DOCUMENT RESUME ED 331 153 EA 022 899 AUTHOR Bowers, Bruce TITLE Teacher Involvement in Curriculum Development. INSTITUTION ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, Eugene, Oreg.; National Association of Elementary School Principals, Alexandria, VA. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 91 CONTRACT OERI-R188062004 NOTE 5p. AVAILABLE FROM National Association of Elementary School Principals, 1615 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 ($2.50; quantity discounts). PUB TYPE Collected Works - Serials (022) -- Information Analyses - ERIC Clearinghouse Products (071) JOURNAL CIT Research Roundup; v7 n3 Spr 1991 EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Curriculum Design; *Curriculum Development; Curriculum Evaluat:..on; Elementary Secondary Education; *Instructional Development; *Participative Decision Making; Teacher Attitudes; Teacher Influence; Teacher Motivation; *Teacher Participation ABSTRACT Four recent journal articles and one meeting paper on teacher involvement in curriculum development are summarized in this research bulletin. Contents include "Motivating Teacher Involvement in Professional Growth Activities," by Ruth Wright; "Teacher Participation in Curriculum Development: What Status Does It Have?" by Jean Young; "The Locus of Curriculum Decision Making and Teachers' Perceptions of Their Own Attitudes and Behaviors Toward Curriculum Planning," by Richard Kimpston and Douglas Anderson; "The Supportiveness of the Principal in School-based Curriculum Development," by Laurie Brady; and "Curriculum Change from the Grass Roots," by David Martin and Philip Saif. Ruth Wright concludes that the most powerful motivators for teachers are intrinsic rather than extrinsic; seeing the results of their input is a significant reward. Jean Young also found that teachers involved in their own schools' curriculum plans were the most committed. That teachers are more responsive to district-level curriculum decision-making is the conclusion of the Kimpston and Anderson study. Other factors for successful teacher-influenced curriculum development include preparation for a long-term process and the vital importance of principal support, factors identified by Martin and Saif, and Brady, respectively. (LMI) **********************************************************************A Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ***************************************************** ***** ************* ,esearch VOLUME Z NUMBER 3 U 5, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SPRING 1991 Othce c Echicatronal Research and improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER IERIC, document has been reproduced reCeivee Iron, the person or orgonastion ortgirtating $t ROUNDUP r Mmor changes have won macre to rrnprowe reproduction ouahty Points 0 v4*0 opmons awed fl III4 OCC u mewl tIO net necelSar,ty litOresent OE Fh pOSrtron or ponce NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS Teacher Involvement -PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY in Curriculum Development TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES By Bruce Bowers INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) What are some of the variables influencing teacher Historically school teachers have been viewed as rul- ers of their own tiny fiefdoms, their classrooms, and involvement in curriculum development, and how is that as having little or no contact with anyone but their students. involvement translated into successful implementation in In recent decades, however. this "isolationist" perspective the classroom? has gradually been diminished, largely because of the Ruth Wright concludes that the most powerful moti- proliferation of teacher committees generated by collec- vators for teachers are intrinsic rather than extrinsic. Extra tive bargaining agreements between teacher unions and pay or release time for participation in curriculum com- mittees is viewed favorably by most teachers, but the school districts. Such agreement% have altered the overall climate of educational decision-making: teachers have expectation that their involvement will result in a signifi- emerged from the classroom to collaborate with their cant improvement in the existing curriculum is more criti- colleagues and with administrators to influence a wide cal to continued teacher participation. range of educational polici,zs. Support for such a view is found in Jean Young's This trend in decision-making has been most obvious assessment of how Canadian teachers value their experi- in the area of curriculum. After all, teachers are the ence in curriculum development. Teachers working on ultimate arbiters of curriculum because they implement it. curriculum at the local level generally felt that the curriculu The question is, to what extent should they be involved in materials under development were likely to be usedin their the development of curriculum prior to its arrival in the schools and classrooms. classroom? Some argue that teachers are not trained to do Richard Kimpston and Douglas Anderson conclude. this, and, besides, their days are so filled with the nuts and however, that teachers are more likely to follow or attend to curriculum decisions made at the district level, as bolts of preparing lessons, teaching, and grading that they have little time or energy left for the painstaking effort opposed to the school or classroom level. The researchers required to develop new curricula. explain that teachers tend to respect a district's well- Those in favor of greater teacher involvement in crafted curriculum development program. When curricu- lum decisions emanate from the district, it curriculum development argue persuasively, however, that is usually to the extent teachers feel they own the curriculum, they because the district has historically placed a high priority will be more competent and enthusiastic about implement- on curriculum development. ing it. As for the problem of teachers being too busy, As for factors that influence successful implementa- proponents assert that extra time can, and is, being carved tion of a teacher-generated curriculum, Laurie Brady points out for teacher participation in school or district curriculum to the active support of the school principal as critical to committees. overall satisfaction with school-based curriculum devel- opment. In addition, say David Martin and Philip Saif, only by preparing for a "long