Running head: VERT. CURRIC. ALIGN.

Vertical Curriculum Alignment

Erica Berry
The University of North Texas
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of
EDCI 5720
Dr. Frances van Tassell
June 17, 2013

VERT. CURRIC. ALIGNMENT

2
Vertical Alignment Narrative

In the creation of a vertical curriculum alignment, there are many steps, decisions and
brainstorming sessions involved. Our group included Emily Franda, Clarissa Figueroa, Sherrie
Beeson and myself. Our first step, as non-traditional teachers, was to find common ground and
pick a subject area. All of us had different areas of expertise, but none of us were in the
classroom utilizing these TEKS on an everyday basis. So we encountered two very large
problems right away. For one, we did not have a shared area of expertise, whether it was grade
levels or subject area, and we would all have to work with TEKS we were unfamiliar with. For
two, even once we picked our spotlighted TEKS, we had no obvious way of obtaining
information on how that particular set of TEKS are actually implemented in the classroom since
none of us worked in the classroom with these TEKS, nor did we know many people who did.
Already, we were anticipating a hassle, but we quickly came up with a game plan.
Day one consisted of a team meeting in which we decided to focus our vertical
curriculum alignment on math, since it is very objective and not as open to interpretation. We
picked the middle school grade levels sixth through eighth grade because our peers were already
doing elementary and high school grade levels. After looking through the TEKS objectives, we
chose measurement as our concentration. This part seemed easy compared to our next step. Our
group had to figure out a way to measure what middle school math teachers actually taught. We
decided to email around and ask if they followed the TEKS. The answers we received were
general and not reliable.
Our next team meeting we came up with a new method. We decided to use each of the
TEKS to create a question on SurveyMonkey.com. We used each TEK to find out how far up in
Blooms Taxonomy each teacher went. We then sent the survey link to teachers in both

VERT. CURRIC. ALIGNMENT

Clarissas and Sherries school. At their convenience, they could easily complete this link and
the results were sent to us immediately.
We divided up each of the graphs among us and got to work. I created the original
vertical alignment of the TEKS, Emily revised my graph to reflect the actual TEKS taught by
teachers, and Clarissa created a new graphic organizer with our recommended fixes for the
TEKS. Sherrie created our Prezi presentation. After adding our graphs to the already completed
Prezi, our group was able to finish.
On our first map, we created four columns representing the required Measurements and
Data with the first column as sixth grade objective 12, the next column as sixth grade objective
13, the third column seventh grade objective 12, and the fourth and last column as eighth grade
objective 11. There are five rows categorizing the different TEKS: numerical data in a graph,
graph data, mean graphed, categorical data, data variability, and populations. Through each
category, if it is aligned across the grade levels, rising in Blooms Taxonomy, they are then
colored according to how well it is aligned. Our table tells us that if it was addressed four times
across our column, it is colored green, three times it is colored yellow, two times it is colored
orange, and one time addressed across the grade levels, then it is colored red.
The second graph took the results from the teachers and changed the colors to represent
how many times it was actually taught. The TEKS were also either bolded, italicized or left in
normal font to represent how far in Blooms Taxonomy that the teachers went for each TEK.
Bold print meant that they went above apply, normal print meant that they were in the middle
range, under apply, and italicized print meant that they were only at the basic levels of Blooms
Taxonomy.

VERT. CURRIC. ALIGNMENT

The third, and final graph took our original chart and changed it to reflect our
recommendations for TEKS in the sixth through eighth grades. We combined the two objectives
(12 and 13) for sixth grade into one column, thus creating three columns instead of four. We also
merged the categorical rows to four instead of five. They now represent four categories:
numerical data in a graph, mean graphed, categorical data and populations, effectively removing
the data variability category. We also added two seventh grades TEKS which we wrote in order
to minimize the gaps for the seventh grade year. This effectively took care of the gap we found in
the seventh grade year for much of the TEKS in Measurements and Data. This changed the
recommended map colors to represent all green or yellow. The green or yellow still continues to
represent three or more skills addressed across the grades, and two or more skills addressed,
respectively.
Summarily, we can see there were a few gaps and redundancies that needed to be
addressed. First, the quick redundancy of having two separate objectives for sixth grade could
have been solved with merging the same wording into one: just by combining the words
represent and interpret. We combined the categorical rows of populations and data variability,
easily reducing a gap. The other gaps we resolved by writing in two TEKS that would move
seventh graders further along in Blooms Taxonomy. One TEK was written for categorical data
and the other for graph data.
After asking our teachers for input (via SurveyMonkey.com) regarding improvements for
designing and implementing the required curriculum, we found that they simply needed more
time. In order to make sure students soak in this knowledge in the best possible way, and retain it
for further use in the subsequent years of their education and even careers, more constructionist
techniques needed to be used. If these constructivist techniques are to be utilized, then more time

VERT. CURRIC. ALIGNMENT

is needed for an effective delivery of all of the required TEKS to an acceptable level in Blooms
Taxonomy.