K-12 Curriculum Development

President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have recently shared their thoughts on national standards for K-12 education in the United States.  On February 16, Randi Weingarten wrote an Op-Ed article in The Washington Post.  Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, wrote "The countries that consistently outperform the United States on international assessments all have national standards, with core curriculum, assessments and time for professional development for teachers based on those standards."

"The United States Constitution created a national system of banking, transportation, commerce, justice, and the military with attendant national agencies and institutions to plan, direct, and implement them; education was left under the old Articles of Confederation, where it remains to this day" (English & Steffy, 2001, p. 31).

Questions for Professional Dialogue:

What are the benefits of national standards?

What are the weaknesses of national standards?

Do you teach in a country with national standards?

What is your opinion on national standards versus state standards?

Additional Sources:

The Accountability Illusion
Released by the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (Feb. 19, 2009)

Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World Class Education
National Governors Association (Dec. 19, 2008)

Education Standards are not the Answer
CATO Institute (article appeared in The Washington Post - April 5, 2007)

The Case for National Standards in American Education
Education Week - Commentary (March 5, 2007)

National Standards: 50 Standards for 50 States Is a Formula for Incoherence and Obfuscation
Education Week - Commentary (January 5, 2006)

The Case for National Standards, Accountability and Fiscal Equity
The Center for American Progress (2005)

English, F.W., & Steffy, B.E. (2001). Deep curriculum alignment: Creating a level
          playing field for all children on high-stakes tests of educational
          accountability. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, Inc.

Curriculum alignment is often viewed as a ladder.  In theory, each rung on the ladder represents a new grade level and when students reach the top of the ladder they should be prepared for the next step which is life beyond high school.  One of the dangers of building a curriculum based on the wrong motives is that students may climb the ladder only to find the "ladder is against the wrong wall" (Covey, Merrill & Merrill, 1994, p. 138).

Mistakes To Avoid When Building a K-12 curriculum:

1.  Curriculuar Reductionism:
     A curriculum which emphasizes courses with mandatrory state and
     national tests at the expense of other courses may omit important life skills
     and may not engage every student.  A second flaw to this approach is that
     some courses are only tested at designated grade levels.  If social studies is
     not taught in K-5, but there is a state test in grades 8, 10 and 12, will
     students value social studies?  Will students be prepared for the state tests
     by having social studies de-emphasized in favor of other tested courses?

2.  Activity Oriented:
     When activities are the central focus of a curriculum, "there are no explicit big
     ideas guiding the teaching and no plan for ensuring the learning" (Wiggins &
     McTighe, 2005, p. 3).  Developing activities which promote student
     enthusiasm and interest in a topic is a rewarding experience.  However,
     activities can serve as a barrier to learning and student understanding when
     educators focus on the activity rather than the key concepts, key skills and
     enduring understandings.  Wiggins and McTighe (1998, 2005) recommend
    "Backward Design" as a strategy for developing curriculum which teaches for
     understanding.

3.  Content-Based:
     When teachers and administrators build pacing guides, they often focus on
     content and omit the key concepts, key skills and enduring understandings.
    "Unless teachers [and administrators] consciously identify these
     understandings, they focus on the fact-based content as the endpoint in
     instruction, and the conceptual level of understanding usually is not
     addressed" (Erickson, 2002, p. 49).    

How to Assess If Your Ladder is Leaning on the Right Wall:

1.  What educational purposes should the school [this course] seek to attain?

2.  What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain
      these purposes?

3.  How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?

4.  How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?
                                                                                      (Tyler, 1949, p.1)

Another method for making decisions during the curriculum development and review process is outlined in the attached chart titled Purpose-Driven Curriculum and Instruction (Weber, 2007).

Curriculum Developers must continue to ask,
"Is the ladder leaning against the right wall?" 

References:

Covey, S.R., Merrill, A.R., & Merill, R.R. (1994). First things first. New York.
         Simon & Schuster. 

Erickson, H.L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching
         beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. 

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

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J.(2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria,
           VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

purpose-driven_curriculum_and_instruction.doc
File Size:	28 kb
File Type:	doc

Download File

---

At the NCASCD Conference, I had the opportunity to hear a keynote speech by Dr. Bill McBride.  Dr. McBride described how video games can keep a child or teenager occupied for several hours.  He shared how he was flying across the United States and observed a young child who never took his eyes off the video game he was playing.  It made him ask, what features does a video game have that could be included in a K-12 classroom lesson?  Through research and observation, Dr. McBride has learned the following practical tips for engaging students in meaningful classroom assignments.

Six Features that Technology Uses to Engage Students:

1.  Choice
2.  Connection
3.  Competition 
4.  Challenge
5.  Communication 
6.  Collaborative Problem Solving 

Since I am a father of two children, I have observed our son playing XBOX 360 Live.  The games he enjoys offer multiple choices, not a simple solution.  He enjoys competing with friends online and around the world.  The headset that he uses allows him to communicate with his teammates and with the competition.  XBOX 360 Live allows players to use collaborative problem solving to beat the other team or to assist a teammate. 

Our daughter plays Web Kinz and other online games for younger children.  Web Kinz allows our daughter to have choice (i.e., multiple options and multiple pets), connection with her pets and with other friends, competition, challenge, communication and collaborative problem solving.

