Running Head: CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
Ch-ch-ch-changes:
A plan for Curriculum Change
Deborah Davis
Liberty University
1
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
2
Abstract
The pseudonymously named Foothills Local School District (FLSC) represents a school district
in rural Ohio faced with implementing a schools-wide curriculum change within their
history/social studies program. As in every community, there are those who are excited about
the change and those who are resistant to the change. Implementing curriculum change is not a
simple process, nor is it easy. It is, however, essential as a part of the process of evaluating
curriculum and assessing progress toward standards. In order to effectively implement a change
of curriculum, the educators – faculty and staff – of the schools, indeed, the entire community
must be engaged in the process. Only by empowering the people who will actually work within
the new curriculum will the change be effective and (relatively) smooth.
Keywords: Curriculum Change, Engaging Educators, Evaluating Curriculum, Action
Steps
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
3
Ch-ch-ch-changes: A Plan for Curriculum Change
Change happens. Heraclitus is credited with the quote: “the only thing constant in
change.” There is so much truth in that statement. The only exception is “Jesus Christ the same
yesterday, and to day, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8, King James Version). In order to embrace
change, it is important for those involved or affected to be engaged in the process. This is true,
regardless of the aspect of change. While not documented, metathesiophobia is likely one of the
greatest of fears.
In the pseudonymously named Foothills Local School District (FLSD) the school board
and all those engaged are no different. This rural school encompasses the community in relative
entirety. Understanding that the district is an integral part of the community, yet subject to the
guidelines of state and federal government, the FLSD has a committee charged with curriculum
watch. The curriculum watch committee reviews state and federal guidelines and evaluates
curriculum within the school system to ensure compliance. A recent change toward the common
core requires a complete revamping of the district-wide curriculum in history.
This district has not updated the curriculum in over ten years, largely for budgetary
reasons. Now, however, a change has become required. A plan for the selection of new
curriculum and implementation thereof must be enacted in a timely manner.
The Usual Cycle
Each year, the curriculum watch committee meets to review existing standards and the
applicability of existing curricula to those standards. Within the committee (largely current or
former educators who live locally), there are those whose background is within a particular area.
When the committee meets in the summer, results of any available assessments are reviewed. If
the students and/or faculty do not seem to be meeting the prior standards, then and ad hoc team is
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
4
formed to determine if the substandard performance is due to materials, method, or manpower.
Historically, FLSD has performed admirably against state standards.
The committee then reviews the state standards for any significant changes. These are
reviewed against the curriculum standards for the prior year. Historically, there have been a few
minor changes and those are dealt with via corrected materials distributed throughout the area.
After verification, the committee meets again mid-year to review any changes and will otherwise
communicate electronically, only calling a meeting if there is an issue to discuss.
Change Happens
This year, there is a substantial change. The new state standard requires that American
History begin at 1877 and that American History as a specific course, need not be presented until
High School wherein it is a graduation requirement to have one-half year course (Ohio
Department of Education, 2010). This information, though published in 2010, was not
distributed until 2014, and requires implementation in the 2016-2017 school year.
The committee had never made a system-wide change and had no plan in place for such a
requirement. The plan must include a timeline for implementation, as well as a methodology to
engage the participants. Formidable indeed, the committee learned of the change during the midyear meeting in the 2014-2015 school year and has been working separately on various plans.
With the upcoming summer meeting, the committee will produce the needed plan and publish it
accordingly. Publication of the plan would actually be the first step action step in the plan.
The Timeline
Ecclesiastes 3:1 says: “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose
under the heaven.” This season of change will be hard, but is essential for the currency and
funding for FLSD. Having determined the need for district-wide curriculum change in a
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
5
relatively short time-frame, engaging the participants is critical early on in the process. Out of
the fifteen months from summer 2015 through fall 2016, a number of requirements must be met.
Since the school year is divided into summer season, fall term, and spring term, it seemed
prudent to align the implementation plan along those terms.
Engaging the staff from the outset was critical to avoid the concept that the new
curriculum came from an oppressive mindset, what being shoved onto them, or anything else that
would undermine the requirement (Craig, 2012). The changes to be implemented are required
and therefore must be sustained. “In order to make changes sustainable, change in regulations
coming from the state level should be consistent with changes in normative and cultural elements
of the institutional order” (Kesküla, Loogma, Kolka, & Sau-Ek, 2012, p. 355). This requires
engaging the families within the community as well.
With the summer months, committee members worked with department heads and
administrators to lay out a series of updates to implement throughout the upcoming school year.
The FLSD website was updated with a slogan each week. The sequence started with Helen
Keller’s “When one door closes, another opens. But often we look so long, so regretfully, upon
the closed door, that we fail to see the one that is opened for us.” The website also encouraged
comments from the community and a flyer was publicized throughout the community to
encourage family to watch the website for “exciting new opportunities for our children.”
During June and July, designated committee members and department heads visited
faculty and staff members to inform them and engage them in the process. Meticulous notes
were compiled to ensure comments were considered. As a result, by the time school started for
the 2015-2016 year, faculty and staff were well versed in the new program and the reasons for
change. This engagement and feedback program is the second action step in the plan.
