to teach students at their pace, not our own