School districts across the United States are making the transition from teachers working in isolation to teachers and administrators operating as a Professional Learning Community. A Professional Learning Community is more than a group of teachers having a common meeting date and location on a weekly basis. If organized properly, DuFour, Eaker and DuFour (2005) explain that the following questions will guide the work of a Professional Learning Community. 1. What is it we want all students to learn? 2. How will we know when each student has mastered the essential learning? 3. How will we respond when a student experiences initial difficulty in learning? 4. How will we deepen the learning for students who have already mastered essential knowledge and skills? In this article, I want to share how curriculum mapping is a tool which supports the work of a Professional Learning Community. Question number one asks 'what’ do we want all students to learn. Without curriculum maps, teachers have not documented ‘what’ students should learn. If teachers in one building agree on ‘what’ students should learn and teachers in another school decide on ‘what’ students should learn, then vertical alignment within the school district will be virtually nonexistent. How will we know when each student has mastered the essential learning? Once again, in the absence of curriculum maps it is difficult to know what is essential. If a Professional Learning Team develops common formative assessments, but they lack curriculum maps then how will the educators know ‘what’ to assess? Some researchers have indicated that teachers should identify the curriculum using the following descriptions: Introductory, Review, and Mastery or Understanding. Until teachers develop a curriculum map, some teachers may teach the state standards for Introductory and other teachers may teach the same standards until students develop Mastery. Wiggins and McTighe (2005), wrote, "In the absence of a learning plan with clear goals, how likely is it that students will develop shared understandings on which future lessons might build." (p. 21)? Question three asks educators to respond when students experience difficulty in learning. It is difficult to respond when students struggle with learning, if each teacher is aiming for a different goal. Some educators struggle with this approach and argue that a common curriculum is a scripted curriculum. What I am describing is a common curriculum which outlines the enduring understandings, key concepts, key skills and power standards. If we can clarify what we want every student to know and be able to do, then we will be able to support students when they struggle with the essential learning(s). ‘How’ a teacher chooses to lead students to understand essential skills and concepts is not dictated by a curriculum map. The best educators understand that student learning styles and readiness levels vary from one class to the next. One teacher may teach a concept differently in first period than she does in second period. A curriculum map will help educators organize the district’s common curriculum. Marzano (2003) calls this the ‘guaranteed and viable curriculum’ and his research led him to believe that this is the number one factor which impacts student achievement. The fourth question asked in a professional learning community allows educators to challenge each student at their respective readiness level. If a student is ready for the next level of learning, then teachers can use the curriculum maps to guide their instructional decisions. It is difficult for teachers to differentiate instruction if they do not share a common starting point to differentiate from. Curriculum maps provide teachers with a starting point. Vertical alignment helps teachers see where students will take their learning at the next level. If a concept is taught for Introduction in the third grade, but two students are ready to move to the next level then teachers can create learning experiences which challenge those students and teach the introductory level of knowledge to the rest of the class. The attached resource was developed by Steven Weber (2009) and it shares the curriculum mapping process. If your staff operates as a Professional Learning Community, but you do not frequently discuss a common curriculum you may also benefit from Unpacking Standards – The Process. References: DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (Eds.). (2005). On common ground: The power of professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service. Marzano, R.J. (2003). What works in schools: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design:Expanded 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 
Curriculum Mapping Resources 09/16/2009
Rubicon is one of several companies which offer tools to support curriculum mapping efforts. Educators interested in learning more about the curriculum mapping process should view the podcasts created by Rubicon at http://www.rubiconpodcast.com/. A great overview of Curriculum Mapping is titled Why Map? Additional Curriculum Mapping Resources are available at K-12 Curriculum Development: http://tiny.cc/Zpm4D Janet Hale (2008) wrote, “Curriculum mapping is an ongoing process that asks teachers and administrators to think, act, and meet differently to improve their students’ learning" (p. 8).  Does your school system have an established method or strategies which assist teachers and administrators in determining the K-12 curriculum? Each year, parents send their children to school with the hopes that the teachers and the educational experiences offered will prepare students for the next grade level and for life in an ever changing, interdependent world. Should each teacher determine the curriculum? According to DuFour (2004), “Despite compelling evidence indicating that working collaboratively represents best practice, teachers in many schools continue to work in isolation. Even in schools that endorse the idea of collaboration, the staff's willingness to collaborate often stops at the classroom door” (p. 8). The following strategies will assist collaborative teams of professional educators in unwrapping state standards, prioritizing curriculum, aligning skills and concepts which spiral throughout the curriculum, and most importantly begin a conversation about the essential curriculum (a.k.a., Power Standards – See Ainsworth). Select one strategy and begin developing your plan for students. Strategies for Determining the K-12 Curriculum I. Unwrapping Standards: “Unwrapped standards provide clarity as to what students must know and be able to do. When teachers take the time to analyze each standard and identify essential concepts and skills, the result is more effective instructional planning, assessment, and student learning” (Ainsworth, 2003, p. 1). For the process, seeUnwrapping Standards: A Simple Process to Make Standards Manageable (Ainsworth, 2003) II. Curriculum Mapping: “Choosing important knowledge, sequencing it well, and getting it behind every classroom door in every grade” is an important part of ensuring that all students receive a rigorous and relevant education (Parker, 1991, p. 84). For the process, see Mapping the Big Picture: Integrating Curriculum and Assessment K-12 (Jacobs, 1997). See Using Curriculum Mapping and Assessment Data to Improve Learning (Kallick & Colosimo, 2009) III. Identify Declarative and Procedural Knowledge: Jane Pollock (2007) distinguished between declarative (content mastery) and procedural (skill mastery) knowledge. She wrote, “In a curriculum document, the