Curriculum Analysis Worksheet EDD/724 Version 2

University of Phoenix Material

Curriculum Analysis Worksheet
Choose a curriculum document such as course descriptions, curricular maps, or government standards documents, from your work setting. These documents should provide enough material for you to conduct an in-depth analysis. Conduct an in-depth analysis on the curriculum and answer each of the following questions with 150-300 words. Support your assertions with appropriate references. 1. What is the purpose and function of the document? Curriculum at Olentangy is developed through a technique called mapping. According to Liu, Wrobbel and Blankson (2010) curriculum mapping is a well-known assessment tool used to articulate and align a curriculum (p. 238). Curriculum mapping emphasizes the requisite that teachers and administrators focus on the balance between what really took place in individual classrooms with what was individually or collaboratively planned. The maps are aligned and clearly articulate high expectations for our students. Simply, the maps describe exactly what Olentangy students should know and do in a particular subject at each grade level. Curriculum mapping is a simple yet effective tool for improving teaching and learning (Jacobs, 2004).The maps are concise (one or two pages per grade level or subject) and easy for any stakeholder to read. The maps are designed this way to allow for greater depth of teaching and student understanding. The maps are the adopted curriculum for the district and guide classroom instruction. 2. Why, when, and by whom the document was created? As stated earlier this document was created to describe exactly what students should know and do in a particular subject at each grade level. Another reason this document was created was due to questions regarding what is taught in the classroom which are an intrinsic and useful part of formal education. Curriculum maps lead educators and their community to ask and answer the provoking questions that improve instruction and promote achievement. The document is review yearly for updates. This three-step process includes teacher and administrators that would like to participate in mapping, a representative community curriculum committee review and the board of education review and adoption of the map (Benade, 2008; Holycross, 2006). According to Koppant (2004) mapping is most effective when the entire school staff is involved as well as other stakeholders. Curriculum mapping is built on a foundation of collaborative inquiry of groups.

3. What strengths and weaknesses of did you perceive in the document? Upon analyzing this curriculum map, it was found that there were more weaknesses than there were strengths. The strengths that were perceived were that it does ask questions as to what is going to be learned. Another strength that was found was that of the use of the Ohio Content Standards. It can be seen that they are trying to follow state guidelines as to what is taught in their district. The weaknesses that were found were that it does not seem to be user-friendly and readable to a lay-person. Also, even though the content standards were address, the map did not show how they were to be addressed; in other words how it was to be taught. The map did not contain any specific timeline as well no assessing procedures.

Curriculum Analysis Worksheet EDD/724 Version 2

4. What changes would you make to remediate the weakness of the document? Explain your rationale. Curriculum maps are different among organizations. The main concept though should be that according to Holycross (2006) should track what is taught, how it is taught, and when it is taught It may include which assessment instruments measure the competencies gained in the teaching, as well. It emphasizes the requisite that teachers and administrators focus on the balance between what really took place in individual classrooms and what was planned individually or collaboratively. The completed map may be used for many purposes, according to Koppantg (2004) includes: aligning instruction to the written standards; developing integrated curriculum units; providing a baseline for the curriculum review and renewal process; identifying staff development needs; and most important, providing communication among teachers. The map should ensure that delivered curriculum content is addressing defined skills or competencies and provide opportunities for students to be assessed against standards, learning outcomes, or achievement objectives (Benade, 2008). Finally, the map needs to be understood by all, this includes teachers, students as well as parents. A key helps a map reader to understand some of the many features represented on a map. It also forces the map writer to have an audience in mind. The emphasis is therefore on clarity of communication. A curriculum map that gets bogged down in woolly adjectives or vague descriptions, that lacks clear, direct and specific c language and punchy verbs, has no place in our already busy lives. Readers of, and participants in, curriculum maps, require useful documents that show connections across curriculum areas and within curriculum areas, and that communicate clearly whether a school is on track as a place of learning (Benade, 2008).

Reference Benade, L. (2008). A critical review of curriculum mapping: Implications for the development of an ethical teacher professionality. New Zealand Journal of Teachers Work. 5(2), 93-104. Benade, L. (2008). Curriculum Mapping - the road ahead, or more bumpy terrain?. New Zealand Principals' Federation Magazine, 10-11. Holycross, J. (2006). Curriculum mapping: An essential tool for curriculum development. The Journal of Physician Assistant Education. 17(4), 61-64. Jacobs, H. H. (Ed.). (2004). Getting results with curriculum mapping. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Koppang, A. (2004, January). Curriculum mapping: Building collaboration and communication. Intervention in School and Clinic. 39(3), 154-161.

Curriculum Analysis Worksheet EDD/724 Version 2

Liu, M., Wrobbel, D., & Blankson, I. (2010, October). Rethinking program assessment through the use of program alignment mapping techniques. Communication Teacher 24(4), 238-246.