There are many frames that affect the curriculum in a district. I find that a major issue in my district is the physical frames of the classroom; we just shifted the whole school around trying to accommodate the growth of the district. We still have class sizes averaging around 28 students, in a school built when 15 in a class was huge. Not only are the classroom small but the technology is lacking as well our students are not exposed to a decent computer until about the fourth grade. Not only is that a major concern within my district, but I would say that we face the personal frames as well. As my own children attend these schools they are being taught by the same teacher that taught their father in the first and second grades. These are great teacher but they have a hard times adapting to new curriculums and ideas when Posner stated the following it just jumped out to me because this is such an issue in our district “in extreme cases, teacher totally reject a new curriculum that is inconsistent or accept one wholesale that is consistent with most of their beliefs.—- Any curriculum that teacher cannot readily adapt , they regard as “impractical”. If I could receive a dollars for every time I am asked by the community why we are using dittos made in the seventies I would be rich. The school adopted a new reading program but the teacher did not adapt it. This caused major conflict within the grade levels and the district. I love and appreciate these well experienced teacher but we all need to work together for the greater good of the students, but not adapting to the curriculm we are creating gapes in our student bodies education.
Wow, it would be interesting to know which state.district you are in because this situation seems really sad. There is a question that needs to be honestly asked by everyone and that is, "What is best for the students?" It appears that veteran teachers are not willing to change their teaching techniques and try a new one even after it has been adopted. And I'm amazed at the fact that students are not exposed to computer technology until 4th grade. As fast as technology is changing, if and when your school gets up to speed with the minimal basics; computers will be outdated. I'm guessing that these students are getting the advanced technologies at home. We start computer lab at Kindergarten and they get it 30 min. a week as a special.
I have the same issue in my school when a lot of the more experienced teachers didn't want to implement new curriculum because it wasn't what they were use to. The were always the negative people at the trainings who would complain about having to be there, not be paying attention, making it difficult for the rest of us to get everything we could out of the training. I quickly learned to avoid sitting next to them during any meeting/training. To start with I would try to show them how they could easily implement the new curriculum into their classroom for the benefit of their students. They would continue to argue so I just moved on.
I personally related to the concern made regarding the personal frames as well. Change is hard for many people; however when it is in the best interest students we need to do what is best for the kids. I have experienced veterans in the profession that are like that. For example, we have one (at least) teacher in the district who refuses to use technology (classroom computers, overhead, projectors, document cameras, smart boards, etc). I don’t blame the teacher, because the district should not allow this to take place when it negatively affects the students. I feel that many of these frames fall under multiple frames; it’s like a knot that is hard to unravel.
Tiffany Laskowski
"There is nothing so unequal as the equal treatment of unequals"
There are many frames with which I have come into contact with and not even realized it. The first that I would like to touch upon is the way that I teach and what it looks like at my school. I would say overall teachers are very traditional in their approach, and this is somewhat upsetting. We all know it is wrong, and we have all had trainings on what we should really be doing, but everyone is so concerned with standardized testing and classroom management that they are afraid to do anything different. In the future our administration has made it a priority to use different techniques more in accordance with experimental and constructivist approaches. We feel as a school that our students are not receiving the depth that they should and that these approaches will help us with our AIMS scores and graduation rates.
Another main idea discussed in the article is meaning oriented curriculum. I cannot stress how many times I have changed a given word math problem to fit within my students boundaries. Math is scary enough as it is, and then you try to make the students do a word problem, the students shut down. Letting in concepts that are familiar to them it gives the students meaning and relevance that will make them want to work for you. I was surprised this last year when I had written into my curriculum problems that related to them and how eager they were to answer those, compared to problems that were only simple algebraic equations.
The last frame I would like to discuss is the multicultural one. I think within every school this frame is so important. With all these students coming in with different backgrounds, ethnicities, religions, and etc, it is so important to find a way to relate to them as a whole. The article went on to say how different research has shown that certain races respond better to different techniques. I know this to be true but I have never really realized how much of an impact it made with my students and how they responded. One other topic that goes along with this one I think is the community, because these are the people that affect your students outside of the classroom and affect their culture.