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
6
During the fall term, new curriculum options were ordered and reviewed. Faculty,
administrators, and the library staff were all given copies to review and consider each text and
package and encouraged to submit recommendations – positive and negative – to the committee
before a decision was made. This allowed for a variety of input from a variety of perspectives.
All input aided in providing the most possible acceptance to this dramatic change in curriculum
within this particular district. The review of potential curriculum was the third action step in the
plan.
Rebutting Negativism
The FLSD, like the schools in Kanawha, West Virginia in the 1970’s, had to deal with
those who were resistant to the idea of starting American History in 1877(Hartman, 2013).
While the Kanawha County issues were largely race-based and religion-oriented, the FLSD
issues focused more on the local area cultural history, including the Shawnee Indian culture from
which the Foothill Indians had taken their mascot and logo. Learning from the mistakes made in
Kanawha County in the 1970’s, FLSD encouraged the community members to participate in the
process and asked for input, giving full credence to responses and incorporating a number of
suggestions.
Community members, faculty and staff were consistently reminded, “the content of the
traditional history-centered classes was reformulated, not necessarily to be fused with other
disciplines, but to be made immediately relevant to the concerns of the present” (Fallace, 2011,
p. 580). This process of engaging the community was critical. Public meetings were held
monthly. Suggestion boxes were available at the schools, in the community, and online. Two
staff members were specifically designated to respond to every suggestion and evaluate it as
either helpful or irrelevant to the issue. Even though some comments dealt with issues not
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
7
specific to the curriculum change, those community members received a response thanking them
for their concerns and indicating that their issues would be dealt with separately from the
curriculum change. This element was an ongoing process and not a specific action step.
New Year – New Books
Late in the 2015 calendar year, the decision for curriculum was made by the committee,
and the order was placed. Materials arrived in January and faculty and staff received their copies
immediately so as to start planning and give time for any questions. During the spring term,
responses from faculty and staff were handled and addendum materials were ordered, received
and reviewed. Parents and other community members were encouraged (via the website and
public notices) to review the new materials within the school and public libraries and ask
questions. Providing the new materials to the faculty, the staff, and the community was the
fourth action step in the plan.
By summer, all reviews had been received, and the new curricula was set. Teachers
prepared personal lesson plans in concert with the new curricula and a three-day in-service
workshop was planned for all faculty and staff. The workshop was scheduled for late June 2015.
On the first day, elementary teachers led middle and high school teachers through the new
curriculum as if they were students, providing highlights of activities and assessment goals. The
second day, middle school teachers had the lead. The third day, high school faculty took over
and prepared the remaining staff for “graduation” requirements.
Through the workshop process, all members of FLSD came to understand how the new
curriculum would work and were able to point out gaps in the transition process. Those involved
could present solutions to ensure that those in high school making the transition received what
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
8
they needed without feeling their elementary and middle school educations had not been
fruitless. The workshop was the fifth action step in the plan.
Implementation and Review
The sixth and final action step in the plan would take plan during the 2015-2016 school
year. During that time, the committee members would meet during in-service training days to
ensure the transition went forward with as few hiccups as possible. Reports back to the
community would continue via print and electronic publication. A specific review of the new
curriculum efficacy would have to wait until assessments near the end of the school year. At that
point, it is hoped that the curriculum watch committee will return to the normal cycle of things.
Conclusion
George Bernard Shaw pointed out that “Progress is impossible without change and those
who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” Charles Kettering reminds us that
“The world hates change, yet it is the only thing that has brought progress. The common idiom,
frequently attributed to Plato advises that “Necessity is the mother of invention.” When dictated
to by the entity holding the checkbook, a school system without the means to act autonomously
must change to meet the new requirements. While uncomfortable, and sometimes challenging,
this is not a bad thing. “Growth demands a temporary surrender of security” according to Gail
Sheehy, author of many well-known books about change.
To some extent, most people have some form of metathesiophobia. Even if people do not
fear change, they frequently do not embrace it. Understanding that, and helping people be
engaged in the changing process is essential for ensuring (relatively) smooth transition. The
New International Version of the Bible says, “He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or
change his mind; for he is not a human being, that he should change his mind” (1 Samuel 15:29).
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
9
God is God and does not, has not, will not change. We humans live in an ever-changing world to
which we must adapt. It is as true in our education as in all things.
CURRICULUM CHANGE - DAVIS
10
References
Craig, C. J. (2012). “Butterfly under a pin”: An emergent teacher image amid mandated
curriculum reform. Journal Of Educational Research, 105(2), 90-101.
doi:10.1080/00220671.2010.519411
Fallace, T. D. (2011). The effects of life adjustment education on the U.S History curriculum,
1948-1957. History Teacher, 44(4), 569-589.
Hartman, A. (2013). “A Trojan horse for social engineering”: The curriculum wars in recent
American history. Journal Of Policy History, 25(1), 114-136.
doi:10.1017/S0898030612000371
Kesküla, E., Loogma, K., Kolka, P., & Sau-Ek, K. (2012). Curriculum change in teachers’
experience: the social innovation perspective. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 20(3), 353376. doi:10.1080/14681366.2012.712051
Ohio Department of Education (2010). Ohio’s New Learning Standards: Social Studies
Standards. Ohio Department of Education (Pub).