| dc.description.abstract | The aim of this study is to analyze the fundamentals of therational, planning, and scientific technical curriculum development movement that has been quite powerful and still has continued influence in the field of curriculum and instruction in light of J.F. Bobbitt's published works between 1911 and 1918. J.F. Bobbitt is the most impressive figure in curriculum field because his thought influenced behavioristic curriculum approach and system approach in curriculum development. The focal point of the study is the question of how J.F. Bobbitt's thoughts on education shaped the understanding of curriculum. In light of this question, the study aims to unravel the historical and philosophical back story of the rational and planning approach in curriculum development. The study employees the help of historical analysis to scrutinize the effects of the industrial revolution that was gaining momentum in the US mid-19th century and the socio economic changes, it brought and their influence on J.F. Bobbitt's thoughts on education. In addition, the study examines how this important theoretician's thoughts on curriculum evolved between 1911 and 1918 in light of his published works. Consequently, the author hopes that this study would contribute to the understanding of curriculum theory efforts and the historical roots of curriculum development paradigm in Turkey Industrialization and urbanization, having gained a momentum especially after 1865, as well as social mobility in the forms of immigration and emigration have resulted in a significant socioeconomic transformation in the USA. Factors such as increased industrial production, higher domestic and international trade volumes, immigration, urbanization, development of the machine industry, and novel perspectives on management introduced especially during the early years of the 20th century and high efficiency in production achieved by these perspectives have not only had an influence on the cultural structure but also on education and have accelerated the socioeconomic and sociocultural transformation processes in the USA (Bensel, 2000; Blumin, 1976; Burton, 1981; Hounshell, 1984). The most significant results brought about by this socioeconomic and sociocultural transformation were observed in the form of new movements of ideas and practices introduced in the field of education. Particular attention was given to teaching the social norms to new generations and providing them with a prospering socialization process for the future of the American democracy and significant movements of ideas have emerged within this framework. Some of the most fundamental movements of ideas in that period were introduced by a number of educational reformers and philosophers such as J. Dewey, W. H. Kilpatrick, and Frank McMurry with their efforts to transform the school life into the aspects of real life in the form of activities such as handicraft and project works provided within the scope of studentcentered teaching practices (Cremin, 1964; Tanner Tanner, 1975). A monograph titled The Principles of Scientific Management written by F. W. Taylor in 1911 paved the way for a new period in the USA by means of having an influence on a great number of activities not only in the field of industrial production but also in the social domain. Time and motion study, a system suggested by F. W. Taylor, fundamentally relied on the simplification of the production process and the performance of the work by breaking it up into smaller sections within the scope of industrial production. During his long-term engineering career, F. W. Taylor identified that it took less time when the work was broken into smaller sections whereas much more work was performed during the equal period of time and put this theory into practice in industrial production. Since the results F. W. Taylor had obtained from such practice indicated an incredible increase in productivity, he called this production model as the Scientific Management and published his work in the form of a monograph (Callahan, 1962; Haber, 1964). This monograph, published by the title of The Principles of Scientific Management, caught the attention of educationists within a short time. J. F. Bobbitt, lecturing on educational management in the University of Chicago, was also among these educationists interested in the work of F. W. Taylor (Kliebard, 1995; Seguel, 1966). J. F. Bobbitt adapted the ideas of Frederick W. Taylor, the most prominent productivity expert of the period, to the field of education. According to J. F. Bobbitt, the most important element in a curriculum was the perspective to determine the product of the curriculum. In other words, curriculum should accurately define the qualities of the product to be created. This definition process should be in accordance with the scientific methods. Achieving productivity as the basis for the principles of scientific methods substantially depends on this definition. Therefore, curriculum developers should primarily analyze the social world and social activities in terms of sociological, psychological, and economic aspects to determine which areas of skills have an influence on the development of society and democracy and then determine the objectives of curriculum in line with the conclusions obtained from such analyses. This procedure forms a basis for the scientific approach in curriculum development. On the other hand, curriculum development also entails technical aspects. Once the objectives are identified, one