1 / 32

Curriculum Evaluation Challenge

Curriculum Evaluation Challenge. Group2: Chatman, Harris, Patterson, Vaccaro , Williams Original Date of Submission: April 14, 2012 Resubmission Date for Capstone Portfolio: March 28, 2013 Argosy University Current Trends in School Curriculum E6501. OL1. SP212 Dr. Isbell. School.

horacephillips
Download Presentation

Curriculum Evaluation Challenge

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Curriculum Evaluation Challenge Group2: Chatman, Harris, Patterson, Vaccaro, Williams Original Date of Submission: April 14, 2012 Resubmission Date for Capstone Portfolio: March 28, 2013 Argosy University Current Trends in School Curriculum E6501. OL1. SP212 Dr. Isbell

  2. School District State Focus Learning Academy (FLA) Native American Asian Hispanic African American Caucasian Multi-Racial School 0 0 67 649 0 3 District 6 65 404 215 293 16 State 1 35 503 129 312 16 www.greatschools.com

  3. Notable Demographics School District State Economically Disadvantaged 81.9% 61.1% 59.2% Limited English Proficient (LEP) 2.9% 6.8% 16.9% Students with Disciplinary Placement (09-10) 0.0% 0.9% 1.9% At-Risk 21.3% 40.5% 46.3% www.tea.state.tx.us

  4. Faculty Information • 25% of teachers in the US leave teaching before their 3rdyr, and almost 40% leave the profession within the first 5yrs (Chang, 2009). www.tea.state.tx.us

  5. Percentage of FLA Students Meeting or Exceeding AEIS Math Standards 90+% of FLA 3rd grade students in every subgroup met or exceeded AEIS mathematics standards. . www.tea.state.tx.us :

  6. Curriculum • 3RD Grade Mathematics • Measuring • Length • Perimeter • Area

  7. Curricular Philosophy Teacher-Centered Student-Centered • Constructivism • 5 E’s • Engage • Explain • Explore • Elaborate • Evaluate • Discovery Learning • Intrinsic Motivation • Active Learning • Student Self Assessment and Pacing • Lecture Based • Students work to achieve curricular objectives • Teacher-designed academic assignments • Extrinsic motivators • Grades and rewards • Work evaluated by the teacher vs. Thomas, T. (2008). & Estes (2007):

  8. Curriculum Evaluation Tool • Curriculum Philosophy & Standards • Curriculum Approaches • Instruction • Delivery of Content • Learning Styles • Evaluation & Assessment • Textbooks & Resources • Classroom Interaction • Cultural Diversity • Community

  9. Curriculum Evaluation Tool Categories Actual Pts Possible Pts Categories (cont.) Actual Pts Possible Pts Curriculum Philosophy & Standards 11 12 Evaluation & Assessment 20 28 Curriculum Approaches 6 8* Textbooks & Resources 6 8 Instruction 10 12 Classroom Interaction 12 12 Delivery of Content 11 14* Cultural Diversity 4 4 Learning Styles 5 8* Community 2 2 TOTAL 87 108 *Category point possibilities were adjusted due to applicability issues and or error in the curriculum evaluation tool. Note: 80.6% = Good w/Improvements

  10. Strengths Actual Pts Categories Possible Pts 11 Curriculum Philosophy & Standards 12 Deficient Points 0 = Perfect 1 = Very Good 2 = Good 2+ = Problematic 6 Curriculum Approaches 8 10 Instruction 12 6 Textbooks & Resources 8 12 Classroom Interaction 12 4 Cultural Diversity 4 2 Community 2

  11. Weaknesses Categories Actual Pts Possible Pts Deficient Points 0 = Perfect 1 = Very Good 2 = Good 2+ = Problematic Delivery of Content 11 14 Learning Styles 5 8 Evaluation & Assessment 20 28 :

  12. Criticality Rating Chart • Analyzed all deficient subcategories • Rationale provided for deficiencies • Ranked severity of deficiencies • Examined deficient themes :

