Educational leaders need to be effective and efficient concerning curriculum in an educational setting (Diamond, 1997). Constructing a solid curriculum is intensive, demanding, and is significantly time consuming. Educational leaders assume numerous functions but none have a more notable influence on students than the engagement in the construction of the curriculum one teaches (Diamond, 1997). Outcomes of the curriculum development process includes, educational leaders can facilitate learning, improve the mind-set of students’ own capabilities, and strengthen students for the challenges they will encounter. Curriculum construction has a propensity to have an effect long after completion and the influence on students is important (Diamond, 1997).
Curriculum documents are the written manifestation of the curriculum and convey decisions from the curriculum planning process (Armstrong, 1997). The following treatise will analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a curriculum document from the Kentucky Department of Education, Middle School. This author will also propose and provide rationale for needed changes within the curriculum document.
Curriculum Overview
The Kentucky Department of Education’s mission is to prepare students to succeed in the future and enact procedures, priorities, and practices that permit the success of all students. The curriculum is a standards-based design that centers upon student ability (Kentucky Department of Education, 2007a). The curriculum development process is collegial-based and echoes the joint connection of curriculum, instruction, and assessment, and persistently parallels curriculum to the academic intentions (KDE, 2007a). The curriculum is divided by subject, grade level, and communicates an explanation of the core content for each subject. Additionally, the curricular document references the mission of the Kentucky school district and the objectives for each subject (KDE, 2007a).
This curriculum document is in an easily understandable format and well organized. This prospectus does mention learning activities for students to acquire the intended learning; however, the learning activities the document mentions do not involve practical application appropriate for the age group and are predominantly magazine, textbook, and Internet examination. The document does list skills and concepts as well as core content for assessment, which will permit the teacher to assess student learning and determine the degree to which students ascertain the intended knowledge.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Curriculum Document
Strength of this curriculum document is an association and relationship shown between the Academic Expectations, Program of Studies, and the Core Content for Assessment on the same document. In addition, the standards-based units of study furnish comprehensive favorable circumstances for students to learn (KDE, 2007a). Furthermore, the instruction through the curriculum is focused upon Kentucky’s standards through Kentucky’s Academic Expectations, Program of Studies, and Core Content for Assessment which generates an engaging learning experience for students accentuating students’ thinking, application of learning, and uniting learning to their lives.
Moreover, this curriculum centers on what is most significant for students to know and be capable of doing and to aid them in his or her lives and with career planning (KDE, 2007a; Hider, 2006). The curriculum document states the overall idea for the subject and lists the academic expectations. The curriculum document lists the intentions for student learning including the Program of Studies, what the student will understand, skills, and concepts. In addition, the Related Core Content for Assessment is also shown (Kentucky Department of Education, 2007b).
In opposition, the curriculum document of the Kentucky Department of Education has weaknesses. The Kentucky School System, like many other school districts, adheres to the national emphasis on standards. The idea is that by teaching standards student achievement will improve and equalize learning for all students. In a standards-based approach, students are responsible for meeting the same set of standards, which aim to adjust the wide discrepancy in achievement among students (Sandholtz, Ogawa, & Scribner, 2004). Since test results demonstrate the performance of the class and the basis for student’s retention decisions, teachers make sure that students achieve minimum standards, despite his or her academic abilities. Teachers frequently instruct at the lower standards since the school district’s tests place significance on standards; the curriculum does not pose variations for learners (Sandholtz, Ogawa, & Scribner, 2004). The curriculum then presents standards as the focus for instruction and does not account for the academic differences among learners.
Rationale for Needed Changes
The intention of a curriculum is to offer guidance, motivation and responsibility in educational settings (Clarke, Stow, Ruebling, & Kayona, 2006). One important change is to raise the academic expectations for students since curriculum standards are at lower levels thus, balanced educational opportunities and augmenting the academic performance of students (Sandholtz, Ogawa, & Scribner, 2004). Thus, the changes to be made in this curriculum should focus on student learning and critical thinking and not necessarily on taught standards (Diamond, 1997).
