Essay On Curriculum

One of the biggest problems in the American public education system is the lack of a common standard for what students should be learning, and when they should learn it. In other words, the inequality of curriculums across the nation is affecting the preparedness of students when they venture out beyond the public school system, for the worst. The way to fix this problem, according to many teachers, administrators, and politicians, is by implementing a common curriculum across the nation that will ensure that the quality of a student’s education is not determined by where they happen to live.

The states need to look at themselves on how they will be able to fix the dilemma of education within their districts. With pressure from the federal level, education leaders at the state level try to overhaul their schools with the approach of looking at individual failing schools instead of the issues across their districts. As long as a state remains focused on the wrong issues, schools will fail and those that are deemed as making yearly progress will only continue to

Curriculums are the roadmaps for schools which provide purpose and direction for administrators, educators, parents, and students. Curriculum typically refers to, “the knowledge and skills students are expected to learn, which includes the learning standards or learning objectives they are expected to meet; the units and lessons that teachers teach; the assignments and projects given to students; the books, materials, videos, presentations, and readings used in a course; and the tests, assessments, and other methods used to evaluate student learning.” (Curriculum, 2015, para. 1) Curriculums may come in many shapes and forms, whether they’re purchased as a package at the school or district level or they’re created or refined by educators and

The purpose of the Comprehensive Curriculum Project (CCP) is to analyze the myriad of issues that have arisen over the last few years revolving around curricula and its use in the classroom, school, and district. With the 2010 state adoption of the Common Core, educators experienced many different transitional issues and developmental issues revolving around the curricula. In order to develop a deeper understanding of these issues it is important to conduct interviews, look at the Teacher Working Conditions survey, and to analyze local organizational models that might affect the transition to the new standards.

Legally, one can argue that the state has jurisdiction, but the Department of Education has a great influence over the decision to adhere to its’ demands. Through funding, “the Department of Education has a significant amount of control over public education” (Underwood, n. d., p. 5). Aside from writing curriculum's using state and district standards, our curriculum's must now incorporate the common core standards. Our curricular, methods of teaching, and resources must be modified to address the common core standards, state standard, and district standards or one risks losing

Also, throughout curriculum development the goals and aims of the curriculum need to be taken into account. Without specific goals and aims for the curriculum, the curriculum could be unfocused with no purpose identified. Within the social studies curriculum that I analyzed, I noticed societal goals for the curriculum (Posner, 2004). Societal goals are emphasized because the curriculum supports the development of knowledgeable and engaged citizens within our country. By understanding the goal of my curriculum I am better able to understand the purpose of what I am teaching, which in turn helps me to differentiate for my students while still keeping the ultimate goal in mind. I also was able to identify the further learning aims within the curriculum (Posner, 2004). By identifying this aim I was able to see how the curriculum I was teaching tied into the curriculum that the students would experience in subsequent grades. By reflecting on the further learning aims I was able to see how my teaching was a valuable piece of a bigger puzzle

There are many approaches that can be taken in order to develop a school’s curriculum, or the material that the students will learn. If there were no federal regulation of curriculum, then it would not be possible to compare student achievement across districts or even states. The federal program, Common Core State Standards, assists in equaling education across the nation. The Common Core has reinvented the perception of student learning which, in turn, has caused American education to become a corporate institution. As a result, there has been a threat to states’ rights for education as more rigorous content has been implemented into classrooms by the government, which ultimately changes the role of the teacher.

Today, many states and schools systems are adopting a standards based education system. In fact, according to Common Core Standards Initiative (2014), forty-three states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) have adopted the Common Core State Standards. The premise is that if all critical subject areas follow a standard from state to state, that all students will receive the same and fair education. The Vermont State Board of Education saw a need and a value in implementing such a system. As such, the Board created a strategic plan to implement a framework of standards that would eventually adopt the common core standards. This paper will discuss the strategic plan created by the Vermont Board of Education and evaluate whether or not the goals of the plan were met through the Framework of Standards.

Schools must decide how to teach the standardized curriculum. Schools must figure out how to mesh a standardized and non-standardized curriculum. Can students guide their own curriculum and perform well on tests?

The idea or policy alternative that should be going further in the policy process than it has is having a school curriculum that is common to all States.

A new era of education reform strategy creators has taken up the reason for changing state educational systems to get ready understudies for a drastically evolving economy, brought on by state-level support groups who are assuming a significant part in propelling change state by state.

We purposely have created three federal laws on education to allow states to continue administering and adjusting their own education needs. (“The Role of the Federal Government I Public Education in the United States”). These laws are General Education Provisions Act (1970), Department of Education Organization Act (1979) and the No Child Left Behind Act (2001). These laws explicitly ban the federal government from having a say in curriculum and the instructional practice guides. (Pioneer Institute Public Policy Research Youtube Video). Common Core is infringing on states’ rights. Currently states have a choice on their own curriculum, teachers required certifications, methods of instruction, standards, accountability of teachers, and control over charter and private schools. If we choose Common Core this will no longer be the case. States will no longer have a choice; Common Core requires the states to adhere completely to their standards and their guidelines.

In the past few years, educators everywhere have been hearing and forming opinions about the phenomenon known as Common Core. For my research paper I will be writing about this phenomenon. The purpose of this paper is simply to inform about different aspects and characteristics of Common Core. I will discuss the following points: what Common Core is, where and how Common Core is being applied, changes from the former system, how Common Core affects teachers, cost of applying Common Core, changes in the subjects of mathematics and English language arts/literacy, what research has been conducted on Common Core and arguments for and against Common Core. Common Core has become an extremely important part

The point is simple, each school has a different student population; county and state curriculum guides are simply guides the teachers still pull and excluded what works best for their students in the real world. Having the school come up with the curriculum at a department level means more teacher input from teachers who work with the students. Teaching, while a solo career within the classroom is all about reflection, making changes, and accommodation. Having a department on the same page when it comes to content means teachers are more easily able to work together for the benefits of the students. One negative of such a committee would be that each teacher has his/her own way of teaching style; some teachers might get the wrong idea by the forming of a committee advising the administration. Some teachers feel that they are better equipped to make decisions about their students, better than administration can. They might feel that they are being corralled and might not like that feeling that they have lost the ability to do it as they see fit. Also, what would happen if the committee recommended

Curriculum is a term often highlighted during discourse about education and most commonly understood as a policy with overt leaning outcomes for teachers to apply and achieve. Ornstein and Hunkins (1998), as cited by Selvaraj (2010), defined curriculum based on two lenses; micro and macro, which identify the term as both policy towards certain goals and what students experience with consideration for relevant theories and principles central to its development and implementation. However, Wilson (n.d.) argued that curriculum is not restricted to certain individuals, subjects and environments, since teaching and learning can also occur beyond the scope of official curriculum (Ebert & Culyer, as cited in Marsh, Clarke & Pittaway, 2014). I believe this interpretation is the closest to the true nature of curriculum, or education, as there are more complex layers to curriculum than just a written guideline. For example, not one curriculum is similar to another because it is subjected to influences from continuum number of factors, such as politics and economy. Hence, it is wise to conclude that curriculum could not be defined based on a singular perspective due to its dependability on context.