some more thoughts about my model....

I've been thinking about my model this past week as I've been sharing it with others and trying to explain it to them. A lot of people have commented that they like the overall model because of its simplicity and the fact that the name helps make the parts easier to remember. I still wonder about the evaluation aspect of it, but keep going back to liking how I've depicted it here. I don't think evaluation should only inform the "input," but all parts of my model.

I've also been thinking about the pieces of my model and how they're represented. I still am happy with how they've turned out, as I think they've done a decent job of explaining contextual factors that need to be considered during the entire process. I shared my model with a senior doctoral student, and felt comfortable in my ability to explain it to her. She noted that the context is really important to my model, and that I was able to show parts that an outsider might not normally think of when creating a K-12 ELA curriculum. I also shared my model with someone with no interest in ID whatsoever, my husband. Although he wasn't able to offer the insight that my classmates might have on the product, he was able to tell me that the model made sense to him, and seems like a solid progression through the stages. (He also does not have any K-12 experience, so explanation of the context was also important here.)

Although it's still a novice model, I'm happy that I can share what I've created with an IDD&E student who's been in the program for years, someone completely outside of the field, and my classmates, and it seems to make sense to everyone. I like that my model is a simple depiction overall that can be fairly easily understood at first glance, and that a person's understanding of it seems to increase with explanation of each part. It makes sense to me; always good for it to make sense to others, too.

Complete ABCDE model as of 4-14-10

I uploaded the entire package to scribd, so you can look at the overall model and then the pieces in sequence. The fonts got changed slightly from the PDFs I posted earlier, but otherwise the diagrams are intact. Click below to view.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29903680/Full-ABCDE-Model-041410

The "E" in my ABCDE model

Yay! Last piece!

The "E" in my ABCDE model is Evaluation. In my "big-picture" model, I drew a dotted line on an arrow that encircled all components of my model. I think that evaluation is needed in all parts. Mostly, this is formative, but in some cases, it is summative. I decided to create a table explaining how each piece has evaluation incorporated into it.

Click on the picture to make it larger. The diagrams for A, B, C, D, and the entire model are all available in previous posts.

The "D" in my ABCDE model

The "D" in my ABCDE model is for both design and development. These work together with change in a rapid prototyping fashion. I chose a rapid prototyping model because district resources in terms of time and money for the Agents creating the curriculum is usually limited. The goal is to create a curriculum that is being reviewed and "tested" as it's being created, in lieu of developing a full model, even for small-scale pilot testing.

As with my other diagrams, click on the image to enlarge. Representations of A, B, and C are all in earlier posts, as well as a depiction of the entire ABCDE model.

The "C" in my ABCDE model

The "C" in my ABCDE model for K-12 ELA curriculum development stands for Change. Communication is vital to this part of my model. I tried to think of how other models showing communication (such as the Gentry Instructional Product Development and Management (IPDM) model (1994; in Gustafson & Branch, 2002, p. 50). However, I know that some of the communication is linear and top-down (like when it is initially decided that a curriculum needs to be created), and other times there are groups working somewhat equally within the subsystem to make it all happen. I chose to categorize my Agents by what they would be doing to implement the change needed with creating, implementing, and evaluating a new ELA curriculum.

The image can be clicked to enlarge it. Previous posts show my diagrams for A, B, and the entire ABCDE model, and they can also be reviewed to help understand this post.

The "A" in my ABCDE model

The "A" in my ABCDE model for K-12 curriculum development represents the agents that are responsible for this system-wide change. There is definitely a hierarchy that exists for these agents in terms of what I'm calling "political power," yet those who will be making the change happen through creation, implementation, and evaluation have just as much, if not more, "change power." I will likely identify who possible agents for change specific to this curriculum are within my model, although the individuals selected may vary from task to task. Color coding who is responsible for what for each stage of ABCDE may be useful in helping to determine/demonstrate who does what and where.

As with my overall ABCDE model, you can click on this image to make it bigger.

Prototype of the ABCDE Model

Based on feedback from Jerry, I've revised my overall model. I still plan on creating components for each part, but this is my overarching plan. I'm not sure how to indicate that evaluation encompasses all parts, other than to draw a big circle around it all. Hey, it's a start.
(You can click on the image to make it larger.)

Model Status Update #2

Today I tried drafting some ideas for what my final model might look like. It's still in the developing stages, but I think I'm going with the "ABCDE Model for K-12 Curriculum Development." You're welcome to review my sketches and sloppy handwriting at the following URL:
http://www.scribd.com/full/29204505?access_key=key-286oqqi8swkesq80rkc5

(You may just want to skip to the last page, as that's the clearest. The first page is just brainstorming, while pages 2-4 describe more about each stage of my model.)

Making Change

Obviously, the creation and implementation of a new curriculum would be a major change in any school district. The gatekeepers would likely be the superintendent, the school board, and possibly anyone with a post of or similar to "district curriculum coordinator." These are the individuals who ultimately decide whether the change will happen, even though they have little or nothing to do with the implementation.

School-level administration would be next in line. This would involve principal, assistant principal(s), any reading coordinators, etc. The school's media specialist(s) should also be involved, as they could assist greatly with selection of appropriate materials. They may also be the ones that are gatekeepers to the school's resources, such as a computer lab.

The ELA department would be next, headed by the chairperson (or chairpersons, if applicable). They should be heavily involved in the creation of the new curriculum, as they are also the ones responsible for implementation. The department chair(s) will likely have mandatory involvement, and may belong also in the second tier of this described chain of command. This process may or may not involve the entire department initially, depending on when the curriculum is created and implemented. If time for creation of the curriculum is only in the summer, volunteers will be needed to assemble everything. Hopefully, these volunteers will also have a more vested interest in creating an effective curriculum than if everyone was mandated to be involved. Teachers that are reluctant to change could be very resistant in making a shift from the familiar to the new, even if it may benefit them and their students.

The school-level administrators and the ELA department chair(s) would be the ones that should initially gain the knowledge about why this change is needed. Although he administrators can disseminate the information to ELA teachers, the department chair(s) is likely to have the most clout with them, and would be able to best persuade them that change is needed. The decision process, as mentioned above, would involve at least ELA department volunteers to create an aligned, standardized, and uniform curriculum, while the entire department is responsible for implementation. This would be overseen by both school-level and district-level administrators. Confirmation would occur after the entire curriculum has been accepted as part of the school culture and has been in place, likely for several years.

There are many other factors to consider when attempting to make this change in the particular school I'm examining. The school is in the suburbs, but it is a public school with an urban population. Accommodations would need to be addressed in the curriculum for the range of student abilities, including the approximate third of the students that are identified as having special needs (IEPs, 504 plans, etc.). Resources and funding (or lack of both) are major factors to consider, as they will affect how teachers will be compensated for their time when writing the new curriculum, and what they will be able to use to implement it. The school board and superintendent, although in charge of the school, may not understand completely its student population, which could be a barrier to the success of the change. Implementation may also be difficult with the aforementioned teachers who are complacent with the status quo and feel no need to change their pedagogy to suit a new curriculum. Even teachers who are interested in effective implementation will need to devote a great deal of personal time and energy to familiarize themselves with the new curriculum and associated materials.