How teachers evaluate a curriculum developed in-house: Focused interviews with six teachers

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/282194
Title:
How teachers evaluate a curriculum developed in-house: Focused interviews with six teachers
Author:
Uecker, Jeffrey Hunter, 1950-
Issue Date:
1996
Publisher:
The University of Arizona.
Rights:
Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Abstract:
Over the years the field of evaluation has developed many models for evaluating curricula. These models suggest that teachers ought to be concerned about testing and measurement, technical quality, objectives, equity, and the views of stakeholders (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). The curriculum and teacher change literatures (Doyle & Ponder, 1977; Fullan, 1982; Hawthorne, 1992), on the other hand, have suggested that teachers are guided by a different set of concerns: student learning and classroom management, the amount of work involved, the pressure and support provided, the fit of the new curriculum with the teacher's system of beliefs, its clarity and explicitness, and so forth. Those studies, however, were based on curriculum innovations which were developed outside the school and implemented from the top-down. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the evaluative framework teachers used when they evaluated a curriculum developed within their own department. Focused interviews were conducted with six high school mathematics teachers. The teachers had been involved to varying degrees in the development of their own Pre-algebra course in which they replaced the textbook with an activity-based curriculum. The study found that the teachers, in general, considered those criteria suggested by the change literature to be of greater importance for evaluation than those suggested by the evaluation literature. The study also found that the teachers' views of the importance of the individual evaluation criteria was not uniform, but that the teachers' views were mediated by the degree to which they had participated in the development of the curriculum. A model of the teachers' evaluative framework was developed, but further research is needed to illuminate the role of the teacher participation. This study is of particular interest to those concerned with curriculum development, implementation, and evaluation.
Type:
text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
Keywords:
Education, Mathematics.; Education, Secondary.; Education, Curriculum and Instruction.
Degree Name:
Ed.D.
Degree Level:
doctoral
Degree Program:
Graduate College; Teaching and Teacher Education
Degree Grantor:
University of Arizona
Advisor:
Doyle, Walter

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.titleHow teachers evaluate a curriculum developed in-house: Focused interviews with six teachersen_US
dc.creatorUecker, Jeffrey Hunter, 1950-en_US
dc.contributor.authorUecker, Jeffrey Hunter, 1950-en_US
dc.date.issued1996en_US
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.description.abstractOver the years the field of evaluation has developed many models for evaluating curricula. These models suggest that teachers ought to be concerned about testing and measurement, technical quality, objectives, equity, and the views of stakeholders (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). The curriculum and teacher change literatures (Doyle & Ponder, 1977; Fullan, 1982; Hawthorne, 1992), on the other hand, have suggested that teachers are guided by a different set of concerns: student learning and classroom management, the amount of work involved, the pressure and support provided, the fit of the new curriculum with the teacher's system of beliefs, its clarity and explicitness, and so forth. Those studies, however, were based on curriculum innovations which were developed outside the school and implemented from the top-down. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the evaluative framework teachers used when they evaluated a curriculum developed within their own department. Focused interviews were conducted with six high school mathematics teachers. The teachers had been involved to varying degrees in the development of their own Pre-algebra course in which they replaced the textbook with an activity-based curriculum. The study found that the teachers, in general, considered those criteria suggested by the change literature to be of greater importance for evaluation than those suggested by the evaluation literature. The study also found that the teachers' views of the importance of the individual evaluation criteria was not uniform, but that the teachers' views were mediated by the degree to which they had participated in the development of the curriculum. A model of the teachers' evaluative framework was developed, but further research is needed to illuminate the role of the teacher participation. This study is of particular interest to those concerned with curriculum development, implementation, and evaluation.en_US
dc.typetexten_US
dc.typeDissertation-Reproduction (electronic)en_US
dc.subjectEducation, Mathematics.en_US
dc.subjectEducation, Secondary.en_US
dc.subjectEducation, Curriculum and Instruction.en_US
thesis.degree.nameEd.D.en_US
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineTeaching and Teacher Educationen_US
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
dc.contributor.advisorDoyle, Walteren_US
dc.identifier.proquest9713448en_US
dc.identifier.bibrecord.b34463240en_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.