The thematic curriculum may be configured in a variety of ways. Since how various themes are arranged can affect what is taught and how it is taught, different implementation options should be explored early in the development process. This is begun by discovering how change may impact on students, teachers, administrators, support staff, and others. After the potential impact of change has been addressed, available curriculum options can be examined. Contextual, organizational, delivery, and content options are introduced in this section and discussed more extensively in Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6. The exploration of different options logically leads to decision making. This includes weighing the various options individually and collectively; giving consideration to the impact they may have on students, educators, and others; and ultimately deciding what form the curriculum should take.
The great interest in educational reform and emphasis on implementing change in the public schools has left many education professionals with a feeling that the only thing constant in education is change. This feeling is clearly bothersome to educators who desire curriculum reform. Administrators, teachers, and others in the schools are being bombarded with so many different changes, often to the point that it is difficult to tell where one change ends and another begins. Educators who have been through several cycles of what some view as "change for the sake of change" are found to be more negative or at least less positive toward change (Glatthorn, 1992).
Without proper consideration, thematic curricula can easily fall into the category of "just another one of those changes." For this reason, persons who create curricula must consider potential barriers to educational change. Many of the more commonly encountered barriers to educational change have been noted by Harvey (1990, pp. 35-45). Examples of these barriers include lack of ownership in change, lack of benefits from change, increased burdens resulting from change, and a lack of support from administration. Educators involved in change may feel a sense of loneliness, insecurity, and boredom. They may also believe they are not receiving enough information about the change and that they are not properly recognized for their participation in the change process. Educators may feel the change will not be successful because the process lacks control or is being made too fast. They may also feel the school's or school system's organizational structure or unique problems are such that change will be difficult to implement. Several of the general comments made by educators that reflect these concerns are listed in Figure 2-1. These statements about change are not abstract concepts. They can often be overheard in schools where change is being implemented. If statements like these are heard, it is important to identify the root cause of each and work to be sure that barriers to change are removed.
Figure 2-1. Comments Made by Educators That May Reflect Concern About Change
- The change is being imposed by others.
- The change gives us no advantages over what exists now.
- We don't have time to be involved in the change.
- We have no commitment from the top to this change.
- I don't want to be the first to try something new.
- This change threatens my job security.
- We don't do it that way here.
- This change is dull, burdensome, and uninteresting.
- We have little control over the way this change is going.
- They told us to trust them and later on we would like the change.
- We don't receive the same information about the change that others received.
- We are never acknowledged for our work on the change.
- This change is being made too fast.
- They said the change was tried before and failed so we should try it again.
- This school (or school system) is too highly centralized (or decentralized) to allow for successful change.
- Our schools have very special problems.
Consideration should also be given to barriers that may impact specifically on thematic curriculum implementation in the schools. Several barriers to "all aspects" identified by Bailey, Koppel, and Waldinger (1994) are quite relevant since "all aspects" can serve as a meaningful strategy for creating thematic curricula. They include the educational preparation of entering students, the conflict between short-term needs and long-term benefits, and the threat to tradition.
Educators in the schools Bailey et al. (1994) visited where "all aspects" had been used "complained about the skills of their entering students" (p. 110). It was noted that "educators who tried to broaden their curricula complain that many students simply do not come in with the basic skills to handle a broader, more sophisticated, and more conceptual curriculum" (p. 110).
Preparing students for employment often involves a curriculum trade-off between what the workplace needs in the short term and what its needs will be in the long term (Bailey et al., 1994). Since "all aspects" reflects broadly based preparation and implies preparation for the high performance workplace, educators may be faced with a difficult decision. This is because the content that is ultimately selected may affect whether or not students are prepared for employment in the traditional or the high performance workplace. It appears that in the future most firms will be smaller and without training clout. Larger firms may lead the way in high performance training needs but hire few people. Given the rather small percentage of firms that have become high performance workplaces and the slow rate at which firms are moving in this direction, educators may be reluctant to shift from traditional to nontraditional curricula.
Both educators and employers may see the broadly based thematic curriculum as a threat to tradition. Employers may view it as something that does not align with their ways of doing business; whereas, educators may see it as content breadth at the expense of depth or the merger of traditional courses and sequences into an unidentifiable lump. In effect, during implementation, tradition can easily get in the way of change. Employers and educators who are set in their ways may themselves be one of the most serious barriers to broadly based curriculum implementation and success (Bailey et al., 1994).
How can these barriers be dealt with effectively? Several approaches to fostering educational change used in conjunction with other educational reforms have much relevance to implementation of the thematic curriculum (Finch, Schmidt, & Faulkner, 1992). These approaches apply in various ways, depending on the nature and focus of the change. Ways educational change can be enhanced are included in Figure 2-2. These suggestions apply to many of the educational reforms that are currently being initiated in schools across the country. Although some local adaptation may be necessary, the list has much relevance to thematic curriculum design and implementation.
Figure 2-2. Enhancing Educational Change
- Empower all educators. Provide opportunities for teachers and support staff to make significant curriculum and instruction-related decisions.
- Schedule times when educators can meet and work together. Change to a curriculum cannot take place unless educators have quality time to meet and plan joint teaching activities.