Meaning oriented curriculum is so important, and I try incorporate this as often as possible in my lessons. I love the idea of making math word problems relevant. My students get a kick out of solving problems with their names in the problem. This simple change does not destract from the main idea of the lesson. They are still learning the math concept, but it is more meaningful when they can relate to the problem.
I completely agree with you about the word problems. Word problems are daunting for the students since they require a little more brainpower. Students are used to just plugging things into a formula and getting a solution right away; this usually doesn’t happen with word problems since they usually take multiple steps. I think word problems provide a meaning oriented curriculum for math, but it does take a lot of effort on the teacher’s part to incorporate these. I know I could definitely do a better job at incorporating word problems. But then again, we are also stuck with time constraints. It’s a vicious cycle.
Amanda - I remember experiencing similar frustrations when I was teaching. I would find myself handing out vocabulary packets, worksheets, etc. that I knew where not helpful or stimulating. I knew that there were better ways to teach, but sometimes I would still put together lessons that I knew were no good. You said "we all know it is wrong." I remember having this exact feeling. As I reflect, I think that is it important to look at the system as a whole. What forces caused us as teachers to teach in this way?
Yes teachers who've been doing the same thing for years because it "works" have difficulty moving into new curriculum (Time Frame). They like the fact that their year is planned for the fall when it is May. They choose not to use the Smartboard, Airliner or Docu-camera because the overhead works just fine. This causes problems with other teachers (Personal Frame) who choose to "follow the rules/norm" and adapt to new curriculum or technology, even if they know that the students don't have computers at home, Internet access or cellular phones because they realize that the world is going technical, so the teacher better advance as well.
Cultural Frame-teachers who value all students tend to choose literature that all students can appreciate or relate to. As a World Literature teacher, I am sure to cover a wide-variety of authors so students can feel appreciated/valued while reading or learning from that author. I do not tell students “ok because we have an African American student in this class, we will read from an African American author today.” I just survey the class (look to see what is represented) and add materials or take away materials as necessary.
In regards to Perspectives on Curriculum Implementation, I am a Traditional Teacher who struggles with keeping students engaged. My teacher friend across the hall who is an Experiential Teacher has students in the hallway working in small groups every day. Her students are always working on a unit project-Romeo and Juliet play production with set building, acting and directing. They are working on Nuremberg Trials, etc. I am amazed at the “productions” and her lack of planning and her easy grading, but I am appalled that the students seem to work on 4 units a year. Yes they may seem happy and know those areas of content, but they are missing so much. I would like to balance between the two, although it is difficult when students fail to complete the work that is required to move into groups. I’d like to know if her students test higher than mine. She feels challenged to fit grammar and writing into her curriculum while I am challenging with creating enjoyable lessons.
I know that I would love to have my year already planned out but I know that it I want to do what is best for my students I have to be flexible. I have to give them time when they need it, move faster at some points, but always make the curriculum relevent for my students. Since my students change from year to year, my planning has to change with it.
Poser’s “frames” described many of the issues that we have to face as educators. I could definitely related to a majority of frames that he had mentioned. The temporal frame is something that I struggle with everyday in terms of curriculum. There is so much material that we have to cover in our math classes and I always feel like there is not enough time. I would definitely love to go slow and have the students really master the concepts, but with so much to cover, it becomes very difficult to accomplish that. I also feel that I do not have enough time to create outstanding lessons for my students since there is so much we are asked to do as teachers.
The physical frame is also something that I had encountered in my classroom. There is definitely not enough space in my classroom for all the students that I have. It becomes uncomfortable in my classroom. It also becomes difficult to do group activities and maneuver around the classroom. With our class sizes increases and our facilities staying the same, this issue is just going to get worse. This leads to the economic frame since more money could create more classrooms to accommodate our growing class sizes.
