Teacher as a
Curriculum De
velop
er and Mapper
in
a
School Environment
Amir Toghyani Khorasgani
*
Email:
amir.toghyani@yahoo.com
Maryam Baratali
Email:
baratali_540_1359@yahoo.com
Department of Educational Sciences, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad
University,
Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
This
paper
stud
ied
viewpoints
and experiences
of instructors
engaged
in curriculum
develop
ment
and mapping
regarding
the
activities
and
tasks
that
improve
or
prevent
from efficient
implementation of
curriculum.
For the aim of this study
6
instructor
s
were elected
from
two
schools
. Classroom observations and semi
-
structured interviews conducted to collect data and
information.
Result
supports
previous studies and shows
a
considerable
relationship
between
available
procedure
and desired
procedure
for curriculum development
and mapping
.
Moreover,
results
emphasize
some
new and
significant
aspects
which neglected
or
did
not adequately
discussed
in
previous studies
. The following
methods recognized
for
productive
and
prosperous
curriculum
development
and mapping
:
integrated
leaders
hip, proper
training,
access to required
resources,
continuous
communication about the
innovations
, and
increasing
motivations
.
Keywords:
Curriculum
;
curriculum
development
;
curriculum mapping
;
teach
ing
methods;
teacher
s’
strategies
1.
Introduction
There are
many
uses of the word “curriculum”. The
Longman
dictionary defines it as
“the
subjects that are taught by a school, college etc
, or the things that are studied in a particular
subject”.
From etymological aspect, t
he
origin
of the
word
“
curriculum
” backs to a
Latin
term
meaning “the course of a chariot race
”
(Schubert, 1986).
Curriculum is
concerning
the
teaching,
methods of instru
ctions,
learning
and evaluation
actions
which
are deliberately designed, planned
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
1
and guided by the education institution involved and carried out by learners in groups or
individually, in
-
classroom or off
-
classroom context
(Mednick, 200
6
).
Therefore, in designing
curriculum,
the responsible persons
should
notice and aware
objectives, as well as methods,
materials,
evaluation
procedures and systems. Moreover, education curriculum should meet and
observe educational
requirements
of most learn
er
s
, including those with
inabilities
and weakness
(
Njogu
, 2012)
.
C
urriculum development
procedure
is
a
necessary
element
for
prosperous
gaining
educational
objectives
for
all learners
.
Traditionally,
outside
qualified
experts
and
authorities
have been responsible for
c
urriculum
construct and design
and deprive
teachers
and
learners
from
contribution
and having role
in the
process
of
curriculum development
(Carl, 2009;
Craig & Ross, 2008).
In
narrow perspective, Curriculum refers to content and
evaluations
. In a
wide prospective, curriculum
includes
needs analysis, aims,
subject arrangements,
assessment
and
learning
methods
(
Giroux, 1988
; Jacobs, 2004
)
.
In
other words
, b
road concept of curricul
um
describes it as a sophisticated
combination
of educational strategies, course content, learning
outcomes, educational experiences,
peripheral learning,
assessment
s, educational environment,
learning style and
timetable.
Literature and previous studies
show that there
are
noticeable
difference
s
between the
formal
curriculum (
developed by
authorities
, experts or educationalists
)
and the
real
curriculum
implementing
in the
educational circumstance or
classroom
setting
.
Teachers
have a
variety
of
options
in related to
curriculum and
teaching
depende
d
on
their
previous
e
xperiences,
studies
,
backgrounds,
special circumstances
of
students
and
instructional places
, their
knowledge
, and the
dominated culture
(Cuban, 1993).
Bas
ed on the curriculum, teachers’ roles
can
favorably
change
as an
executor, facilitator, resource
, counselor, problem solver and coordinator.
Curriculum
development for the aim of this study is sequence and management of contents and subjects.
Literature
review shows
teachers’
affirmative
understanding
of curriculum
development
and
mapping
as a
powerful
tool
to
improve their job and also
school
programs
(Huffman, 2002;
Lucas, 2005).
Moreover
,
some
of the researches
have
prove
d
connection
between
teachers’
curriculum
development
and
increasing
student
s’
achievement
s
(Fairris, 2008; Shanks, 2002).
Unfortunately
, t
here are few
research
es
focus on the proce
dures
and act
ions
taking place
in the
course of
curriculum
development
and mapping
or
discovered
the
circumstances
and
needed
support for
prosperous
and effective
curriculum
developing
(He, Schultz,
&
Schubert, 2015)
.
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
2
Furthermore
, there
are few
discussion
s
in the
previous studies
about the problems
and difficulties
that
teachers
or
instructors
may
experie
nce
through
the
mapping
a curriculum
and
the ways
which
these
obstacles
and
situations
are
remove
d
or
controlled
.
