Curriculum Evaluation

When I hear the term curriculum evaluation, I instantly think about the
content/standards that have been set in place and that those standards need to be
evaluated. I can only imagine the amount of questions that arise when evaluating
those standards that are set in place and that have been in place for several years. A
more technical definition for curriculum evaluation would be the assessment of the
merit and worth of a program of studies, a field of study, or a course of study
(Glatthorn, Boschee, Whitehead, and Boschee, 2012, p. 357). Glatthorn et al. (2012)
describe merit to be the intrinsic value of an entity and worth to be the value in a
specific context or application (p. 357). Curriculum evaluation is not the easiest
process and it doesn’t just happen overnight. It is a long process that has to be
carefully looked at in order for the outcome to benefit a majority. To determine the
merit and the worth there are several different models that can be used.
Two models I chose to take a closer look at were Bradley’s Effectiveness Model and
Stake’s Responsive Model. With Bradley’s Effectiveness Model, you are given the 10
indicators to help determine curriculum effectiveness at one’s school. These indicators
can help meet the needs of any school district and they can also focus in on specific
content area (Glatthorn et al., 2012, p. 359). I find the first two indicators in Bradley’s
model (vertical curriculum continuity and horizontal curriculum continuity) to be very
important when looking at the curriculum and the overall goals. It is important for me
as a teacher to know what my students have learned in previous grades and what I am
setting them up for in future grades. It is also nice to know when moving schools
within the same district the standards will still align and your child shouldn’t be too
far behind and too far ahead. In Stake’s Responsive Model, there is a large interactive
component that involves the people and/or community that is being affected by the
changing curriculum (Glatthorn et al., 2012, p. 362). Robert Stake (1983) stated that
his evaluation model is based on what people naturally do, they observe and react.
One way that Bradley and Stake’s models are similar is that they both have set
objectives that they are looking for, but with Bradley’s they are already set in stone
(Glatthorn et al., 2012, p. 359-360) and with Stake’s the evaluator will meet with the
audience to find out what is of value to them (Stake, 1983). In Stake’s model, the
audience is closely involved throughout the evaluation to make sure their needs are
met. In Bradley’s model the indicators are noted (yes or no) and if something is
missing suggestions are given to make sure that indicator is met. The indicators aren’t
specifically tailored to one school setting and the information isn’t as meaningful,
where as in Stake’s method it is. Neither one of the models is completely right nor
wrong; each have powerful components that are beneficial to curriculum evaluation.
After looking closer at the two models, I find that Stake’s Responsive Model would
be more effective in evaluation curriculum with the student’s best interest in mind.
The evaluator is able to meet with staff to get their perspective on the evaluation and
the evaluator is able to identify real issues and collect desired data. I feel as if Stake’s
model aligns similarly with creating and using rubrics. William (2011) states that in a
study done by Barbara White and John Frederiksen, rubrics were shared with students
and the students were given time to think through with others what the rubrics might
mean in practice and how can be applied to their own work (p. 59). The students were
taking in the learning intentions so they were able to apply it to their own work. In
Stake’s method the evaluator is developing plans after the evaluation so teachers/staff
are able to take those plans and take in what has been changed. Brookhart (2013) also
believes that students should be given a rubric ahead of time to familiarize themselves
with what is being evaluated (p. 95). This allows the teacher to be responsive in what
is unclear to his/her students. While curriculum evaluation can be daunting topic,
teachers can do their own evaluation of how they present the given curriculum to their
students. Having open communication is a reoccurring theme within Stake’s model
and rubric assessment. It is important to make our students feel like they are being
heard, just as Stake’s model outlines.