|
The real voyage of discovery
consists not in seeking new landscapes,
but in having new eyes.
--Marcel Proust
Curriculum Mapping Model |
Curriculum Mapping Focuses
Curriculum Mapping and Change |
The Curriculum Mapping Journey
The United States educational system is experiencing one of the
largest accountability movements in its history. Federal laws such
as No Child Left Behind; stakes testing; instruction based on best
practices; standards alignment … The list goes on and on!
There are a myriad of research-based frameworks
and models designed to help cultivate educational reform. Within
these frameworks and models there is the necessity to consider not
only what teachers are teaching, but more importantly, what
students are truly experiencing and learning. Curriculum
Mapping clearly addresses this requisite.
Curriculum Mapping Model
The current Curriculum Mapping model is based on
the work of Dr. Heidi Hayes Jacobs (1997). Udelhofen (2005) states
"…the concept of curriculum mapping originated in the 1980s with
the work of Fenwick English…" (xviii). Dr. Jacobs embraced and
enhanced the earlier work by adding a variety of teacher-driven
curriculum maps, horizontal and vertical alignments, cyclic
reviews, and professional curricular dialogue. Jacobs (2004)
states, "…curriculum maps have the potential to become the hub for
making decisions about teaching and learning. Focusing the barrage
of initiatives and demands on schools into a central database that
can be accessed from anywhere through the Internet can provide
relief … Mapping becomes an integrating force to address not only
curriculum issues, but also programmatic ones." (p.126).
Curriculum Mapping emphasizes the requisite that
teachers and administrators focus on the balance between what
really took place in individual classrooms with what was
individually or collaboratively planned. This data is measured in
real time: recorded by months or grading periods. Most types of
curriculum maps are recorded monthly. Teachers record what has
taken place, or is planned, individually at a school-site level
(Diary Map, Projected Map); collaboratively planned curriculum at
a school-site level (Consensus Map, oftentimes referred to as a
Core Map, Master Map, or Benchmark Map); or collaboratively
planned curriculum at a district level (Essential Map).
To gain
insight into gaps, absences, and repetitions in a school or
district's K-12 curriculum, it is critical to create quality maps.
During the initial learning-to-map-phase
the most commonly recorded data includes content, skills,
assessments, resources, and their alignment to one another other
and state (or other) standards. In subsequent and more advanced
phases of mapping, additional data such as evaluation processes, attachments of best-practice lesson plans and
activities, essential questions, and other curricular information is often included.
Curriculum maps are never considered "done." Curriculum Mapping does not perceive education
as a static environment since learning, and learning about
learning, is a continual process. As
long as teachers have new students, new classes, and new school
years, newly created and revised curriculum maps provide evidence
of a school or district's ongoing curriculum.
Curriculum maps are never used for teacher
evaluation or punitive damage. They are designed to provide
authentic evidence of what has happened or is being
planned within a school or a district. Encouraging individual and
collaborative renewing and re-visiting of data (curriculum maps
and other sources) through curricular dialogues is essential to
mapping and
becoming a thriving educational environment that continually improves student
learning.
Curriculum Mapping Focuses
Curriculum Mapping focuses on three Cs: Communication,
Curricular Dialogue, and Coherency.
Communication -- 21st Century
curriculum maps are most often developed and maintained using an
Internet-based commercial mapping system. This technological venue provides
teachers and administrators with easy access to both the planned
and actual horizontal (same grade level and/or same discipline)
and vertical (different grade levels and/or different disciplines)
curricula for present and past school years. The
commercial
systems' search features allow teachers to gain instant
information in regard to mapping data to aid in curricular
dialogue. This means and level of communication is unprecedented.
In the not-to-distant past data had to be printed out, copied,
distributed, and an in-person meeting held to view and discuss the
documents. Curriculum Mapping encourages innovation and thought about meeting
differently and in
new ways.
Curricular Dialogue -- Teachers take part in collegial
relationships wherein they make data-based decisions about
grade-level, cross-grade level, disciplinary, and cross-disciplinary curricula
and instructional practices. Teachers become Teacher Leaders.