should ensure the realization of these objectives in the most efficient fashion. This would be achieved only by means of the teaching process. J. F. Bobbitt attributed the quality of the product to be created to the teaching process and emphasized the significance of active learning. Therefore, he supported the progressivist movement that was highly prominent in education during the period in which the aforementioned work was published. In this context, J. F. Bobbitt was against the memorization of the concepts during the teaching process. Putting an emphasis on the fact that the memorization of the verbal knowledge could not possibly resolve any problems encountered by the individuals in that new age, thus J. F. Bobbitt rejected the faculty psychology of the 19th century. According to Bobbitt, information was of no value unless it was functional in everyday life (Bobbitt, 1918; 1924). According to him, the inclusion of the history of Ancient Rome and Ancient Greek civilizations, or Homer's Iliad within the scope of the objectives of social studies had no significance. Such subjects were completely obsolete, archaic, and they remained only in the dusty pages of history. The main objective of the social studies of the 20th century should be providing the students with practical skills in terms of industry, citizenship, and urban life. Therefore, J. F. Bobbitt stood up against the philosophy of education based on the classics, essentialism, and perennialism whereas he formed his own philosophy in parallel with progressivism as the dominant philosophy of education in that period (Cremin, 1964; Schiro, 1978; 2012). Written in line with this perspective, The Curriculum became a milestone as the forerunner in the history of the curriculum field. As a reflection of a combination of Taylor's ideas on scientific management and productivity, the functionalist perspective proposed by Herbert Spencer, and the ideas proposed within the context of the progressivist philosophy of education of the period, The Curriculum was the first in its period and it also had a profound effect on the successive literature. Publishing works in parallel with this work as in the case of educationists such as W. W. Charters lecturing in the University of Chicago resulted in the publication of many textbooks titled "The Curriculum" within a short period of time. In other words, the most significant intellectual legacy of J. F. Bobbitt was his exclusive contribution to the field of curriculum to be accepted as a praxis science. In the later periods, J. F. Bobbitt participated in field studies as a productivity expert and published a number of articles on the curriculum. Furthermore, this new perspective proposed by J. F. Bobbitt on the nature of the curriculum has formed a basis for the curriculum development efforts today. The first section of the intellectual legacy of J. F. Bobbitt was the central role of the objectives in the process of curriculum design (Jackson, 1992; Kliebard, 1970; 1995; Ornstein Hunkins, 1988). He was the first to emphasize that the objectives were the first and the most fundamental element of the curriculum and therefore, the objectives should be taken into account in the first place with an aim to provide for an effective teaching. The second section of the intellectual legacy of J. F. Bobbitt was his emphasis on both technical and scientific processes in the development of curriculum. Whereas the scientific method identifies the objectives of the curriculum, the technical aspect is used to match these objectives with their counterparts encountered during real life experiences. By using an allegory in which J. F. Bobbitt compared the curriculum to a railway construction, he emphasized the significance of the technical processes for the efficiency of the curriculum. Technical knowledge made it possible to determine the stage at which each individual objective would be made available for the student and how the experiences and assessments associated with these objectives were to be designed. The third section of the intellectual legacy of J. F. Bobbitt was his perspective on the fact that the curriculum should not be based on uniformity but it should based on diversification in a variety of fields. J. F. Bobbitt was of the opinion that uniform curriculum was insufficient for the 20th century. He proposed that the curriculum should be exclusively designed for various aspects such as occupational, academic, and preparatory and that a multi-program structure should be adopted in schools. Therefore, the students would be able to follow various curricula in line with their own preferences and skills and receive education suitable to their interests. The final section of the intellectual legacy of J. F. Bobbitt was the idea that education could be used as a means of social control. Asserting that the society may be recreated through education, J. F. Bobbitt remarked that schools were efficient centers to rebuild the social life. Although ninety-seven years have passed since the introduction of J. F. Bobbitt's early opinions, formed between 1911 and 1918, on curriculum and a different perspective on the curriculum design, his opinions are still followed within the scope of the efforts in the curriculum development. J. F. Bobbitt's proposal for the analysis of the social life for the determination of the curriculum objectives was further developed by his student, Ralph W. Tyler, to incorporate the data obtained from the individual, the society, and the subject field. | en_US |