T
his
paper
is
conducted
to
elaborate
curriculum
development
and mapping
in
two
school
-
setting
s
to
record
both
the
favorable circumstances
and
obstacles
of the
ways of
conducting
and
recognize
used
strategies
for
a
success curriculum
.
2. Literature Review
Jacobs (1997)
introduced a
model in which
it
allowed individual teachers,
to use
technology and
school
schedule
, to develop their own curriculum,
and finally
analyze
each other’s curricula for
deficiencies,
break
, unrelated materials
, contradictories
and redundancies
in order
to
develop
a
logical
,
understandable,
homogenous
curriculum
inside
and
outside
schools
whi
ch
is
organized
both
horizontally
and vertically
(Kallick & Colosimo, 2009; Udelhofen
, 2005).
As
model
proposed by
Jacob suggest
,
every
curric
ulum
should
be
criticize, analyze, adapt
or
customize
on
a
rational
ground
to
answer
school
neighborhood’s
curricular needs as they
modify
or
as a
react
ion
to
indicated
dynamic and
changing
requirements
(Udelhofen, 2005).
The work of
previous
theorists
identified
the importance
school
teacher
s
’ roles
in curricular
development at the
constructing
level (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2004). Literature
review
on teacher
leadership
highlights
that, for almost more than two
decades, attempts
to generalize teacher as
leaders within educational organizational systems have
took place
with
little
considerable
succe
ss (York
-
Barr & Duke, 2004).
In addition to
the teacher owned curriculum development,
Curriculum mapping
applied
as a
method
of curriculum
analysis
in
educational institute
.
As
Udelhofen
(2005) noted,
standards
-
based reform
, improvement
and
responsibility
, curriculum
developing and m
a
pping
is
employed
by
a number of
schools
in a greater extent
as a planning
instrument
that
let
teachers
adapt
their curricula with the
desired
national
norms
and
evaluation
methods
.
Recent studies
use Fullan’s (2007) theory
of educational
modification
in addition to
some
careful
instructional
change
standards
,
notions
and
fundamentals
as a theoretical
foundation
. This theory
proposes
three
stages
in the change
course
:
beginning
,
performing
,
organizing
or
maintenance
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
3
and
draw
desirable matters
at
every
stage
.
T
heorists
who support change
urge
that
changes and
reforms
should not consider
as a
simple
direct
or
straight
process; in
fact
,
according to Marsh
(2009)
stages
of change will
blend
slowly and unnoticeably
in together. Moreover, Fullan
(200
7
)
noted that
a
ll
stages
should
be
considered
from the
initiation
and continually
thereafter.
According to
Hall and Hord (2010)
a
good
and efficient
change
starts
and
closes
with
realizing
the
significance
of
performing
dynamics
and constructs
. The
review of
educational change
studies
proposed
that implementation
has to
be
real
employment
of
change
in
exercise
. The five
aspects
of implementation in
reality
suggested
by
Fullan and Pomfret
(1977)
involve
“changes in
subjects
,
framework
, and role/behavior, knowledge and understanding, and value internalization”
(p. 336). The
writers
emphasized
that some
aspects
of the implementation are
simply
noticeable
,
since
some of them
should
be
understood
or
mentioned
through
pap
ers
and
interviews.
Due to
the
difficulties
of the implementation process, the
re are plenty of
elements
which
have
positive effects or
impact
s on change
: professional
promotion
,
available sources
(e.g., time,
equipment
,
place,
materials),
response
systems
that
improve
cooperation
and
obstacle
recognition
, and
also
role of
participation
s
in
making a decision
(Fullan & Pomfret, 1977).
The
change
stages
need
guidance
,
cooperation
, individual learning,
engagement
from school
personnel
, and a
common
inte
rest
and
crucial
planning (Fullan, 1992; Hall & Hord, 2010).
Literature
review of the
change emphasizes the
critical
performance
of
people
in the change
procedure
.
As reported by
Hall and Hord
(2010), “organizations adopt change
–
individuals
implement change...successful change starts and ends at the individual level. An entire
organization does not change until each member has changed” (p. 9).
In other words, a
successful change requires
individ
ual
to change.
Therefore
, it is
vital
to
investigate and
examine
all the
procedures
and
measures
of the change from the
perspectives
of the
curriculum actors
(
White & Le Cornu, 2011)
.
Curriculum is the
focal point
for the relationship between teachers
and
learners
. It involves developing programs of study (study plans),
particular lesson plans,
teaching
strategies,
all
ocation of
resources
, evaluation
of students and faculty development
(Alberta Education, 2012).
Considering these facts
curriculum
developmen
t
approach
in
school
is and
ought to
be
one of the serious and common
concern for
those involved in this task
,
especially for
policy
-
makers
,
government,
educationalist,
educators, parents and the society at
large (Alberta
Education, 2012
;
Fish, 2013
).
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
4
Two questions
examined in this paper
.
