Curriculum and Instruction

The power to define what is legitimate knowledge and therefore what will be rewarded in its representation, will always be contested (Sergiovanni, Starratt, 1998). It is imperative, then, that very early in the charter school’s development, the organizers list their beliefs about how children learn. These must be clear statements of belief, which will give helpful direction for choosing the correct curriculum and instructional methods. The list should not be intended to become definitive of a possible learning method; it is simply a base from which to examine appropriate curriculums and instructional methodologies. The group developing the list should represent a cross-section of the newly formed school community: parents, educators, and any other stakeholders. It may be of value to visit some effective schools to gather suggestions (Nathan, 1996).

Joe Nathan (1996) suggests the next step to be a discussion of what the above group of stakeholders believes the students should know. Within the context of this discussion must be decisions on how progress will be measured. Colorado has mandated a set of state standards and an assessment tool of measurement. Along with this, the school may wish to further include other school standards and assessments. Since the cornerstone to the charter school movement is based upon demonstrable improved achievement, the group needs to carefully consider what it finds to be credible goals for the students, and for what it will hold the school accountable.

There are many similarities in the proposals for restructuring schools. Each proposal focuses on quality student achievement. The philosophy embraced, and the process by which the school uses to reach the vision, will vary greatly. One underlying theme to school restructuring stems from the fundamental reason for the initial development of the "common school" in the United States: to develop an enlightened citizenry (Nathan, 1996). The schools were to focus on providing enough common information, including shared literature and history, to forge a national identity from the numerous ethnic groups in America. As the public schools modernized, many left behind this original notion. "While there is attention to the development of novice-experts in the academic, professional and technical areas, we have to look hard to find recommendations dealing with the development of the novice-citizen" (Sergiovanni, et al., 1998). Many charter schools in Colorado have recognized this fact, and have embraced the Core Knowledge curriculum to meet their philosophy of what they believe a child needs to know in order to become a productive American citizen.

An equally valid argument is made that public life is becoming more and more complex, and the schools need to respond accordingly. If schools graduate young people of voting age who know little of the public issues facing the nation, and how to participate in the political arena, this will put not only our future citizens, but the entire nation at risk (Sergiovanni, et al., 1998). Such adherents argue that simply knowing the information is not enough, but it must be applied in real-life situations in order to create a deep understanding. From this argument arises the need for a curriculum and instructional methodology that employs an experiential process to attain the school’s academic achievement standards.

And finally, a new focus on school restructuring is being based on the tenet that the answer to the nation’s problem with education is based upon the need for students to develop reasoning ability, inquiry skills, and rational problem solving. A student who arrives at a deeper understanding of the academic disciplines will become a citizen who will use the power found in knowledge to better determine the correct direction in today’s complex world. This assumption reflects on the Socratic belief that knowledge is virtue. If we know enough on a deeper level, we will think clearly enough to do the right thing (Sergiovanni, et al., 1998). Basically, this brings us full circle with the original concept of mass education.

Whatever educational vision, curriculum, and instructional method is chosen by a charter school, the founders must align this with their standards (and those of the state of Colorado). According to Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (1999), the process for developing standards at the school level includes four key steps:

1. The school’s standards team must review the school’s mission to reflect on what its purpose is, whom it plans to serve, and what the expectations for the students will be.
2. The team will develop a list of academic goals, which will be those qualities and skills it deems necessary for graduation from the school.
3. The team then creates a list of interim skills (benchmarks) which help the school determine the progress of the students in reaching the goals.
4. The educators will then develop lists of specific academic skills, which the students will achieve in each subject and each class.

Based upon the above standards, the school then initiates the task of identifying an appropriate curriculum that will teach these standards. Additionally, an assessment system must be determined that will accurately reflect the achievement level of the students. Again, from Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (1999), the process includes the following essential questions:

1. What do we want our students to understand and be able to do? These are the standards.
2. How can we best teach these to our students—what educational means should be employed? This is the curriculum.
3. How will we know whether our students have learned these skills? This is the assessment.

All four elements—standards, curriculum, assessment, and school vision—must be aligned for a school to have a healthy, coherent educational program.

This section of the Guidebook provides samples of academic issues and policies.

References

Assessment, Accountability, Evaluation: Coalition of Essential Schools, Brown University, (401) 863-3384.

Goodson, I. F. (1995). The context of cultural inventions: Learning and curriculum. In P. W. Cookson, Jr. & B. Schneider (Eds.), Transforming schools (pp. 309-327). New York, NY: Garland.

Nathan, J. (1996). Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Newman, F. M. & Wehlage, G. G. (1995). Successful school restructuring. Madison, WI: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (1999). Charter starters: Assessment and accountability. Portland, OR. Also available: www.nwrel.org

Performance Assessment Collaborative for Education (P.A.C.E.), Harvard University, (617) 496-2770.

Perkins, D. (1992). Smart schools: Better thinking and learning for every child. New York, NY: Free Press.

Sergiovanni, T.J. & Starratt, R.J. (1998). Supervision: A redefinition (6th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.