Implementation Failure and Factors Affecting Change
One example of a change that did not go well in an educational setting is the implementation of a new technology-based curriculum platform. The failure was primarily caused by a lack of thorough planning, inadequate training and support for teachers, and resistance to change.
The implementation process lacked clear goals, objectives, and a shared vision among all stakeholders. Insufficient planning led to a lack of understanding about how the new platform would integrate into the existing curriculum and instructional practices. As a result, teachers struggled to effectively incorporate the technology into their lessons, leading to frustration and resistance.
Additionally, there was a lack of comprehensive training and ongoing support for the teachers. Without proper training, educators felt ill-equipped to navigate the new platform, troubleshoot technical issues, and utilize its full potential. The absence of adequate support systems further hindered successful implementation.
Resistance to change was another significant factor in the failure. Some teachers were resistant to embracing technology or felt overwhelmed by the rapid pace of change. This resistance was exacerbated by a lack of communication and collaboration between administrators and teachers, leading to a breakdown in trust and engagement.
Overall, this example highlights the importance of thorough planning, comprehensive training, ongoing support, effective communication, and collaboration when implementing changes in educational settings.
Texas Tests: STAAR Tests
The Texas tests for public school children, such as the STAAR tests, are considered criterion-referenced tests. Criterion-referenced tests focus on measuring students’ performance against specific predetermined criteria or learning standards. STAAR tests assess students’ mastery of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) standards, which outline what students should know and be able to do at each grade level.
Norm-referenced tests, on the other hand, compare students’ performance to a norm or average performance of a group. These tests rank students in relation to each other rather than against specific criteria or standards.
A. Public Policy-Makers and Educational Change
Public policy-makers who advocate for educational change should indeed study more about the nature of schools and curriculum. They need a deep understanding of the complexities and nuances of the education system to make informed decisions that positively impact students and teachers.
If I were to select something from this course to teach a policy-maker, it would be the importance of involving all stakeholders in the decision-making process. Policy-makers should understand the value of collaboration and seeking input from educators, parents, students, and community members. By involving all stakeholders, policy-makers can ensure that their decisions are well-informed, inclusive, and aligned with the needs and aspirations of the education community.
B. Informing the Public about Curriculum
In a formal study of curriculum, one important aspect that should be relayed to the public is the significance of curriculum alignment with societal needs and goals. The public should understand that curriculum is not static but evolves in response to changing societal demands.
By informing the public about curriculum alignment, they can better understand the purpose behind curriculum changes and how it impacts students’ preparation for their future roles as citizens and workers. This knowledge can foster support and engagement from the public in educational initiatives, leading to more successful implementation of curriculum changes.
Foundations of Curriculum Theory
The four foundation areas in curriculum theory are philosophical, historical, psychological, and sociological foundations.
One example of a foundation area is the historical foundation. Understanding the historical context of education is crucial for educators as it helps them comprehend the evolution of educational practices and systems. By examining past educational theories and practices, teachers can reflect on what has worked and what hasn’t in order to inform their instructional decisions.
For instance, based on my education experience, historical foundations have influenced teaching strategies used today. For example, the shift from rote memorization to student-centered learning can be attributed to past educational philosophies that emphasized active engagement and critical thinking. By understanding these historical foundations, educators can adapt their teaching methods to better meet the needs of contemporary learners.
Preferred Curriculum Development Model
If I were leading a curriculum development project, I would choose the Backward Design model as it aligns with my philosophy of education and knowledge of curriculum development. Backward Design emphasizes starting with clear learning goals and outcomes before designing instructional activities and assessments.
This model resonates with me because it focuses on student-centered learning and ensuring that instruction is purposeful and aligned with desired outcomes. By beginning with the end in mind, educators can design meaningful learning experiences that promote deep understanding and transferable skills. Additionally, this model promotes collaboration among teachers during the planning process, ensuring coherence across grade levels and subjects.
Formative and Summative Evaluation
Formative evaluation refers to ongoing assessments conducted during instruction to monitor student progress and provide feedback for improvement. It helps teachers identify areas where students are struggling or excelling so that instruction can be adjusted accordingly. Formative evaluation involves techniques such as quizzes, classroom observations, feedback discussions, or student self-assessments.
Summative evaluation, on the other hand, is conducted at the end of a unit or course to assess overall student learning. It typically involves high-stakes assessments such as exams or projects that measure students’ achievement against predetermined standards or criteria. Summative evaluation provides a summary judgment of student performance at a specific point in time.
In summary, formative evaluation is focused on providing feedback for improvement during instruction, while summative evaluation assesses overall student achievement at the end of a learning period.
Our orders are delivered strictly on time without delay 
