MODEL TYLER

(MPPR 1123)
DR IBNATUL JALILAH BINTI YUSOF

NURUL AKMAR BINTI SAID

MPP 192006
1
Ralph W.
Tyler
1902-1994
Who is Ralph W.
Tyler
￮ American educator who worked in the
field of assessment and evaluation

His first teaching job was as a high school

 science teacher in Pierre, South Dakota
after first degree

He earned his master's degree from the 

University of Nebraska in 1923 and his 
Ph.D. from the University of Chicago in
1927
3
 FATHER OF THE
OBJECTIVE MODEL

Tylerian Model or

Introduction Tyler’s Objective

Model
First created 1940s
1930-1945
Ralph W. Tyler – essential Basic Principle :
role in the development of Matching the pre- The model considers
educational evaluation and behavioral objectives curriculum as a means of
testing and his name is with the actual come aiming toward an
given to the EVALUATION educational object.
DEVELOPMENT
Based OBJECTIVE-
ORIENTED THEORY (Vo Thi Kim, Anh, 2018)
(Madaus & Stufflebeam,
2000)
(Tyler, 1949)
4
 PROGRAMME
EIGHT YEAR
STUDY, 1930s
Tyler said assessment is a process for determining the extent to which a
program's goals can be achieved (1933-1941)

The approach has several steps;

1) 1) Define goals and objectives
2) 2) Classify goals and objectives
3) 3) Define objectives in terms of behavior
4) 4) Identify situations in which objective achievement can be seen
5) 5) Develop and choose measurement methods
6) 6) Collect data
7) 7) Compare performance with the objective set

5
(Smith & Tyler, 1942)
Basic Principles of
Curriculum and
Instruction (1949)
This book was a bestseller and has since been
reprinted in 36 editions, shaping curriculum and
instructional design to this day
￮ Tyler Rationale:
￮ - Defining appropriate learning objectives
￮ - Introducing useful learning experiences
￮ - Organizing experiences to maximize their
effect
￮ - Evaluating the process and revising the
areas that were not effective
6
Tyler’s Model
(1949)
7
Tyler’s Rationale:
Model of Curriculum
& Instructional
Design
Expression of 2 Level of
educational ideas Identifiers for the
Curriculum:

Special attention to - Data Gathering

the planning - Screening
process (Philosophical &
Psychological)

Follows a 4
Question process

8
Key Emphasis:
Instructional
Objective
Purpose Method Limitation
To measure 1. Specify Instructional 1. Ignore process
students Objectives 2. Not useful for
progress 2. Collect performance diagnosis of
towards data reasons why
objective curriculum has
3. Compare
performance data with failed
the objectives/standard
instructional

9
 OBJECTIVES
What educational goals the school seek to attain?

Tyler’s
Planning
SELECTING LEARNING EXPERIENCES (CONTENT)
How can learning experiences be selected which are likely to useful in
attaining these objectives?

Model
(1949) ORGANISING LEARNING EXPERIENCES (METHOD)
How can learning experiences be organised for effective instruction?

EVALUATION OF STUDENTS PERFORMANCE (EVALUATION)

How can the effectiveness of learning experiences be evaluated?

10
 goals
Careful

from three
educational

1
formulating

Th
e
le
ar
n
er
s
2

C
ou on
th ts tem
e id
le e p o
ar th r a
n e ry
er s
ch lif
oo e
lf
or
3

S
u
b
je
ct
m
at
te
r
11
Two goal
screen
1 A psychology of 2 A philosophy of
learning education

Based on the school’s Based on the school’s

psychology of educational philosophy (very
learning via broad)
attainability of goals
and expectations
(narrows down the
philosophical screen
candidates)
12
 The idea that children’s
“ interest must be identified
so that they can serve as
the focus of educational
attention”
Tyler, 1987

13
Advantages
1. It takes all stakeholders into consideration
2. Has active participation of the learners
3. It seeks to develop a purpose by using
screens of value and understanding
4. Easily understood
5. The end result narrow in scope
6. Objectives are clearly defined

14
Disadvantages
1. Not paying attention to students'
backgrounds and abilities
2. It is possible that the objectives are not
reached because the student lacks the
existing knowledge or skills
3. Too much emphasis on learning outcomes
that not encourage student creativity
4. The evaluation burden is too heavy
5. Time consuming

15
Thanks
!
Any questions?
You can find me at
￮ Fb: nurul akmar said
￮ akmarsaid06@yahoo.com

16
References
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000). The CIPP Model for Evaluation. In D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F.
Madaus, & T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluiation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and
Human Services Evaluation (second edi, pp. 279–318). Boston: Kluwer Academic

Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

Vo Thi Kim Anh (2018). Evaluation model in educational program: strengths and
weakness. Malaysia: Universiti Malaysia Sabah
17