Reaching Curriculum Mapping Sustainability Through Consistency and Flexibility

By LASZLO ILYES: Seattle Aquarium Heidi Hayes Jacobs’s Curriculum Mapping Model is a systemic-change model.  A learning organization must create its own framework based on the model. While there are protocols and consistencies involved in mapping, there are many aspects that necessitate flexibility. Therefore, there are times when implementing a mapping initiative may feel like you trying to shake hands with an octopus.

By establishing expected consistencies as well as preparing for flexibilities, the octopus hand-shaking—while frustrating—can be manageable when those responsible for the initiative’s implementation are transparent and continually addressing questions as they arise. An excellent example of staying true to the intent of curriculum mapping while also making mapping their own is the Franklin Northeast Supervisory Union (FNESU) district.

In a rural area of upstate Vermont, five towns/districts function as one district. Mary Helen Hart, the current Curriculum and Grant Coordinator began a curriculum-mapping prologue almost three years ago by establishing a CM Cabinet/Council of teachers and administrators across the union districts. After multiple trainings, the CM Cabinet/Council members collaboratively developed an implementation plan (and continually revisit the plan for potential revisions) based on the district’s previous curriculum work and the desire to establish curriculum mapping as the hub for both the district and individual schools’ on-going learning and teaching conversations and collaborations.  

I recommend reading FNESU’s Winter Newsletter to gain insight into how one district, in midst of establishing curriculum mapping as the ongoing framework for their curriculum work, is finding a way to address the needs of their dynamic, multi-faceted mapping initiative.