Analysing teachers’ curriculum implementation from integrity and actor-oriented perspectives

Abstract

Curriculum materials and knowledge about curricular purposes and structures are valuable tools that teachers often draw upon to organize instruction and facilitate student learning. Careful analysis of teachers’ curriculum implementation and the decision-making that undergirds their curriculum use is critical for fully understanding enactment. This paper compares how integrity analyses of implementation of curriculum materials and actor-oriented analysis of teachers’ curriculum use can help researchers, teacher educators, and curriculum designers interpret teachers’ decisions about what aspects of new materials to use and how to use such materials. Drawing on evidence from teacher interviews and observations, we compare two teachers’ enactments of a new elementary-level environmental biology unit. Our analyses of integrity point to differences in teachers’ adaptations with respect to their consistency with the purposes and structures of curriculum materials as construed by designers. By contrast, our actor-oriented analysis explain how the teachers’ different approaches to interpreting the goals and structures of the curriculum unit partly account for patterns in their enactment in ways that can inform refinements to materials and the design of professional development supports for teachers. In so doing, we show how implementation integrity and actor-oriented analyses offer complementary perspectives to inform curriculum research and development.

Keywords:

• implementation
• integrity
• actor-oriented perspective
• science curriculum

Acknowledgements

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number BCS-0624307. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. We gratefully acknowledge Drue Gawel, Hannah Lesk, Allison Moore, Kari Shutt, Kathryn Torres, Kersti Tyson and Katie Van Horn for their assistance with data collection. We extend special thanks to the teachers and students who participated in the project.

Notes

1. The version of the FOSS curriculum used in the district did not include a set of embedded assessments that are now part of the curriculum. The Assessing Science Knowledge (ASK) assessments do provide students with opportunities to make visible their thinking throughout the unit. Teachers can provide feedback to students on the basis of their interpretations of student responses, interpretations that are supported by rubrics associated with each ASK item.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

William R. Penuel

William R. Penuel is professor of Educational Psychology and Learning Sciences in the School of Education at the University of Colorado Boulder, UCB 249, Boulder, Colorado 80302, USA; e-mail: [email protected]. His research focuses on the design, implementation and evaluation of reforms in science and mathematics education.

Rachel S. Phillips

Rachel S. Phillips is a teaching associate and postdoctoral scholar in educational psychology and learning sciences within the College of Education at University of Washington, Box 354941, Seattle, Washington 98105, USA; e-mail: [email protected]. Her research focuses on underserved youth, particularly those who are incarcerated or in alternative school settings.

Christopher J. Harris

Christopher J. Harris is a senior researcher in the Center for Technology in Learning at SRI International, 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA; e-mail: [email protected]. His research focuses on the design, implementation and study of instructional innovations in K-12 classrooms and informal science contexts.