Curriculum Pd Action Research

Curriculum development

1

Abstract This essay discusses how curriculum development, professional development, and action research are linked within an educational system. Language learning is used as an example throughout in order to provide a subject-area example. Professional development and action research are considered part of closing the gap between the ideal (i.e., the written curriculum) and reality (i.e., taught curriculum) as teachers develop not only pedagogical skills but also their personal development, career development, moral development, overall school improvement, and improvement of the teaching profession as a whole. Action research permits teachers to be part of the solution as learning principles are to be established and adhered to. It was determined that shifting teachers to become more curriculum functioning will better provide the knowledge and skill necessary to increase understandings among learners and common assessments across disciplines.

Curriculum development

2

Curriculum development, professional development, and action research: A foreign language perspective If the hypothesis is true – that any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development – then it should follow that a curriculum ought to be built around the great issues, principles, and values that a society deems worthy of the continual concern of its members (Bruner, 1960, p. 33 & p. 52) Bruner's hypothesis, now almost 50 years old, not only is still relevant to the general classroom of today but is also relevant to foreign language learning as well. Curriculum development, professional development, and action research provide the means for linking the desired results with individualistic and collective ends. In language learning, like other skillbased subjects (e.g., sports, drama, and music), the curriculum tends to focus on behavioral objectives for each skill (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007) which then leads to professional development and action research - should the gap between the desired results and current reality warrant it. Instead, a more integrated curriculum merges concepts, understandings, facts, and skills such that subsequent professional development and action research would together establish language acquisition as both means and ends. Building a curriculum around the acquisition of a language is best served when based on the growing of understandings. Wiggins and McTighe (2005) highlight several distinguishing features of understandings as follows: a) an important inference, drawn from the experience of experts, states as a specific and useful generalization

Curriculum development

3

b) referring to transferable, big ideas having enduring value beyond a specific topic c) involving abstract, counterintuitive, and easily misunderstood ideas d) being best acquired by “uncovering” (i.e., it must be developed inductively, coconstructed by learners) and “doing” the subject (i.e., using the ideas in realistic settings and with real-world problems). e) Summarizing important strategic principles in skill areas (pp. 128-129) Thus, instead of adhering to a curriculum that is based on a behavioral-objective format – one that progresses from an objective to an activity then concludes with an evaluation – an integrated curriculum begins with creating the overall desired results in the form of understandings. For language learners to achieve understandings, they must demonstrate a level of communicative competence that provides the evidence of both language skill and content knowledge. Fisher and Frey (2007) list the following formative assessment means for checking for understanding: a) oral language, b) questioning, c) writing, projects and performances, d) tests, and e) common assessments and consensus scoring. Recognizing that all these techniques should be a part of any assessment program, the focus here remains on performance tasks and the importance of building common assessments as part of an overall curriculum development practice. Once the desired results have been established, designing common performance tasks precedes the instructional planning through a “backward design” (Wiggins and McTighe, 2005). Fisher and Frey (2007) add that “creating an assessment, even an imperfect one, allows groups of teachers to talk about the standards, how the standards might be assessed, where students are performing currently, and what learning needs to take place for students to demonstrate

Curriculum development

4

proficiency” (p. 122). Having teachers collaborate in this way provides the means for identifying the gap between the ideal (i.e., the written curriculum) and reality (i.e., the taught curriculum). To close this gap, professional development may need to be considered in order to give teachers the necessary knowledge and pedagogical skill to improve current practice. Similarly, action research provides a more collectivist approach to closing the gap by implementing a more formalized plan that extends over a longer time frame. In developing common assessments across disciplines, professional development needs to address more than pedagogical skill. “In recent years the field has expanded to include a variety of other purposes: a) personal development, b) career development, c) moral development, d) school improvement, and e) improvement of the teaching profession (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 366). When teachers have the support and opportunity to work together on common assessments they also build their personal network with others that can lead to a variety of professional development purposes as mentioned here. Since performance tasks are included in the curriculum, their efforts are directly related to school improvement as well. The act of developing assessments can also be the basis for conference talks, thus extending the applicability of common assessments throughout the teaching field as well as promoting one's career. Action research can also help closing the gap between the written and taught curriculum. “Action research in education is study conducted by colleagues in a school setting of the results of their activities to improve instruction” (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 406). Since common assessments are the link between planning for learning and the desired results (Wiggins and McTighe), collaboration between teachers can foster improved practice that

Curriculum development

5

extends to all areas of teaching in the form of learning principles. The premise of basing teaching practice on a set of shared principles is to not leave the details of teaching to the teachers alone but rather share the commitment with administrators as well (Sergiovanni, 2005; Wiggins and McTighe, 2007). This allows for a more collaborative action research as the process proceeds through a series of five stages: a) “select focus area, b) conduct needs assessment, c) design action plan, d) carry out action plan, and e) evaluate effects and revise action plan” (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 408). In language learning, action research that adheres to individual professional development better prepares teachers to gain the expertise and experience needed to close the gap between what teachers say should be done and what they actually do on a day-to-day basis. In summary, language teachers who pursue learner understandings and communicative competencies work together in designing the most appropriate common assessments that can be implemented across different language levels. Professional development and collaborative action research assist in shifting language teachers to a higher level of “curriculum functioning (as displayed by initiating and suggesting ways to change and knowing how to proceed in creating curriculum)” (Glickman, Gordon, and Ross-Gordon, 2007, p. 393) that addresses both personal professional development goals as well as school-wide objectives. By giving teachers a level of choice, responsibility, support, and authority, teacher leaders emerge then become agents for change instead of objectives of change.

Curriculum development

6

References Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education: A landmark in educational theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Fisher, D. and Frey, N. (2007). Checking for understanding: Formative assessment techniques for your classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). Glickman, C., Gordon, S., and Ross-Gordon, J. (2007). Supervision and instructional leadership: A development approach. New York, NY: Pearson. Sergiovanni, T. (2005). Strengthening the heartbeat: Leading and learning together in schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (2007). Schooling by design: Mission, action, and achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).