Curriculum Planning History has several historical or political occurrences that have mostly influenced current curriculum design through various teaching styles and patterns. Educational communities shape and mold our society and society in turn impacts the curriculum. Majority of all stakeholders speak openly concerning their views today in hopes to persuade legislatures and school officials about decisions going forth or changing within school systems. In the last 10 years some of the most dramatically changes within curriculum in the schools has resulted due to the increasing number of US youth in school, the diversity of the US population, traditional classroom setting activities, increase in pre-kindergarten students beginning school, the likelihood of diminishing smaller schools, minimizing teacher/pupil ratios at a slow pace, technological future: and the future becoming technology, and who is left to teach becomes a critical question.
The ELL laws and SIOP have impacted our educational communities’ curriculum development in both negative and positive ways. For example, some of the benefits of SIOP for non-ELL teachers are dramatic increase awareness in professional-development programs on how to teach English-language learners as a plus in the implementation of the law. Nevertheless, the No Child Left Behind Act could be thought of as a disadvantage more than a benefit to English-language learners, this belief is one of the few researchers who have studied the impact that the law has had on instruction. I personally believe in the NCLB Act and I was very much an advocate for the Act when it initially became effective. Also we must acknowledge the “gifted education” movement and how it identifies with the initial curriculum development both negatively and positively from its first implementations of similar development and specifications.
Most Influential Historical/Political Occurrences
The melting pot approach has interested educators in the integration of diversity. The melting pot approach was adopted in the 60s and 70s, soon quickly becoming known nationwide in the United States at the same time interacting with similar subjects of various cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds. Metaphoric speaking contents of the pot–people of different cultures, languages and religions are combined so as to lose their distinct identities resulting in a final product that is quite interesting but nothing like the normal consistency at start. Resulting in more multicultural, multiethnic and multi-religious societies it is important that curriculum understands and reflect these changes. As stated by Ornstein and Hunkins (1998), “the complexion of our students is changing from one colour to various shades of colour and this adding of colour and cultural diversity will continue into the foreseeable future” (p.146).
As we continue to research our influential historical and political occurrences we take notice of the world changing into a global village. Society becoming even more diverse as people brings new values and new languages to assist in establishing a new way of life. Then there is the salad bowl approach where diversity is personified individually but all uniquely at the same time. In other words, take for instance the makeup of a salad where all ingredients (diverse backgrounds) maintain their own specific flavors.
The salad bowl approach is better representation than the melting pot approach. It is politically correct to assume that Cultural diversity of pluralism demonstrates how most societal beliefs are made up of several voices and various races. This outline allows groups to show good manners and appreciation of each other; coexisting and interacting without issues. Society members usually more committed than not in participating and sharing the lead of power and decision making as history proves with this approach.
ELL Laws and SIOP Impact
Educators specializing in teaching English-language learners tend to be uncertain about the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Although, most have expressed that the 10-year-old plus law has shown concern for the handling of test results resulting from the criteria spelled out within the NCLB Act. It is evident that the challenges these students face has prompted an increase in professional development, specifically for mainstream teachers. While acknowledging the ELL Laws are not clear about the instruction being more positive or negative overall. As English-learners’ test scores fall short many believe it is wrong to penalize schools. In addition to reviewing the ELL laws we must address the Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol, or SIOP, defined as a model for teaching English and academic content simultaneously.
For example, clearly written objectives content, clearly written language objectives, key vocabulary emphasized, various technique concepts usage to stress clarity, and providing many consistent opportunities for interactive teacher/student dialogue encouraging elaborated responses are some examples. For example, SIOP allows a teacher to implement various hands on teaching and training aids that can only assist in teaching the average ELL students at a more rapid pace.
“Gifted Education” Movement Impact
The “Gifted Education” curriculum has impacted education for at least twenty-five years or more with various issues. Therefore implementing and identifying key trends including values and substantial material for the elite, technological subject matter, aspects of creative interactive lesson plans for the academically skilled persons within core subject areas. It is obvious Passow’s flattering article on secondary programming was designed for the gifted student that was justifiably leveled between mental and influential areas.
Passow’s model provided answers on creating a guide for tracking implementations and improvements that called for concerns about accepting one’s own beliefs and assisting others who you might not agree with. It was also centered morally and ethically with developmental stages in reality and emphasis on critical thinking and resolving problems, a stress on the liberal arts, and customized choices. Surely, Passow and VanTassel-Baska are advocates for Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs. Mentorships, internships, and independent study are all examples of why there is a need for more customized interactions.
Curriculum Planning History occurrences are dictated by the outcome of present and past societal decisions that have outweighed educational models and theories across the nation in various educational communities. Curriculum Planning prepares students from past experiences to embrace the now and willingly reaches out and take on the future. In other words, a curriculum needs to address the wants and needs of everyone desiring to resolve social conditions locally, nationally and globally (McNeil, 1995). In the United States the number of school-age students will grow from more than 60 million in 2012 to possibly 80 million in 2050. However, it is extremely critical not to ignore or deny the possibilities the trends reveal. Therefore, we can hope “Trends” will best serve as a starting point where educators and facilities professionals come together to “think outside of the box,” to ask “what if,” to wonder “why can’t we,” and to “consider the unconsidered.”
Flashing back on Chen, 20110, stating how open discussions of the potential impact of the trends on public education and its school structures will surely emerge new and exciting ideas. Undoubtedly, the roles of all stakeholders will be affected by a changing future. In conclusion, it has been proven that educators and educational specialists do continue to shape diverse futures. As an old favorite African proverb of mine reminds us; Tomorrow belongs to the people who prepare for it today.
A Collaborative Curriculum is created and necessary based on the circumstances and beliefs during that period of time. The collaboration is reflective of various political ideologies, societal predictions, divine beliefs and wisdom conceptions at a particular point in time. While there is great advancements in information and communication technology, administrators, teachers and students are expressing and gathering views globally. It has been seen in other school systems and majority of all stakeholders would like to see these practices in their own educational community.
Ornstein, A. and Hunkins, F. Curriculum: Foundations, principle and issues. (1998). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Chapter 5: Social foundations of curriculum. Passow, A. H. (1986). Curriculum for the gifted and talented at the secondary level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 186-191. [See Vol. 4, p. 103.]
Stevenson, K. R., (September 2010). Educational Trends Shaping School Planning, Design, Construction, Funding, and Operation., National Clearing House For Educational Facilities www.files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539457.pdf Topic 3: Social Foundations of Curriculum peoplelearn.homestead.com/beduc/module_3.social.history.doc VanTassel-Baska, J., Zuo, L., Avery, L. D., & Little, C. A. (2002). A curriculum study of gifted-student learning in the language arts. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(1), 30-44. [See Vol. 5.] VanTassel-Baska, J., (2003). Introduction to Curriculum for Gifted and Talented Students: A 25-Year Retrospective and Prospective. The College of William and Mary.