  13. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 4: Delivery of Content Criteria The presentation of course content addresses multiple learning styles like visual, kinesthetic, and auditory. Problem Solution • The lack of variation in the instructional delivery does not allow the instructor to adequately address the learning styles of struggling students. • More Differentiation in • Instructional Approach • Incorporate Multiple Representations Pape & Tchoshanov (2001) and (Tomlinson, 2001)

  14. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 4: Delivery of Content Criteria The curriculum unit allows instructors to meet the needs of all learners. Problem Solution • Some students may not understand a concept when illustrated symbolically, but may be able to understand it when it is illustrated concretely, either via models, manipulatives, or technology. • Explicit Modeling/Demonstrations through Guided Lessons (Sutton and Krueger, 2002) :

  15. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 4: Delivery of Content Criteria The instructors using this curriculum unit will be able to provide opportunitiesforall learners to demonstratecore learningoutcomes. Problem Solution • Lack of support and feedback in the lesson does not allow struggling learners to adequately demonstrated core learning outcomes/standards. • Peer Partner Availability/Seating Arrangement • Checks for Understanding(CFUs)-hand signals/cues, oral questioning Note: 2 subcategories in Part 4 were not addressed due to limitations (Greenwood, 1997) and (Tomlinson, 1999)

  16. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 5: Learning Styles Criteria The curriculum unit meets the developmental and learning needs of all learners. Problem Solution • The curriculum does not provide varied approaches for presenting lessons. • Deliver the material so that the various learning styles are catered to. (Ralabate,2011).

  17. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 5: Learning Styles Criteria The curriculum unit provides sufficient opportunities and time for all learners to demonstrate core learning outcomes. Problem Solution • The unit assessments lack variation. • Include assessments that cater to the visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners, beyond just typical paper and pencil. (Ralabate,2011)

  18. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 5: Learning Styles Criteria The activities of the curriculum unit seem doable for all kinds of learners. Problem Solution • The lessons are presented one unilateral mode of delivery and do not cater to different levels or styles of learning. • Add more variation in the the presentation of the various lessons. Note: 1 subcategory in Part 5 was not addressed due to limitations UNESCO (2004)

  19. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria Learning objectives and assessment activities are closely aligned. Problem Solution • The curriculum has only one basic set evaluation piece regardless of tier levels in the classroom. • Teachers will need to go through assessments before hand and make modifications that will accommodate different students based on IEP’s. www.bridges4kids.org/IEP/iep.goal.bank.pdf

  20. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria The assessments in the curriculum unit are effective with respect to the topics in the curriculum. Problem Solution • Curriculum can be effective with extra resources that are connected or aligned to the given topic based on the curriculum itself. • The assessments are not effective with the topics in the curriculum. http://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/resources.htm

  21. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria The assessments in the curriculum unit reflect the principles of assessment. Problem Solution • Assignments lack instructional guidance which would allow students to complete assignments independently. • Teachers will need to be explicit when explaining instructions and model what is expected so that students will have a clear understanding when completing assignments. http://www.education.com/reference/article/formative-and-summative-assessment

  22. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria The course includes evaluations that accommodate various learning styles. Problem Solution • Objectives do not accommodate all learners. • Some questions do not state what instrument to use to find the solution. • Include more tier leveling in the structure of the units. • Structure all questions with the appropriate instrument that is needed to find the correct solution. (Beck, 2001) & (Tulbu, 2011)

  23. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria Includes both low-pressure and high-pressure assignments. Assessments occur at meaningful intervals. Problem Solution • Assignments may not always be meaningful to all learners. • Time frame and interval of lessons need to be addressed for feedback and assurance of retention of the learners. • Provide more time for high-pressure assignments. • Allow more time between high-pressure assignments to give more time for individual and group feedback. (Birenbaum, 2006)

  24. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria Expectations of the learner are high and clearly stated. Problem Solution • Rigors of the expectations are unreasonable to all levels of learners. • While keeping the expectations high and clearly stated, the curriculum needs to have built in criteria to be reached during each lesson to give students at all levels vision of the goals set forth by the curriculum. Note: 1 subcategory in Part 6 was not addressed due to limitations (Birenbaum, 2006):