statements of declarative knowledge (facts, concepts, generalizations and principles) are identified by the words understands or knows” (p. 35) that “serve as placeholders for active verbs, which translate into activities and experiences that help students organize declarative knowledge.” For procedural knowledge, a statement of student learning would begin with “a verb that describes the steps that need to be practiced to attain automaticity such as add, compose, sing, draw, or graph” (p. 36). The latter requires extensive repetition and practice. Does your school system’s curriculum clarify the difference between declarative and procedural knowledge which is guaranteed to be taught at each grade level? IV. Clarify Content Priorities: “Because we typically face more content than we can reasonably address, and because it is often presented as if everything were equally important for students, we are obliged to make choices and frame priorities” (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 70). Planning Tool - See Figure 3.3 (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 71). V. Use Dr. Reeves’ Criteria for Identifying Power Standards: a) Endurance b) Leverage c) Readiness for the next level of learning Use the following question: What do your students need for success – in school (this year, next year, and so on), in life, and on your state tests” (Ainsworth, 2003, p. 14)? VI. Determine What You Won’t Teach: Jacobs reminds educators, “Given the limited time you have with your students, curriculum design has become more and more an issue of deciding what you won’t teach as well as what you will teach. You cannot do it all. As a designer, you must choose the essential” (as cited by Ainsworth, 2003, p. 12). Conclusion: Wiggins and McTighe (2005), wrote, “In the absence of a learning plan with clear goals, how likely is it that students will develop shared understandings on which future lessons might build” (p. 21)? If your school system does not have a common curriculum, select one of the strategies above and watch student achievement soar. References: Ainsworth, L. (2003). Power standards: Identifying the standards that matter the most. Englewood, CO: Lead + Learn Press. Ainsworth, L. (2003). Unwrapping the standards: A simple process to make standards manageable. Englewood, CO: Lead + Learn Press. DuFour, R.(2004, May). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11. Jacobs, H.H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum & Assessment K-12. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kallick, B., & Colosimo, J. (2009). Using curriculum mapping and assessment data to improve learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Parker, W. C. (1991). Renewing the social studies curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Pollock, J. E. (2007). Improving student learning one teacher at a time. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design: Expanded 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Force Field Analysis 06/24/2009
 Do opposing forces prevent your school system from aligning the curriculum? Opposing forces include time, co-workers, competing district initiatives, changes in leadership, and the failure to define the purpose for curriculum alignment efforts. Educators are aware of the need for curriculum alignment, yet most school systems struggle with making curriculum alignment an ongoing process. A planning tool named the Force Field Analysis will provide your team with valuable data regarding the opposing forces which interfere with curriculum alignment efforts. The Force Field Analysis is a simple but powerful technique for building an understanding of the forces that will drive and resist a proposed change. The attached document provides a template for teachers and teacher teams. The Force Field Analysis can also be used for other educational goals which are difficult to achieve due to opposing forces. Additional information regarding this tool is available at: Force Field Analysis 
Assessing What Matters Most 05/25/2009
 Recently, I addressed the need for K-12 educators to identify their purpose or their goals. Such goals must guide curriculum development and instruction. The next step after identifying curricular goals is to develop assessments which measure the received or understood curriculum. In a recent article, Popham (May 2009) wrote, "The time has come to do more than merely talk about desirable outcomes. It's time to measure them" (p. 86). Assessing Student Affect addresses the need to assess what educators have determined is important. This brief article shares how student affect and other learning goals can be measured. The next step may be revising the written and taught curriculum in order to ensure that your district's curriculum and instruction is meeting the intended purpose(s). We can hope that students learn the skills and concepts that will make them successful contributors to society. However, most educators agree that an end-of-grade or standardized test is not the most appropriate method for determining if learning goals have been achieved. How does your school measure what matters most? Reference: Popham, W.J. (2009). Assessing student affect. Educational Leadership, 66(8), 85-86. The Law of the Compass 05/10/2009
 In The 17 Indisputable Laws of Teamwork, Maxwell (2001) wrote, "Every team needs a vision to give it direction. A team without vision is, at worst, purposeless. At best, it is subject to the personal (and sometimes selfish) agendas of its various teammates. As the agendas work against each other, the team's energy and drive drain away" (p. 91). He describes this as the Law of the Compass. Curriculum Clutter 05/06/2009
 Curriculum clutter impacts student achievement. "When school staff have a more informed conception of curriculum, a teacher's daily decisions about how to deliver instruction not only affect student achievement in that classroom but also future student achievement, for it is assumed that students will be entering the next classroom prepared to handle a more sophisticated or more expansive level of work" (Zmuda, Kuklis & Kline, 2004, p. 122). During the curriculum development process, educators will experience change and various strategies will require that educators have a clear understanding of the differences between first order change and second order change Seven Barriers to Curriculum Mapping 03/13/2009
 My personal experiences with curriculum mapping and observing the work of teacher teams in other school systems has led me to identify the following seven barriers to curriculum mapping. With proper planning, scheduling and support from school administrators, each of these barriers can be removed.
Finding a Purpose for Curriculum Development 03/08/2009
"Curriculum is analyzed to find gaps - are there standards that have not been addressed? Repetitions - are there topics in content that repeat without any significant changes in the material? Spirals - places where the curriculum spirals and builds in complexity? Are thinking skills focused and to what level?" These curriculum conversations help us to answer the question What do we want students to know and be able to do (p. xiii)? | AuthorSteven Weber is the Director of Secondary Instruction for Orange County Schools in Hillsborough, NC. Weber has served as a classroom teacher, assistant principal, and state department of education consultant in Arkansas and North Carolina. He consults school systems in aligning their curriculum and in unpacking curriculum standards.  ArchivesMarch 2010 CategoriesAll | ||||||||||
RSS Feed