What are the
action plan
and initiatives
for curriculum
developing and mapping
to be
prosperous
?
And, w
hat are the opportunities and
problems
of
curriculum
development and
mapping implementation?
3.
Methodology
3.1.
Sampling
This study benefited from a
purposeful sampling to
choose
both
research
place
and
participants.
Two
reputed
high schools
for
curriculum
development and mapping were selected
.
One of
school has 460 students and the other has 530 students.
The educa
tional degrees of 160 teachers
in these two schools were:
5
0
.8%
BA
,
41
.
7
%
MA
, and 7.5%
had PhD
degree.
At first
,
twenty
teachers
were
accepted to participate in this study
and invited for intervie
w
.
After
conducting interview, six teachers (3 female and 3 male) were selected for the aim of this study.
The teachers were
fully informed
for the study.
All the participants
were experienced teachers
at
least with 1
9
years teaching
experience
.
Contributors
considered
themselves as being
fairly
qualified and skillful
with curriculum
development and
mapping.
3.2.
D
ata collection and analysis
As
Miles & Huberman
(1994) mentioned
Qualitative data
authorized
the researcher to preserve
chronological flow, see
exactly
which events lead to which
outcomes
, and derive fruitful
explanations.
Concentrating
on a
n
individual
case helped
reveal
the
interplay
and
impact
of
significant
parts
specific to the
interested
aspect
and
evaluate
disparate tasks
and
procedures
appear
in the research
setting (Merriam, 2009).
The
first
way
for collecting data
was
interviews.
In 1995, Lincoln and Guba
suggested data
collect
ion
should be done
to
the extent
that
satiation
or
repetition
is
attained
.
For every
participant, t
wo interviews
were
conducted.
In the course of
second
interviews, it was understood
that
extra
interviews
added no new
information
related
to the research questions. The
first
interviews lasted
50
-
6
5
minutes and
the second
interviews
carried out in
30
-
45 m
inutes.
Extra and supplementary
information
were
gained
from classroom observations and
records.
C
lassroom observations identif
ied
the
degree that
teachers followed
the agreed
curriculum
and
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
5
amount of
innovative
and
ingenuity
the teachers
combined
to the
developed
or mapped
curriculum
. The documents included
records
curriculum
implementing
for different
classes
and
also
standardized
assessment
reports. The classroom
monitoring
and
records
were used to
validate
and
confirm the
results
from interviews.
Glaser & Strauss
(1967) suggested that t
he
process
of
data analysis
included
classification
,
en
coding,
grounded
established based on
data
collection
,
employing
a
sustained
comparative
method
.
New
collected
data
continually
contrasted with
old
accumulated
data;
classification
established
in advance
were compared with the emerging ones in order to
prove
or
reject
them
until the most
reasonable
analysis and explanation
of data was
gained
(Cohen, Manion, &
Morrison, 2007).
4. Results
Curriculum development is a process
including
different
phases
and is
performed
after every
specified
period defined by an educational institution concerned.
Alt
hough it
can
be different
from
school to school, the developers should have enough experienced and knowledge to prepare
and also update
or
revise it.
Developing curriculum may take more or
less
time
depending on the
size of the institution. An approach to develop curriculum therefore, s
hould
encompass design,
implementation and assessment.
According to
Ornstein and Hunkin
s (2009
) Curriculum
development
includes
curriculum plann
ing
, implement
ing
and
assessment
, as well as
those
participated persons
and
involved
procedures
.
Using a
curricu
lum model
as a road
-
map
can
help
curriculum
planning
leader
with a systematic and comprehensive
approach
to
this
complex and
demanding
work
(O’Neill, 2010).
Most of the
respondent
disclosed
positive
understanding and
perception of
both
curriculum
developing and
mapping as
efficient
planning instruments
which support both
short
-
term and
long
-
term
educational
purposes
,
remove
gaps and unproductive
redundancies
in the curriculum,
and
also
provide better
adjustment
of curriculum with state
norms
.
Meanw
hile
teacher
s
are
develop
ing
or map
ping
curriculum, teachers
are able to
follow
needs, the
previous knowledge
and skills of their
learners
and build on them.
In other words,
it is designed to promote a deeper
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
6
level of learning by identifying tailoring the
needs of the students with the intention of helping
the student achieve learning goals.
One participant
mentioned
, “You know what
are
students’
need
s
, what they were
wanted
to
learned and master
.” Curriculum mapping helps ensure that all
students
have
sufficient opportunity to master specific outcomes
.
Teacher
curriculum
development
and mapping
improved student learning and
motivation; whilst curriculum
developed by outer expert
did not result in significant
student learning or increase their
motivation
.
Some of the participants declared
that
both
teacher curriculum developing and
curriculum
map
ping
kept them on
the right
track. One of the
participant mentioned
, “
having
map
, keeps you
focus
on
the
target.”