Dr. McBride asked educators to consider the following:

How can we use these strategies to our advantage in schools? 

Do our lessons provide students with these six opportunities? 
 
What can we do to modify our existing lessons to offer students choice, competition, challenge, communication, etc.? 

Presenter: Dr. Bill McBride
http://www.entertaininganelephant.com/index.html
Presenter's Web site

Reference:
2009 NCASCD Conference
Keynote Presentation
Pinehurst, North Carolina
February 12, 2009

According to Stephen Covey (2004), "we live in a constant, churning, changing environment.  In turbulent white water, every single person must have something inside them that guides their decisions.  They must independently understand the purpose and guiding principles of the team or organization" (p. 105).  K-12 education is changing at a rapid pace.  The demands for increased rigor and relevance continue to impact teachers and administrators. Student demographics are changing in schools across the United States.  State accountability tests, state mandates and NCLB have brought benefits to students and increased challenges to educators.  As the world continues to change and educators seek to prepare students for life and work in the 21st century, educators must take time to ask "Is our school district prepared for Permanent White Water?"

Questions for K-12 Educators to Address:

1.  Create a list of things or people that are changing at a rapid pace in your
     school district.  (i.e., Teaching Staff (retirement), Student Demographics,
     Central Office Staff (Revolving Door), Use of Technology in the Classroom,
     State Standards, State Assessments, State and Federal Mandates, etc.).

2.  How can teachers and administrators work together to keep the main thing
     (student achievement) as the central focus during times of constant change?

3.  How does permanent white water impact K-12 curriculum and instruction
     decisions?

4.  What can educators do to increase communication in times of constant
      change? (i.e., Blogs, Email, Online Curriculum Maps, Professional Learning
     Community, Common Planning Period, etc.)

5.  Covey wrote, every single person in an organization "must independently
     understand the purpose and guiding principles of the team or organization" 
     (p. 105).
     
     What are the guiding principles for your school?
    
     What are the guiding principles for K-12 curriculum decisions in your 
     school district?

Reference:
Covey, S.R. (2004). The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York:
          Free Press. 

As a teacher and curriculum developer, do you ever feel like you are in a race against time?  At some point, most educators ask the question 'Is everything important?'  How do teachers and administrators in your school district make decisions about what is most worth knowing?  Curriculum development cannot be done in isolation if educators are seeking curriculum alignment, a purposeful curriculum, and a guaranteed and viable curriculum (Marzano). 

“Any curriculum aiming for student understanding requires uncoverage of the material – inquiring into, around, and underneath content instead of simply covering it” (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998, p. 98).  According to Brandt, "designing lessons for understanding begins with what we want students to be able to do and proceeds to the evidence we will accept that they have learned it”
(in Understanding by Design, p. vi).

Before there can be a rational curriculum, we must settle which things it most concerns us to know.....

                                                               - Herbert Spencer
                                                                 What Knowledge is of Most Worth (1854)

Seven Questions for Educators to Address: 

1.  What should students know and be able to do as a result of this course?

2.  What concepts and skills will every teacher at a specific grade level
     'guarantee' to teach?

3.  What will each teacher commit to doing when students do not learn the key
      concepts and skills for this course?

4.  How will teachers in our school district communicate with each other
     regarding curriculum and instruction? (Online Curriculum Mapping, Early
     Release Days, Common Planning Period, Professional Learning Community,
     Periodic Curriculum Audit, K-12 Writing Folders, etc.)

5.  Does the current recommended pacing outlined by our district allow enough
     time for student mastery of the key concepts and skills?

6.  How can classroom teachers provide input when they see a gap in the
     district's curriclum or when the pacing needs to be adjusted in order to
     support student understanding?

7.  Former college football coach Lou Holtz describes W.I.N., an acronym he used
     with his teams.  W.I.N. stands for What's Important Now (Holtz, 1998,
     Winning Everyday: The Game Plan for Success ).  At this point in the school
     year, What's Important Now (W.I.N.) in your course?  Would all teachers and
     administrators provide the same answer?

The term teacher leader is one that I am hesitant to use in 2009.  While I stand in awe of the way great teachers are able to juggle unit planning, parent-teacher conferences, building relationships with students, and after school meetings, while keeping their family as a priority, I have been in education long enough to see the meaning of teacher leader evolve.

As a first year teacher, the term teacher leader was reserved for someone in our school with ten or more years of experience.  The only way that I was going to become a leader was to wait nine more years or enter the field of educational administration.  While working with high school teachers, I have frequently observed the department chair as the teacher leader.  I suppose this makes the other teachers in department meetings teacher followers.

Within the past three years, I have observed teacher leaders who are entering the teaching profession and teacher leaders who are in their final year of teaching.  I have observed professional learning communities in which each teacher has a voice in selecting the team norms and each teacher is expected to contribute to the curriculum development for that specific course.

"No matter how competently managed a school may be, it is the extra quality of leadership that makes the difference between ordinary and extraordinary performance" (Sergiovanni, 1990).  Do we need one teacher leader in each department?  Do we need young teachers to wait until their ten year anniversary with the school district before they begin assuming leadership responsibilities?  What is your view of Teacher Leaders in 2009?  

 
References: 
Sergiovanni, T.  (1990). Value-added leadership: How to get extraordinary
          performance in schools. New York: Harcourt Brace Javonovich.