- Facilitate rather than push. Teachers and support staff must ultimately have the need and desire to implement change.
- Build and maintain strong communication links with and among educators. Keep everyone well apprised of progress. Provide time for educators to share their successes and discuss their problems with colleagues.
- When organizing for change, work closely with all educators. No educator or educator group wants to feel left out of the process.
- Use a variety of activities to build educator curriculum teams. Examples include forming functional ad hoc committees, organizing teamwork sessions, and providing teams with opportunities to attend relevant professional conferences and workshops and bring back useful information to share with others.
- Utilize the "educators teaching educators" concept. Give educators who have developed expertise in using thematic curriculum opportunities to share their expertise with others.
- Use educator teams to conduct professional development sessions and workshops. This exemplifies the team concept.
- Offer educators specific responsibilities in the change process and opportunities to employ their professional skills in creative ways. Examples include organizing field trips to local businesses and industries, team-based curriculum development, and team teaching.
- Be sure there is support for change from the highest level of the organization (e.g., superintendent of schools). Without this support, the shift to thematic curricula may be undermined and the change may never be implemented.
Dealing more specifically with "all aspects," Bailey et al. (1994, pp. 111-115) have identified several ways that barriers to "all aspects" development and implementation may be overcome. These barriers, which are listed in more general terms in Figure 2-3, have much relevance for thematic curricula. This list of suggestions to assist in removing barriers is certainly not exhaustive. Experienced educators and employers who become involved with curriculum development and implementation will most likely be able to generalize from some of their past experiences to help move the process along.
Figure 2-3. Removing Barriers to Development and Implementation
- Build the curriculum on a solid foundation of basic skills.
- Emphasize the positive benefits of the curriculum as a teaching strategy, which, in turn, may make it acceptable to more educators.
- Link the curriculum with teaching approaches such as the integration of vocational and academic education that link the learning of specific skills with broader knowledge.
- Incorporate creative teaching strategies into instruction (such as using contextualized material to reinforce the learning of academic skills) that reduce conflicts and trade-offs associated with curriculum.
- Recognize that educators may be trying to accomplish more with the curriculum than with traditional instruction and, thus, allow more time to implement this reform.
- Emphasize the general nature of education and use more general categories of industries and fields at the middle school level.
- Be sure employers fully understand benefits of the curriculum so they will place realistic value on graduates.
- Show relevance for skills taught and how students can be motivated to learn in-depth concepts (academic and technical).
When considering how thematic curricula should look in a particular school, what comes to mind? The following are four basic questions that should be answered:
These four questions each introduce a different set of options that are available to persons who are creating thematic curricula. They include contextual options, organizational options, delivery options, and content options. Provided in Figure 2-4 are listings of the more common contextual, organizational, and delivery options associated with thematic curricula. Content options, which are often decided based on or in concert with other option decisions, are detailed in Section 6.
Figure 2-4. Contextual, Organizational, and Delivery Options for Designing Thematic Curriculum Using an All Aspects Approach*Contextual Options
- Individual courses
- Clusters and majors
- Career academies
- Magnet schools
Organizational Options
- Traditional arrangements
- Tech Prep
- Integration
- School-to-work transition
Delivery Options
- School-based enterprises
- Linkages and partnerships
- Job shadowing and mentoring
- Youth apprenticeships
- Portfolios
- Senior projects
*This is a list of representative options; it is not meant to be exhaustive.
Figure 2-5 serves as an organizer for designing and implementing thematic curricula. Recognizing that curriculum development is seldom done in a step-by-step manner, the process typically begins by giving some thought to what the thematic curriculum is (Section 1), why the thematic curricula is considered to be a major educational change, and what should be done to ensure that it is successfully designed and implemented (Section 2). Next, contextual options (Section 3), organizational options (Section 4), and delivery options (Section 5) are considered. These options may be examined both individually and collectively since they are often a function of what currently exists in local school, workplace, and community settings. Persons who are already familiar with these options may choose to skip over Sections 3, 4, and 5. Contextual, organizational, and delivery considerations and preliminary decisions provide a useful foundation for determining what the thematic curriculum content will actually be (Section 6) and how it should be provided to students (Section 7). Additionally, the assessment of curriculum impact is designed and conducted (Section 8). Although shown at the bottom of Figure 2-5, assessment must begin as the curriculum is being designed and continue through the curriculum lifespan. The dashed lines in Figure 2-5 that flow from assessing impact to the other components reflect the need to feed assessment information back to each of the design and implementation components. In this way, the curriculum will continue to evolve in response to changing needs. When the various components are organized in a meaningful fashion, they have the potential to build a thematic curriculum that can affect positive and lasting change in the schools.
Bailey, T., Koppel, R., & Waldinger, R. (1994). Education for all aspects of the industry: Overcoming barriers to broad-based training (MDS-243). Berkeley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Finch, C. R., Schmidt, B. J., & Faulkner, S. L. (1992). Using professional development to facilitate vocational and academic education integration: A practitioner's guide (MDS-277). Berkeley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of California at Berkeley.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1992). Teachers as agents of change: A new look at school improvement. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Harvey, T. R. (1990). Checklist for change: A pragmatic approach to creating and controlling change. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