In standards-based curriculum, some teachers initiate teaching to outcomes; as a result, teach to the test versus teaching to the benefit, and needs of the students (Janzen, 1999). Furthermore, when teaching to outcomes of test scores, the focus shifts from the students to the outcomes (Janzen, 1999). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was instrumental in requiring states to take identifiable measures to ensure student achievement, especially with closing the achievement gap between students. The components of NCLB include accountability, assessment, standards and high quality teachers in an attempt to improve academic achievement of all students (McCarthy, 2007). However, the accountability aspect of NCLB warrants test preparation for assessment and requires academic standards that identify what students should know at certain grade levels (McCarthy, 2007).
School districts have a tendency to base learning on test scores even though there is a deficit of proof linking testing with student achievement. A more capable assessment of student learning may be through a student’s work and a more superior method of measuring problem solving, reasoning, and critical thinking skills (Marsh & Willis, 2003). Klein (1986) contends that the traditional measured curriculum should not be used alone and that a combination of different designs might better suit students.
The intended learning through this curriculum document is based upon standards and does not focus on students. There needs to be a shift within this curriculum document from what is covered and what the students learn (Diamond, 1997). As Allen postulates (as cited in Diamond, 1997, p. 50), educational leaders should maintain an “understanding of assessment, learning styles, motivation, and various instructional methods and technologies.
Conclusion
The ideal curriculum provides for individual differences so that each student may adequately achieve (Ediger, 1996). Analyzing curriculum documents elicits awareness to the importance of value within an educational setting. This effort can identify sections requiring attention and offer a foundation for educational leaders to use as they set up guidelines for curriculum developers.
With the differentiation in today’s students, the proposal for changes within the curriculum will be more students centered and focus on learning and not standards. This in turn will set the criteria for the curriculum document so that the curriculum can more effectively serve the educational community (Armstrong, 1997). Educational leaders must attain a curriculum that establishes student learning beyond the test and provide students with knowledge that allows them not only to perform well on accountability assessments, but also to function well in the future (McCarthy, 2007).
References
Armstrong, D.G. (1997). Rating curriculum documents. The High School Journal, 81.
Retrieved June 8, 2007 from ProQuest database.
Clarke, N. A., Stow, S., Ruebling, and Kayona, F. (2006). Developing standards-based
curricula and assessments: Lessons learned from the field. The Clearing House,
79(6), 258-261.Retrieved June 10, 2007, from EBSCOhost database.
Diamond, R. M. (1997). Designing and assessing courses and curricula. A practical guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ediger, M. (1996). The social studies and the ideal. College Student Journal, 30(2), 200-202. Retrieved June 10, 2007, from EBSCOhost database
Hider, G.R. (2006). What’s the big issue? Creating standards-based curriculum.
Technology Teacher, 65. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCOhost database.
Janzen, M. (1999). Standards testing in grade three: A success? English quarterly, 31.
Retrieved June 10, 2007 from ProQuest database.
Kentucky Department of Education (2007a). Curriculum document and resources.
Retrieved June 8, 2007 from www.kde.state.ky.us
Kentucky Department of Education (2007 b). Curriculum Document, social studies,
eighth grade. Retrieved June 9, 2007 from http://www.education.ky.gov/users/jwyatt/CCD2006/CCD_SS_8.doc
Klein, M.F. (1986).
Alternative curriculum conceptions and design. Theory Into Practice,
25. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from University of Phoenix, Selected Readings Page,
EDD 724.
Marsh, C. J., & Willis, G. (2003). Curriculum: Alternative approaches, ongoing issues
(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
McCarthy, J.A. M. (2007). NCLB assessment for accountability: Good teaching or
teaching to the test? Perspectives, 33. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from ProQuest
database.
Sandholtz, J. H, Ogawa, T., Scribner, S. P. (2004) Standards gaps: Unintended
consequences of local standards-based reform. Teachers College Record, 106.
Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCOhost database.
Vogler, K. (2003). Where does social studies fit in a high-stakes testing environment?
Social Studies, 94. Retrieved June 10, 2007 from EBSCOhost database.