We have already touched upon the AIMS test during our discussions, but state testing is another frame that we are stuck dealing with. There is such a large emphasis placed on the state testing. Because of this, I feel the students are put at a disadvantage. The time that we spend getting prepared for the test could be better spent on creating more meaningful lessons.
I think all of these frames are issues that educators have faced for many years and will continue to face for many years to come. As much as we would love to have a more meaningful curriculum, there are so many factors that get in the way of that. If we had more resources available, we could definitely be providing better, more meaningful, lessons. I like to think that I do a decent job of juggling everything and giving my students the best that I can offer with what I am given.
Those are the frames that I have come in contact with the most too. Being an elementary teacher, I feel like there is neverenough time to teacher all the standards in all the subjects, especially since i need to have them all taught before the AIMS test almost two months before the end of school. We also began to implement district wide quartely tests. Between the state, the district, and any tests that I may have to give, I felt like my kids did nothing but testing. I think teachers have to figure out ways to make these frames work in their favor somehow.
George Posner's "frames" include the physical, cultural, temporal, economic, organizational, political-legal, and personal considerations that framework a "valid and credible" curriculum. The curriculum is a working document and it is not set in stone. Students are very diverse, and the curriculum is a guide for high quality learning. It is not something that is thrown together and utilized. Just like in the writing process of a paper, there are many revisions and factors that come into play before the curriculum can be published operational.
This year, our curriculum guide went through a lot of revisions. The basis for the curriculum was the Arizona State Standards. The basic components of the curriculum itself was the Arizona State Standards, Safety Net standards (Top ten safety net standards that need to mastered by students by the end of the school year), and the curriculum map. The curriculum map was divided into quarters with the standards divided up into levels of importance, related areas, and or non-connections. Other parts were material correlations, student objectives, and academic vocabulary. On my first day on the job, they handed me student textbooks and materials, manipulatives, supplies, class roster, and a curriculum guide. I opened the binder labeled 'Curriculum Guide.' The school improvement coordinator instructed me to follow the guide verbatim. Therefore, that is what I did, which was a big mistake. The content that was suppose to be taught was way above the level of my students. I began to question the curriculum. What guidelines were followed in order to create the curriculum? Was student demogaphics used for decision making of content? However, I just received no answers. I was told to teach the content and make sure students master each and every one. Analyzing the preassessments of students for the beginning of the year, I knew I couldn't teach the content that was suppose to be taught from the curriculum. I had a difficult time trying to teach content to mastery and go through each one by the end of the school year, or before the state mandated test, AIMS. Everyday, I would wonder, why are they forcing teaching of content that is way above student level. I would say 80% of students were not at grade level academically. "Not only must the teacher cover the breadth of the curriculum, but also the students must learn the material at least at some minimal level of mastery or depth. These two tasks present a dilemma facing every teacher."
In the article, the factors utilized for curriculum change gives a in depth way of thinking critically about the hows, the whys, the when, the where, and the what of teaching and learning. The physical frame which is the natural environment, the school, classroom, materials, equipment, and school. This plays a major factor with the curriculum in that the physical environment for the student has to be safe, confortable, and enriching; if that is not in place, there is no shelter from outside chaos. The political-legal frame is the state requirements that schools are bound to. "As might be expected, the greater the pressure for accountability, the greater the influence of the test." Accountability is the name of the game, curriculum has to match the content standards, and schools meeting standards through state mandated assessments. The organization frame is the district- and state-level decision that influence the classrooom. This frame includes everyone working collaboratively to accomplish goals or objectives of the curriculum. Personal frames are the characteristics of the teachers, students, administrators, cutodians, and other support staff. Everyone contributes to the implementation of the curriculum. We work together to enhance high level of student learning. Economic frame is the costs and benefits of curriculum. "It takes a greate deal of time, money, and energy to maintain any organization." Cultural frame signifies school culture and community culture which both affect curriculum. Culture has it's own set of values and beliefs and putting that into play with curriculum creates a set of beliefs and values that are implemented into the curriculum.
