Federal law has made it mandatory for school districts to provide special opportunities for those students (immigrants and others) who do not speak English. The reason for this is many fold but basically if a student isn't proficient in English, he or she will struggle throughout the educational experience. Curriculum at public schools in turn has responded to federal law and those opportunities for English language learners is vital for the economic future of our country.
Curriculum Development
What historical or political occurrences do you think have most influenced current curriculum design?
The social and political history of the United States has always had an influence on schools and the curricula schools devise for their students. An article in New Straits Times (2005) reflects the fact that "…mounting levels of obesity" has raised concerns about schools and what they are teaching regarding good health habits. In the article the World Health Organization (WHO) reports over 300 million people worldwide are obese, and the lack of physical education and good health education in American schools was cited as partly to blame. Hence, curricula in some schools have added nutrition and physical health activities to regular classroom content.
In the www.peoplelearn.homestead.com website the authors note that historically children attending one-room school houses needed to learn to write, read and spell "…for the purpose of reading the Bible, government notices and common law." After the American Revolution, the "common school" (known today as public schools) was established in order to assure "…the survival of a new-found democracy."
What events, legislation, etc., in the last 10 years have "most dramatically changed curriculum in the schools? Clearly, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has had a very dramatic effect on school curriculum. That said, NCLB has been in effect for more than ten years, but it is very relevant to this question. The curriculum resulting from NCLB has been decidedly "test-driven," has posed "a potential threat to national security," and has harmed programs "for gifted students" (Hockett, 2009, 394). In fact some (if not many) teachers have been moved to "emphasize uniformly delivered test preparation lessons at the expense of differentiated approaches to curriculum and instruction" (Hockett, 395).
Hockett (395) gets right to the point when she says the "recent shift towards standardization has not been categorically deleterious for curriculum"; in other words, with NCLB teachers are/were "teaching to the test" so they can show high test scores. In some cases teachers' jobs are on the line if their students don't score high on standardized tests, and this is not only wrong, it goes against the idea that children should learn to solve problems, should learn independent research habits and should be challenged. Among the five principles offered by Hockett, "Principle 2" is the most germane: "High-Quality General Education Curriculum Should be Rooted in Ideas, Principles, and Skills Essential to the Respective Disciplines" (398).
TWO: What impact has ELL laws and SIOP had on curriculum development?
Federal civil rights laws make clear that English as a Second Language (ESL) / English Language Learners (ELL) have equal access to education. According to the National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition (NCELA), roughly five million students in the United States have "…limited English language skills," and that lack of skill in English has a negative impact on these students' ability to "participate successfully in educational programs" (NCELA). In 1970, the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) in the federal government issued a memo to schools indicating what the civil rights law means for schools.
Because children who struggle with English will have a very difficult time finding success in schools -- which takes away their worthwhile participation from learning -- school districts "…must take affirmative steps to rectify the language deficiency in order to open its instructional program to these students" (NCELA). Federal law will thus be violated if: a) school districts exclude students because they don't speak the English language; b) students of minority ethnicity are assigned "inappropriately to special education classes" due to their lack of English language skills; c) programs for students without English language skills are "…not designed to teach them English as soon as possible," or if the programs offered are basically a "dead end track"; or d) parents of students who don't speak English well are not sent school notices in a language they understand (NCELA).
What impact have these laws had on curriculum? School districts have created curricula addressing the need to help non-English speakers get up to speed with the language. The Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) is one instructional strategy that helps schools bring English language competencies to students (K-12). The SIOP model is very helpful for both teachers and students because studies reflect that "…when teachers fully implement the SIOP model, English learners' academic performance improves" (www.cal.org).
One negative impact of ELL laws on curriculum development is presented in Education Week (Zehr, 2009). In schools with a small number of ELLs, "…first generation immigrant students do better academically if they aren't placed in an ESL class" (Zehr, p. 1). This may be true because ELLs aren't invited to access to mainstream "…core academic curriculum"; also, their counterparts that are in mainstream classes with no ESL available "do better academically than students who are put in ESL classes" (again this is only true in schools with few ELLs) (Zehr, p. 1). A positive impact vis-a-vis the benefits of SIOP for non-ELL teachers is that the SIOP protocol helps "distinguish teachers" (who work with the program) from other teachers with no experience in SIOP (ARCC).
THREE: How has the gifted educational movement impacted the evolution of curriculum development? Address both negative and positive impacts…provide examples.
For one thing, educators have seen the need to develop curriculum specific to the needs of gifted students. Curriculum for gifted students offers "…content related to broad-based issues and themes" and it "focuses on cross-disciplinary concepts" while exposing students to "multiple perspectives and domains of inquiry" (Hockett, 407). By exposing bright / gifted learners to many perspectives the curriculum in effect is the future for learning while the NCLB "teach to the test" concept reflects the past. Curricula for bright students attempts to "…accommodate the development of advanced understanding, and therefore," students learn that complex issues are simply there to be understood and problems are there to be solved (Hockett, 408).
Can the positives from curriculum developed for gifted students spill over to general education-related curriculum? On page 413 Hockett writes that curriculum experts "endorse meaningful outcomes" for both gifted and general education. General education curriculum leaders view expertise as "…developmental and progressive," and gifted curriculum leaders see expertise as a way to develop talent (Hockett, 413). Both agree that the goal should be for students to acquire "…deep or advanced understanding" and both agree that curriculum should be "flexible" (Hockett, 413).
You’re 82% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.