haul" where years, not Prepared by ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, Univer. months, are spent on curriculum development can change sity of Oregon, which commissioned Bruce C. Bowers, Ph.D research analyst and writer. be successfully implemented in the school curriculum. COPY MAIM 2 FEST prime motivators for teacher involvement in curriculum development. (1) Wright, Ruth. "Motivating Teacher involve- Many of Young's teachers, especially those doing The ment In Professional Growth Activities." of funds local committee work, seemed to resent the.lack (February 1985): 1-6. Canadian Administrator 24,5 teacher for release time or extra pay ft'r their work. One EJ 313 717. thought so few colleagues were involved in curriculum for it." committee work "because you're not getting paid What motivates teachers to go beyond the normal call of However, other teachers gave a different point of duty and become involved in "professional growth view, one more congruent with Wright's. One teacher activities"? Ruth Wright turns to the literature on expect- responded to the question of motivation by saying. "I was studies of motivation in ancy theory. which has its roots in going to mention the fi nancial reward, but I honestly industry. The basic premise of expectancy theory is that believe that it is insignificant for teachers. Otherwise, they people are motivated to act if they believe the outcome will wouldn't be teaching." be good. More support for Wright's findings was evident when Wright wanted to know what kinds of outcomes would the teachers were asked about potential use of the cur- motivate teachers to become involved in curriculum devel- riculum materials produced. Teachers at the provincial teacher opment. She asked 640 randomi y selected full-time level expressed almost universal skepticism that the mate- members of the New Brunswick (Canada) Teachers As- rials they were developing would in fact be used. They sociation to list in rank-order ten incentives for each of blamed a lack of resolve at the provincial administrative development. Wright seven different tasks in curriculum of level and teacher resistance at the local level. Their lack then determined the relative importance of each i ncenti ve motivation can be attributed to the more intrinsic factor of ranking of the ten top across tasksto produce an overall feeling unappreciated. incenti ves. But such was not the case among teachers working on The most startling finding was that only one of the ten curriculum committees within their own schools. Since incentives. "provision of materials for use in your school." with those committees had been formed specifically to deal could be considered an extrinsic reward. It was in sixth problems within their schools, the committee work had Conspicuously absent from the list were such place. immediate and concrete application in the classroom, a extrinsic reinforcers as extra pay, release time, or other form of intrinsic reinforcement. income-related items. Instead, at the top of the list of ten A recurring theme among the teachers in this study preferred items were ( I) opportunity to improve the existing by administrators for was the perceived lack of support curriculum, (2) increased effectiveness as a teacher. (3) professional growth activities generally. As one teacher fmling that one's contributions and suggestions are help- noted, -That's always a problem in education.., the reluc- ful. and (4) satisfaction from participating in decision- professional devel- tance to actually give time or recognize making that affects one's own work. opment." From these findings Wright concludes that, in order Young also poses what she considers the three most for administrators to motivate teachers to become involved critical questions principals must ask themselves when in curriculum development, they must convince teachers they begin to assess the potential for teacher involvement that their involvement will make a significant and recog- in curriculum development: nized contribution to the educational development of To what extent do they perceive the teacher's role children. By demonstrating that teacher participation is I . genuinely sought and by assuring teachers that the results of their efforts will be implemented in their classrooms, administrators can obtain strong teacher support for, and About ERIC The Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC' is a participation in, curriculum development. national information system operated by the Office of Educa- tional Research and Improvement (OERI). ERIC seives educators by disseminating research resifts and other resource information that can be used in developing more effective (2) Young, Jean, "Teacher Participation In educational programs. Curriculum Development: What Status Does It The ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, one of several such units in the system, was established at the Have?" Journal of Curriculum and Supervision 3, University of Oregon in 1966. 1988): 109-21. EJ 363 405. 2 (Winter This publication was prepared by the Clearinghouse with w-Unerd of Education, under funding from OERI, contract no. OERI-RINO. The opinions expressed in this Young interviewed thirty-one full-time teachers in the of repwl do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies province of Alberta. Canada, who were heavily involved in NAESP or the Department of Education. No federal funds were used in the printing of this publk:ation. curriculum committee work: fifteen at the local level and sixteen at the provincial level. On the surface her findings LER= Cleartnpeuse on Educational Management, occasionally contradict those of Wright, who concluded University of Oregon, 1787 Agate SI., Eugene, Oregon 97403. 2 that intrinsic rather than extrinsic incentives were the extending beyond it? as confined to the classroom or a of the devel- (4) Brady, Laurie. "The Supportiveness 2. Do principals see participation in curriculum Develop- Principal in School-based Curriculum teachers to grow profession- opment as a desirable way for 17, 1 Journal of Curriculum Studies ment." ally? (January-March 1985): 95-97. EJ 319 061. 