Curriculum as Intended Learning Outcomes
The third image asks a single question: where should learning arrive? It keeps its eyes on the future, fixing the curriculum to the ends it intends to reach rather than the activities along the way.
Curriculum as the ends learning should reach
This image shifts the emphasis from means to ends. Instead of describing what learners will do, it describes where they should end up. The curriculum becomes the set of outcomes the school intends learning to reach.
The key move is precision. Older purposes were often stated in grand, vague language, such as “an appreciation for our cultural heritage.” That sounds fine but gives a teacher little to work with. The outcomes image replaces the grand phrase with a structured series of specific ends. Once the ends are set, everything else lines up behind them: all activities, all teaching, and even the design of the room serve the acquisition of those specified outcomes.
The strength of this image is that it makes purposes concrete and checkable. Its risk is that it can squeeze out anything that is hard to state as a clean outcome.
Specific ends, stated precisely
It moves the focus from means to ends. Vague aims like “appreciate our heritage” are replaced by a structured series of outcomes, and all teaching and activity serve to reach them.
How was this article?