Although the goal always seemed to be, to learn and open our minds to different opportunities and thought processes, there was always this underlying expectation of examinations. This I always refer to as “teaching to the test”. This happens in almost every school. During some of my prior classes and some fieldwork, while creating lesson plans, you are expected to follow a certain criteria that gives you a particular final result. In order for a student to be successful even in that particular lesson, they have to have reached a specific and predetermined goal.

The Tyler Rationale puts many limitations on what the teachers are allowed to teach. This then becomes a limitation to the students because their education gets put into a box that they cannot expand using the resource that is their teacher. Also from this limitation, this restricts ways that the students are allowed to learn, so students that may learn in a slightly different way than provided they will have an unfair disadvantage. It is almost impossible under this rationale for there to be any independent work done by the students in which each student will have a personalized outcome and proof of learning. The Tyler Rationale puts more focus on the result rather than the journey that the students and even the teachers took to get there.

While there are many negatives to the Tyler Rationale, there are positives to it as well. While some people think that structure is a bad thing, there are a lot of students that require this structure to be successful. There is a focused objective which means that you have a point where you are certain that your students are successful and understand the topic that is given. Using this rationale there is an agreed-upon set of outcomes and goals that each student needs to reach, which means that there is a set expectation of the students and the teachers.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

Great comparisons between the positives and negatives of the Tyler rationale. I enjoyed how you connected it to how students education is put into a box. But, having the positive be for students who require structure within the classroom.

LikeLike

I can relate to your experiences regarding examinations and testing. I agree that the Tyler Rationale can disadvantage students who learn in ways that differ from the majority, as well as your point about the structure is a positive thing; however, I believe too much classroom structure is what places us in the norm of ‘commonsense’ as the previous article stated.

As you reflect on your points regarding pros and cons of Tyler’s Rationale, what are possible ways you would modify this Rationale to make it more inclusive in your classroom?

LikeLiked by 1 person

Regarding inclusion, I’m sure when the rationale was published inclusion wasn’t a concept that was considered at all. But I find that for some students in the classroom, having that structure can be a great thing and bring success but for other students having that personalized outcome and sense of learning is the only way that they will be successful (even switching up the definition of success for that student or set of students). Being able to give more “wiggle room” in the Tyler Rationale would definitely help more students than it would regularly.

Great Question!!

LikeLike