NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED178696
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1979
Pages: 13
Abstractor: N/A
Review and Critique of Strategies for Determining Career Education Curriculum Content.
Finch, Curtis R.; Crunkilton, John R.
Examination of selected national and state level career education curriculum development projects provided the basis for consideration and comparison of major strategies used in deriving curriculum content. Those found most useful included the theoretical base, philosophical base, introspection, function approach, task analysis, Delphi approach, and critical incident technique. Using a theoretical base involves questions of theory validity, whereas a philosophical base can serve as a general foundation even though it may fail to allow for work-related specificity. Introspection has inherent shortcomings since the content may not be relevant and realistic. Adams' DACUM (Developing a Curriculum) approach makes good use of introspection, however. The function approach focuses on identification of content in terms of unifying characteristics across a particular industry or business, and can cut across traditional teaching lines. Task analysis, while expensive and time consuming, has much value in identifying career preparation content. The critical incident technique, focusing on identifying behaviors which are value-laden, has greatest applicability in career preparation and exploration, in contrast to the task analysis approach. The Delphi Technique is most useful in setting priorities, establishing goals, and forecasting the future. It should be remembered that strategies are not mutually exclusive--use of multiple strategies has great potential if one is aware of the comparative strengths and weaknesses (as can be derived from the accompanying tabulation) of each respective approach. (CP)
Publication Type: Speeches/Meeting Papers; Reports - Evaluative
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg.
Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Francisco, California, April, 1979)