The Importance Of Curriculum, Instruction And Assessment

As schools were faced with these daunting expectations to meet standards, state agencies, school boards, and administration all had to re-evaluate current practices, not only in the form of what should be taught, but how it should be taught (Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, n.d.). In more appropriate terms,

Today’s education system is challenged with creating and incorporating the most effective and meaningful methodological and conceptual curriculum designs to date. One of the key challenges is to design curriculums that facilitate understanding, retention, and generalization (Bulgren, Deshler, & Lenz, 2007, p. 121-122). However, there is no single way to overcome these challenges due to the variances and complexities within each content area. These, along with the demands of meeting high stakes testing, and the endless revolving door of performance standards, places teachers in a constant state of turmoil as they seek to create coexistence between student achievement and rigorous and challenging standards. One strategy being implemented

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.

The Common Core has been developed as a nationwide measurement for student progress. Officially launched in 2009 as a federal funding bill, the standards identify skills that every student residing in the United States should master in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics from kindergarten through 12th grade (Gewertz, 2015). The Common Core itself is not a curriculum, however, it identifies rigorous objectives that must be met by a school’s curriculum. The purpose is to initiate a deeper focus on developmental learning by using interdisciplinary instruction. This redefines the way that students learn because their progress is no longer assessed on the outcome of their performance, but by the process that has allowed them to reach the

“Shrinking state and local education budgets matched with the added pressure of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which sets rigid standards in reading and math that schools must achieve in order to receive federal funding, have created a new challenge for districts” (Van Harken).

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.

Adopted by forty-two out states in 2010, the Common Core State Standard Initiative strives to provide an educational structure which details what English language arts and mathematics should be taught from kindergarten through twelfth grade. The initiative is the federal government’s attempt to ensure all students who graduate from high school are adequately prepared to enter a two or four year college or the workforce. Despite their intentions, the Common Core has caused much controversy in the education community. The thought behind Common Core is very valid and has the potential to help students, however changes must be made to unrealistic standards and wordy statements. Common Core must first be rewritten so that the language is clear and can be easily understood by the general public. Next ask experts on childhood development and elementary school teachers to review the standards and rewrite standards they see as unneeded or irrelevant as well as unrealistic.

Like an epidemic terrorizing the western hemisphere, the Common Core State Standards program has swept across our nation, and at each stop, threatened a new way of thinking and learning. These standards were created to ensure that more students graduated from high school with the skills to succeed in college, life, and career, no matter where they might live (“About the Standards”). In 2009, this fresh new take on education was launched to each state’s educational leaders in the U. S. The officials of each state decided whether the implementation of the program was beneficial for them, or if the current techniques were the best option.

Ultimately, Common Core is not the education our children need. Students need a mixed curriculum of learning, with the intention that they will recognize what their passions are, and not just how well educated they are in general subjects. Having knowledge in these subjects are extremely important, however only emphasizing on certain subjects narrows the child’s ability to learn more. The Common Core standards prevent students from that excessive knowledge they would have, and only focuses on how well they can think on a test. Despite the elaborate plan Common Core presents to raise the educational standards in our nation, these same standards will diminish the student’s individualism, as well as inflict stress and anxiety on the child’s

Forty-two states, along with the District of Columbia have adopted Common Core State Standards. These standards were created to focus only on English and Mathematics. An effect of states adopting Common Core State Standards is that all other subjects taught in school were emphasized less. History, Science, and many other subjects are no longer stressed; therefore students are limited to being proficient in only two subjects. The Common Core deprives students’ ability to be skilled in multiple areas. These standards do not provide a slight “break” from the challenging and fast paced teaching of English and Mathematics. In addition to limiting education to English and Mathematics, Jill Bowden explains that the Common Core is affecting kindergarteners by taking them “away from materials that encourage playful learning” (36). Simple, beneficial learning materials typically used in kindergarten classrooms are being replaced with workbooks and textbooks. These standards are not benefiting education; instead they suppress enjoyable learning that one could gain from free learning. All grades are affected, but especially kindergarteners. These kindergarteners are too young for authoritative standards, and should be learning concepts appropriate for a child the age of five. Standards were made “to become the backbone for student, teacher, and school accountability systems and will play an increasingly prominent role in the American educational ecosystem” (Gutierrez 78) Therefore,

Every few years, some new process, concept, reform, or innovation is touted as the magic cure-all that will remedy whatever ails the profession – followed by disappointment that many ailments continue to plague us. Educators are often baffled by – and perhaps impatient with – these perpetual shifts and their accompanying array of

When Common Core was put into full effect, teachers were unprepared and were not given the professional development that was needed to effectively implement these standards. As Sarah Boslaugh says in her article, “the new standards are more demanding than those already in place in many school systems and teachers and administrators do not have enough time to prepare for their implementation, which would result in widespread failure among students”(Boslaugh, 2015, para.1). Common Core’s standards were poorly implemented and it is causing the system to fail. Sue Pimentel, a founding partner of the nonprofit Student Achievement Partners and lead writer of the Common Core State Standards for ELA and literacy states, “Teachers aren't being given enough time to work together to develop the materials and teaching techniques that will be necessary to effectively implement the Common Core, nor are they being given enough time to observe and critique each other's teaching” (qtd. in Tucker, 2014, para.3). Sue Pimentel is saying that teachers are not properly trained to teach their students the Common Core curriculum, so it is illogical to have these standards be implemented. Since teachers are now required to follow a step-by-step format to teach, along with a set of required criteria to be met, the classroom has completely changed both inside and out. A majority of schools are not even attempting to help teachers with this change. “Adapting to change: teacher perceptions of implementing the common core state standards” is an article written by Brooke Burks. This article discusses how teachers are coping with this rapid change of curriculum. As the article says, “fewer than fifty percent of school districts planned professional development reared towards implementing and aligning Common Core standards” (Burks, 2012, p.4). Teachers are in need of any

Napavine’s goal is to engage and inspire critical thinking skills in every student through instruction that is individually relevant, motivating, aligned and diverse. Our action plan is for both the elementary and junior/senior high schools to utilize the Marzano Instructional Framework as a guide to student learning and professional growth. We have established that building administrators and teachers will utilize the Marzano Frameworks to guide professional growth discussions, goal setting meetings, and to identify future professional development opportunities. We have also established a Teacher/Principal Evaluation Program (TPEP) committee who will plan and guide professional development that includes a teacher leader to provide evaluation and framework training. Our School Improvement Plan (SIP) identifies Marzano instructional practices on a yearly basis as a school-wide focus for implementation and/or improvements. We also hold student growth meetings each fall between school administrators and teachers to revolve around students at risk of falling behind their peers and student sub-groups who may be collectively behind the total student population (closing the achievement gap). We plan to make time for instructional rounds during the school year to facilitate professional growth among teachers.

Current reforms and initiatives based on the national education standards focus on student’s achievement and teacher’s preparation. Educational researchers and curriculum designers continuously find problems with standards and requirements on a state level and how the state and local boards of education focus highly on advanced placement and cultural literacy. A key focus is also accountability for students, schools, and school-districts in regards to academic performance. A new factor that has surfaced is school choice (charter schools and home schooling) and character development. Progressive teachers are able to guide learners to new experiences in every lesson. However; they are sensitive to unique and different learning styles which