Another participant shared “
Classroom
-
level
curriculum development
reflects constructivist principles of active
learning and
interaction between thought and
experience
”.
Most participants suggested that curriculum map
ping
and teacher as a curriculum develop
er
can
effect on
communication tool with
parents, administrators,
and other stakeholders.
In this study
teachers supported
both
curriculum developing and mapping, they emphasized that it can help
new teachers to
determin
e
the
order
and
stages
suitable
for covering the material and to
satisfy
the
school and department
needs
in one side, and simultaneously
consider developmental,
cognitive, emotional, and communicative factors
in other side. Participants also proposed that
experienced
teachers
should
provid
e
opportunities to share their
expertise an
d knowledge
with
their
partners and co
-
workers
through developing a
well
-
designed
curricula and
maps.
All the
individuals
participated
in this study
strictly wanted
improvement
in
synerg
ies
among teachers
within and beyond
faculties
.
All of the
participants asserted that it
is
essential
to provide adequate
support, assistance
and
ongoing
training for
educators
to develop
curriculum
and maps and not to
believe
them to do it
immediately
.
T
eachers
should have enough motivation,
interest
and
initiati
ve
to tackle different
obstacles and problems.
Moreover
, curriculum
experts
should
monitor teachers’ works and
answer their
questions, provide assistance
and motivate teachers
.
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
7
References
Alberta Education. (2012). Curriculum development processes, from
knowledge to action.
Retrieved from
http://www.education.alberta.ca/media/6809242/d_chapter1.pdf
Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into practice
(3rd Ed.). Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta Academic Press.
Cohen, L., M
anion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Craig, C., & Ross, V. (2008). Cultivating the image of teachers as curriculum makers. In M.
Connelly, M. He, & J. Phillion (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of curriculum and
instruction. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.
Cuban, L. (1993). The lure of curriculum reform and its pitiful history.
Phi Delta Kappan, 75(2).
Fairris, J. (2008). The effect degree of curriculum mapping implementation has on student
performance levels
on sixth and eighth grade benchmark examination. (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (UMI No. 3313258).
Fish, A. (2013). Reshaping the undergraduate business curriculum and scholarship experiences
in Australia to
suppor
t whole
-
person outcomes. Asian Education and Development
Studies, 2(1), 53
-
69.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/20463161311297635
Fullan, M. (1992).
Successful school improvement: The implementation perspective and beyond.
Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY: Teachers College
Press.
Fullan, M., & Pomfret, A. (1977).
Research on curriculum and instruction implementation.
Review of Educational Research, 47(2), 335
-
397.
Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals. Granby, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strateg
ies for qualitative
research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
Hall, G., & Hord, S. (2010). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes (3rd Ed.).
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
He, M. F., Schultz, B. D., & Schubert, W. H. (Eds.). (2015). Guide to Curriculum
in Education.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
8
Huffman, S. (2002). Middle school teacher’ perceptions of the value and efficacy of curriculum
mapping and state standards. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Digital
Dissertations. (UMI N
o. 3044121).
Jacobs, H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment K
-
12.
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jacobs, H. H. (2004
). Getting results with curriculum mapping. Alexandria, VA: As
sociation for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kallick, B., & Colosimo, J. (2009). Using curriculum mapping and assessment data to improve
learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lincoln
, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1995) Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lucas, R. (2005). Teachers’ perceptions on the efficacy of curriculum mapping as a tool for
planning and curriculum alignment. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest
Digital Dissertations. (UMI No. 3190194).
Marsh, C. (2009). Key
concepts for understanding curriculum. London, England:
Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Mednick,
F.
(2006).
Curriculum
theories
(Version
1.9).
Retrieved
from
http://cnx.org/content/m13293/latest/
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to desig
n and implementation. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey
-
Bass.
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expended sourcebook.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Njogu, K. (2012). Conceptualizing the curriculum: Towards a renaissance for theory. American
International
Journal of Contemporary Research, 2(9).
O’Neill, G. (2010). Program design: Overview of curriculum models. Retrieved from
http://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/ucdtlp00631.pdf
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2004).
Curriculum: Foundations, principals and issues (4th
ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ornstein A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2009). Curriculum foundations, principles and issues (5th ed.).
Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
9
Shanks, D. (2002). A comparative study on academic
gains between students in second through
sixth grade before and after curriculum mapping. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (UMI No. 3061779).
Schubert, W. H. (1986). Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and
possibility. New York:
Macmillan.
Udelhofen, S. (2005). Keys to curriculum mapping: Strategies and tools to make it work.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and residents: A new typology for online
engagement. F
irst Monday, 16(9
-
5).
York
-
Barr, J. & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from
two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255
-
316.
IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research
ISSN: 2456-2947
Volume-4 | Issue-2 | Feb,2019
10