3. In what ways do principals' attitudes toward teacher feasi- participation in curriculum development affect the develop- In her analysis of school-based curriculum bility and quality of that participation? critical position of the ment. Laurie Brady highlights the New South school principal. She surveyed 277 teachers in school-based Wales, attempting to test the claim that (3) Klmpstom, Richard, and Douglas Anderson. in a supportive and curriculum development is not successful "The Locus of Curriculum Decision Making Teachers' Perceptions of Their Own Attitudes school climate. Description Brady used the Organizational Climate and Behaviors Toward Curriculum Planning." perceive school (Winter Questionnaire (OCDQ) to see how teachers 1, 2 Journal of Curriculum and Supervision and the organization, the behavior of the school principal, 1986): 100-10. EJ 331 287. the results with nature of staff interaction. She correlated of a school's other results obtained from separate measures Kimpstom and Anderson investigated the question of teacher curriculum decision-making. Finally she measured whether teachers' attitudes toward their school curriculum school-based satisfaction with different approaches to varied according to the locus of curriculum decision- making. Would it be different if that locus were at the curriculum development. behind Brady's results suggest that the key factor level? district level, rather than the school or classroom devel- teacher satisfaction with school-based curriculum Kimpston and Anderson used the Curriculum Decision- Where the school opment was the degree of principal support. Making Inventory (CDI) to classify fifty-seven supervi- principal focused more on school operations and They districts according to their toe us of decision making. satisfaction with curriculum sory responsibilities, teacher then employed a stratified random sampling strategy to involved development was low. But where the principal was select two districts from each of three classifications for an and professional welfare of the more with the personal indepth study, six disuicts in all. instructional staff, teacher satisfaction with curriculum Data were collected from superintendents, curriculum development was high. personnel, principals, and a random sample of teachers in given Further, the more supportive the principal seemed to all six districts. Most teachers in the six districts were curricular be, the more likely were the teachers to view the Teacher Self-Analysis Inventory (TSAI). which mea- teachers decisions as group-based. In a supportive climate, behavior toward their sures teachers perceptions of their individual teachers felt less were a more cohesive staff and schools' curricula, and the Curriculum Attitude Inventory development. isolated about their own roles in curriculth.: (CAI). which measures teacher attitudes toward curricu- earlier These findings reinforce the conclusions of an lum use and planning. pivotal Research Roundup (April 1990), which cited the Results suggest that when the district is the locus of individual" role of a "highly motivated, goal-oriented curriculum decision-making, teachers are likely to follow change in However. (usually the principal) in initiating fundamental the curriculum formulated for their district. when the school is the locus of curriculum decision- schools. making, teachers are less inclined to follow district formu- the lated curricula. And in schools where the classroom is (5) Martin, David, and Philip Saif. "Curriculum least locus of curriculum dedsion-making. teachers are Change from the Grass Roots." Paper pre- from likely to follow curriculum guidelines handed down for sented at the Annual Meeting of the Association the district. Supervision and Curriculum Development (Chi- Can these findings be made consistent with Young's ED 254 913. March 22-26, 1985). cago, IL, respond to conclusion that teachers are more likely to closer curricula developed within their own school? A "The office shelves of school administrators and the observation of the districts examined in Kimpston and bottom drawers of teachers' desks are strewn with unused Anderson's sample reveals why, in some districts, teachers guides in- and dust-covered copies of 'new' curriculum district-initiated curricula. In the are more likely to respect have so tended to truly change school programs. Why decision-making was at the two districts where the locus of inglorious ends after many paper products come to such curriculum district level, there existed well-established apparently so much hard work of well-meaning curriculum development programs having their own directors. The this change agents?" Martin and Saif attempt to answer authors say that in these two districts "curriculum concerns question by pointing to the one factor that may make the importance and visibility were raised to a greater level of difference: teacher "ownership" of that curriculum. than was the case in the remaining four districts." 4 How is such ownership achieved? Martin and Sail 3. Forming subcommittees to write prerequisites and argue that it is not through a -traditional" approach to activities and to select materials and evaluation methods curriculum development, in which the superintendent (or 4. Obtaining feedback, not only from teachers but also principal, at the school level) orchestrates the entire effort. from cmisultants ar-.1 from the community They favor a "grass roots approach," in which all faculty 5. Pilot-testing the curriculum members are involved in the curriculum. In their version, 6. Revising the curriculum based upon the pilot testing. not all teachers, but a large enough number of teachers are 7. Conducting a final evaluation of the curriculum involved so that the staff in gemsal has a sense of ownership 8. Implementing the curriculum on a school- or dis- of the developing curriculum. trict-wide basis Beyond this, the curriculum must be developed in a The entire development may take as long as several systematic and pervasive way. That is, it is more likely to years. However, rather than the traditional, top-down ap- be adopted if the development follows this series of critical proach. Martin and Saif suggest that the bottom-up in- steps: volvement of a large and representative number of teachers 1. Identifying the needed change in a carefully structured, incremental process is more likely 2. Forming a committee to write the rationale and to produce a well-regarded curriculum. objecti. vs NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF Teacher Involvement ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS in Curriculum Development 1615 Duke Street Alexandria, Virginia 22314 Research Roundup, Vol. 7, No, 3, Spring 1991 (ISSN 87552590) -