  25. Subcategory DeficienciesPart 6: Evaluation & Assessment Criteria • Gradingpolicy/criteriaisevidentand easy to understand;deadlinesareclearlystatedbecausearepenaltiesforfailuretomeetthem. • . Problem Solution • No grading policy/criteria • No deadlines stated • No penalties listed • Grading policy for test and assignments should be listed. • Teacher notes on the side should have reminders to go over policy for each assignment and test. • Deadlines for homework and group work should be stated. • Penalties should also be listed and noted on the side for teachers. Note: 1 subcategory in Part 6 was not addressed due to limitations (Birenbaum, 2006):

  26. Revised Curriculum Evaluation Categories Actual Pts Possible Pts Categories (cont.) Actual Pts Possible Pts Curriculum Philosophy & Standards 11 12 Evaluation & Assessment 28 28 Curriculum Approaches 6 8* Textbooks & Resources 6 8 Instruction 10 12 Classroom Interaction 12 12 Delivery of Content 14 14* Cultural Diversity 4 4 Learning Styles 8 8* Community 2 2 TOTAL 101 108 *Category point possibilities were adjusted due to applicability issues and or error in the curriculum evaluation tool. Note: 93.5% = Excellent :

  27. Summary • Good to Excellent • Future Improvements • Curriculum Philosophy & Standards • Curriculum Approaches • Instruction • Textbook & Resources

  28. Question and Answer Period

  29. References Argosy University (2012) E6350: Module 5 resource pack current trends in school curriculum, Retrieved from htt://www.myclassonline.com ASHA website (2011). Universal Design for Learning: Meeting the Needs of All Students. The ASHA Leader.  Retrieved from www.asha.org Beck, C. R. (2001). Matching Teaching Strategies to Learning Style Preferences. The Teacher Educator, 37 (1), 1-15. BirenbaumM., R. S. (2006). Assessment Preferences, Learning Orientations, and Learning Strategies of Pre-service and In-service Teachers. Journal of Education for Teaching, 32 (2), 213-225. Borman, G. D. & Dowling, M. N. (2008) Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 78. 3: 367-409. Chang, M. L. (2009). An appraisal perspective of teacher burnout: examining the emotional work of teachers. Educational Psychology Review, 21 (2009), pp. 193–218.

  30. References Dallas Independent School District (2011). A review of the Student Behavior Management System. Retrieved from http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/ Ebeling, D. (1994). Adapting curriculum and instruction in inclusive. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org Estes, C. (2007). Promoting student-centred learning in experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(2), 141-161. Focus Academy website. (2010). http://www.focusacademies.org Formative and Summative Assessment retrieved from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/specialed/resources.htm GreatSchools.com website. (2011). www.greatschools.com Greenwood, C. R. (1997). Class wide peer tutoring. Behavior and Social Issues, 7(1), 53-57. Pape, S. J., Tchoshanov, M. A. (2001). The Role of Representation(s) Developing Mathematical Understanding. Theory into Practice. 40(2). 118-127.

  31. References Special Education retrieved from www.bridges4kids.org/IEP/iep.goal.bank.pdf Students’ Diversity. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images Sutton, J. and Krueger, A.(2002). What we Know about mathematics teaching and learning. Aurora, CO. McREL. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/resources/2/Principal/2004/N-Dp40.pdf Texas Education Agency . (2012). www.tea.state.tx.us Thomas, T. (2008). Teacher-Centered vs. Student-Centered Classrooms. Retrieved from http://www.openeducation.net Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). Mapping a route toward differentiated instruction. Educational Leadership. Alexandria. Retrieved from the ProQuest databases. Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/system/galleries/download/ncac/DifInstruc.pdf

  32. References Tulbu, C. (2011). Do different learning styles require differentiated teaching strategies? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 155-159. UNESCO (2004). Changing Teaching Practices: Using Curriculum Differentiation to Respond to Students’ Diversity. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images

More Related