Curriculum Mapping has two guiding principles: Jacobs (2004)
states that teachers and administrators must consider "…the empty
chair…" which represents all students in a given school or
district, and "…all work must focus on Johnny, and all comments
and questions are welcomed as long as they are in his best
interest" (p.2). Second, if it is in the students' best
interest to change, modify, stop, start, or maintain curriculum
practices, programs, and/or other related issues, there must be
data-based proof to do so (Jacobs, 2002). These two
principles are logical, rational, and well-founded. One may
consider them easy to implement, but oftentimes
proves difficult in practice. Barth (2006) refers to the
"…elephant in the classroom—the various forms of relationships
among adults within the schoolhouse might be categorized in four
ways: parallel play, adversarial relationships, congenial
relationships, and collegial relationships" (p.10). Not
surprising, the first three ways do not elicit vigorous curricular
dialogue. Barth contends "…empowerment, recognition, satisfaction,
and success in our work—all in scarce supply within our
schools—will never stem from going it alone … success comes only
from being an active participant within a masterful group—a group
of colleagues" (p.13). Therefore, it is of utmost importance to
provide teachers with ample professional development to
hone their skills in all facets of curriculum mapping and collegial, curricular dialogue. Allowing teachers
time to
build personal ownership in the mapping process empowers them,
and subsequently, improves student learning.
Coherency -- A combination of 21st
Century communication plus curricular dialogue eventually
equals curricular coherency. Many teachers are currently engaged in
what Dr. Jacobs (2001) refers to as "…treadmill teaching." Running
breathless on grade-level or content-area treadmills trying
desperately to get everything they believe needs to be taught,
taught. If teachers took the time to slow down their treadmills
and personally document and evaluate both the planned, and most
importantly, actual learning, they may well discover that they are
perpetuating a potentially incoherent curriculum. Curriculum
Mapping is designed to ask teachers to record, reflect on, study, and
revise their individual and corporate work. This cyclic endeavor
eventually leads a school or district to developing and
maintaining an aligned curriculum that makes sense to all—and
most importantly—to students!
Curriculum Mapping and Change
Curriculum Mapping necessitates that teachers play an
active role in making curricular decisions. Looking at this
historically, it is not the educational norm. Empowering teachers to become
Teacher Leaders is paramount, and a top priority when introducing
the concepts of Curriculum Mapping. Administration, as always,
plays a critical role in this endeavor. Lyle (2006), a Curriculum
Mapping Coordinator in Marion, Illinois, wrote an excellent article pertaining to the issue
of Curriculum Mapping, leadership, and change. Here is an excerpt:
Curriculum mapping involves a second-order change.
Marzano, R., Waters, T., and McNulty, B.A. (2005) state that
second-order change "…involves dramatic departures from the
expected, both in defining a given problem and in finding a
solution" (p. 66). Curriculum Mapping may be considered a
second-order change for our district because it challenges
the status quo of historical practices and therein may
result in resistance. However, it has the potential of
resulting in transformative learning. Weinbaum (2004, cited
Merzirow & Associates, 2001) in stating "…transformative
learning involves the process by which we revise or change
our fundamental assumptions, perspectives, and worldviews"
(p.16). Curriculum Mapping results in reflective practices
that expand teacher perspectives and responsibilities for
student learning from a micro to macro level. Jacobs (1997)
states
To make sense of our students' experiences over time,
we need two lenses: a zoom lens into this year's
curriculum for a particular grade and a wide-angle lens to
see the K-12 perspective. The classroom (or micro) level
is dependent on the site and district level (a macro
view). Though the micro and macro levels are connected
throughout a district, there is a conspicuous lack of
macro-level data for decision making. Yet we need that big
picture for each student's journey through his or her
years of learning. With data from curriculum mapping, as
school and its feeding and receiving sites can review and
revise the curriculum within a larger, much-needed
contest. Data on the curriculum map can be examined both
horizontally through the course of any one academic year
and vertically over the student's K-12 experience (pp. 3 -
4).
The data generated in curriculum maps can provide
information that enables teachers to identify and address
curricular gaps and repetitions. Curriculum Mapping is built
on a foundation of collaborative inquiry groups in which
"…teachers construct knowledge from questioning their own
practice and looking closely at their own students and their
work" as well as the relationship between individual
teacher's works in terms of the big picture of the student's
K-12 experience (Weinbaum, 2004, p. 18). Lambert (2003)
states "…schools in which staff members discuss student
learning outcomes during continuing professional dialogues
tend to reflect upon and improve practice as a result" (p.
54). The reflective process of Curriculum Mapping as well as
the variety of collaborative inquiry groups has the
potential of significantly impacting student achievement.