There are many issues that are faced on a daily basis in the educational setting, one of which is the curriculum. Having set frames to follow or guidelines to consider only create boundless opportunities to enhance collaboration, increase knowledge, and strive for a more meaningful education for students.
Natasha,
You said that your curriculum went through a lot of changes that matched the AZ State Standards. I am assuming that your school district was all ready using the State Standards which has been around for years. I am not familiar with the Safety Net Standards. Teachers do get the worse of everything. Your example was an indication of decisions made and then given to the teachers to apply, without considering the reality that maybe this is not possible to apply and do. When is the political-legal frame going to match with the other frames?
I really enjoyed reading to and relating to the different frames mentioned by Posner. I believe that all of us can relate to each frame in some sense. The ones that I most related to include the physical frame, the economic frame, and the time frame.
In my kindergarten classroom the physical frame has a big effect. When you try to cram too many tables into a classroom with too many little bodies it leaves little room for them to explore and have some free play time or group time that is needed at this age level. So, either we need smaller class sizes or larger classrooms and I don't see either of those happening any time soon. I also see a lack of materials such as manipulatives that would greatly enhance the teaching of the standards I'm supposed to be teaching. This also leads to the economic frame. The past two years our administrator has told us that we have 0% soft capital which means that we would not be able to order the K-3 reading workbooks that are needed for instruction and practice in our reading program. Fortunately he has come up with enough money each year to order them for K-1. But our math workbooks have not been ordered for the past 3 years or so.
The time frame affects me in teaching the standards to mastery. It is the whole depth vs. breadth scenario. I don't have the time to teach EVERY student to mastery in every subject so I try to make time to work with them individually to get them to benchmark.
In relation to the curriculum one of the reasons I love teaching Kindergarten is that I can use so many hands on things to help them to learn the standards that need to be learned. I also try to relate as much as I can to their previous knowledge and make a connection there. I love teachers who come up with new ideas for how to teach the same things every year. I hope I won't get into a rut of teaching the same lessons every year. But, you have to hit a balance and use what works every year. This year we are the first ones to implement the national standards at our grade level. We have already looked at and mapped out the math standards but haven't seen the final reading standards. It will be interesting to see how they are different that our Arizona standards.
Time, there never is enough time. My class periods are forty five minuets, by the time the students have gotten to the seat and I begin the lesson class is really forty minuets. I have to crunch in the entire curriculum from bell to bell. My colleagues and I have to fight in the standards and prepare our students for the state test in a time period that never seems long enough.
I think the Temporal frame is just a given. I don’t think there is a teacher who I have ever talked to who said they had enough time. Between planning, teaching, grading, etc. teachers just don’t have the time they need. If I’ve noticed anything since I have been staying home, it’s a realization of the fact that I was at the school for 10-12 hours a day which is ridiculous. As a teacher, I enjoyed being able to make my schedule of when I was going to each subject during the day. The school then decided that grade level need to have blocks of time for reading/writing and math. They told us the time of day that we had to teach the subject but they didn’t make it an uninterrupted time, in fact we ended up with many assemblies and such during that time.
The political-legal frame affects all of us who teach in Arizona. As the reading mentioned, once a state has mandates a test to be taken to hold schools, teachers, and students accountable, all the focus shifts to the test, not the best teaching practices. This also ends up tying into the standards that a state has chosen which in many districts ends up deciding the curriculum that they choose.
Posner discusses the frames that will limit the curriculum. One frame that I struggle with as a math teacher is the mastery/coverage frame or the frame of time. In mathematics there are a lot of standards to cover. In fact there are too many stadards to teach before the AIMS test comes. At this point the teacher must decide which standards to address. I don't feel that there is enough time to develop mastery of all of the standards that appear on the AIMS test. Students are expected to master a broad range of math concepts and in so doing they can not master them because their are too many. It is interesting to see that in the US math curriculum students will often spend time on standards in multiple grades. For example, with the standard of fractions students begin learning these around the 4th grade and are still spending time with fractions in the 8th grade. They are not given time to master the concept so they are forced to return to it in other grades.