However Curriculum Mapping can not be sustained without the
proper leadership, support, and teacher "by-in." Effective
Curriculum Mapping requires nurturing, supporting, and
encouraging teacher leadership so that the impetus for
systemic change is fostered by a bottom-up approach rather
than a top-down system. Lambert (2003) suggests:
Directive or command-and-control behavior may get the
immediate task done, but it undermines the growth and
development of those who are subjected to it, diminishing
teacher leadership and the leadership capacity of the
school. Innovation, risk-taking, and real conversations
about teaching and learning are not to be found in schools
governed by directive principals. (p. 44)
Fostering teacher leadership, shared vision, and
"trusting" collaborative inquiry groups is the cornerstone
of a curriculum mapping initiative that results in
sustainable change. Barth (2001) notes that teacher leaders
often:
"…encounter resistance from fellow teachers" because
they "…violate the taboos of their school…" in that
"…principals lead; teachers teach. So it has been, and so
it shall be" or they may feel impeded by "…other teachers
and administrators who are threatened…" by the teacher
leader's passion and enthusiasm. (p. 446)
Curriculum Mapping results in a redefining of teacher and
administrator roles and responsibilities.
References:
Barth, R. S. (2001). Teacher Leader. Phi Delta Kappan,
82 (6), 443-449.
Jacobs, H.H. (1997). Mapping the big picture
integrating
curriculum and assessment K-12,
Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Lambert, L. (2003). Leadership capacity for lasting
school improvement, Alexandria, VA: Association
for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R.J., Waters, T, McNulty, B.A. (2005) School
leadership that works from research to results,
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum.
|
Critical to understanding Curriculum Mapping and
its collaborative design, one must recognize that mapping is not
an external program or process that "comes and then goes" in a few
years—it is an internal, interactive process that becomes a
natural component of a school or district's infrastructure. In an
interview for the Journal of Staff Development (Sparks, 1996),
Michael Fullen shared
People in schools should not take shortcuts in
their search for clarity and solutions. They need to engage with
all kinds of ideas to improve what they are doing, but not adopt
external programs that foster dependency … In my view, teaching
is an intellectual and scientific profession, as well as a moral
profession. That means that schools have to constantly process
knowledge about what works and that teachers have to see
themselves as scientists who continuously develop their
intellectual and investigative effectiveness … The cognitive
sciences teach us that if information is to become knowledge, a
social process is required. This makes great pedagogical sense.
Information stays as information until people work through it
together in solving problems and achieving goals ... Changing
the culture is even more important because it establishes norms
of continuous interaction. So, information becomes knowledge
through a social process, and knowledge becomes wisdom through
sustained interaction.
This connection between enabling teachers to
create quality data-based curriculum maps and using the maps for
curricular dialogue is critical for a successful Curriculum
Mapping initiative. Fowler Elementary School District, in Phoenix,
Arizona, has a district motto: Curriculum Mapping is not one
more thing on our plate—it is the plate! This motto is 100%
true, but this reality does take time (from my personal experience, up to
three years) to get the majority of teachers in a school or
district to cognitively and emotionally understand the complexity
of the processes and function in a vigorous, self-challenging manner.
The Curriculum Mapping Journey
Based on current educational demands, success is based on
measurable, improved student learning. Curriculum Mapping
addresses this concern, but goes much deeper. It travels to the
heart of our profession: caring about the journey a child takes
upon entering as a Kindergartener, exiting as a high-school
graduate, and enrolling in a higher-education learning environment
... To be successful for a lifetime: Prek-16+.
Be advised: Curriculum Mapping is not a quick fix. Curriculum
Mapping has a learning curve to it. For a time, your teachers will
be students. They must be afforded the cognitive processing time
needed to learn something new, and be well-supported throughout the
process. Some will learn faster than others; some will need more
support; and still others may refuse to learn. Just as
curriculum's root meaning is: a path taken in small steps, it is
important to allow teachers to likewise take small steps.
Learn as much as
you can about Curriculum Mapping by continuously reading, attending
conferences and networking to aid in developing your school or
district's strategic plans, realistic action plans, and short-term
goals.
Please use my website to help gain insight into the world of
Curriculum Mapping and support your present or future work. If you
would like to e-mail
me or call me to discuss questions or wonderments, please feel
free to do so at any time.
Happy Mapping!
References:
|
