Curriculum Issues Facing Educational Leaders - Research Paper Example

Topic: Curriculum Issues Facing Educational Leaders Introduction Curriculum is critical to all the processes and experiences that occur in the school environment even though the development of curriculum has remained the responsibility of external experts which has excluded teachers from participating actively in the development of the curriculum (Ylimaki, 2010). Previous research along with practice in this area has demonstrated considerable difference between the official curriculum that is developed by the experts and the curriculum that the teachers teach the students in the classroom. This is because the teachers who work independently make different choices in relation to curriculum and instruction depending on the knowledge they have, experiences as well as the realities that they deal with in their classrooms (Hart, 2005). There are various issues that have an impact on the manner in which the curriculum is implemented in the classroom and they continue to trouble the educations leaders. Quality of the teachers The quality of the teacher is among the most popular perspectives in regard to the problem of making sure that the curriculum is implemented since the quality influences control as well as accountability in the teaching force (Luke, Woods and Weir, 2013). In accordance with this perspective, schools exhibit low standards, incoherence, poor management as well as insufficient regulation particularly in relation to the work that teachers do with their students. The teachers are not held accountable by the schools and the teachers are left to do whatever they please behind the closed doors of the classrooms. From this view, the projected result is a decreased quality of performance on the part of the teacher together with the students. Fundamental to this view is the notion the genesis of the quality problem in teachers is in a deficit that is in the preparations, commitments, engagements as well as efforts of the teachers themselves. In the view of those that support this viewpoint, the best solution to the problem that is being faced by the educational system is an increase in the centralized control of the schools and making the teachers become responsible (Abs, 2009). Advocates of this view are in support of curriculums which are uniform, subjecting teachers to licensing exams and improved performance standards along with comprehensive teacher and school assessments. Most of these accountability measures have already been executed so that no children are left behind. Broad research has been carried out in power, control as well as accountability in schools over the past decades with the research involving evaluation of a broad collection of data. From the research that has been carried out, it can be concluded that push towards accountability typically ends up in the wrong diagnoses and solution for the problem of quality of teachers. It is necessary and practical to have answerability in schools and the public reserves a right and an obligation to be apprehensive about hoe the teachers perform. It is important to note that some of the teachers are poor performers and are poor at their jobs. Nonetheless, the view for accountability every so often directs the manner in which the schools contribute to the issue of quality of teachers particularly with regard to their management and organization. This view often undervalues some of the most important sources of organizational control and answerability in the schools and therefore increasing its chances of failing. Authority The level of authority and control that is held by practitioners in relation to decisions at the work place is among the most popular standards of identifying the level of professionalism and the status of a specific occupation. Professionalized workers have control and independence that almost resembles that of senior management when decisions in the organization are considered (Hodson, 2001). For instance, the academics usually have equal or more control than the administrators of universities concerning the content that they teach and research, employment of new colleagues as well as the assessment and promotion of members. This means that they have a significant level of influence over the continuing content and character associated with their profession. Conversely, the members of professions that are of a lower status typically have little authority over the work they do. When compared to individuals who are employed in traditional occupations, teachers have restricted authority over the main decisions that affect their work. This chain of command in schools is reasonable and significant, considering the nature of the work that is done by the teachers (Strike and Nickelsen, 2011). The schools cannot be seen as formal administrative bodies that are designed to deliver academic instruction as their duty is not restricted to teaching the children how to read and write. Schools are among the main instruments that allows for socialization of students and the youth and the duty of determining which the conduct and principles that are appropriate for the children is not inconsequential nor neural. Therefore, it comes as no surprise that those involved in this work and the manner in which they do it are issues of extreme concern. Without a doubt, fundamental to the view on answerability, is the comprehensible notion that curriculum is much more important to be left in the hands of the educators only. Consequently, teaching is a profession that is surrounded by tension and discrepancies between answerability and authority (Ledger, Vidovich and ODonoghue, n.d.). In contrast, the teaching profession, which involves preparing, instruction and nurturing the next generation of scholars, is vital and intricate. The people that are tasked with training the next generation of scholars are not given much control over most of the critical decisions associated with the curriculum they teach. Contradictory demands Schools have different was of exerting their control as well as a maintaining a certain level of answerability. These may not automatically include direct and clear cut methods like the use of rules and regulations. The most effective methods as far as the control of workers is concerned is time and again entrenched in their daily culture of the workplace, thus, are not carefully adhered to making them become invisible. This can be seen in the part played by teachers in school as they can be likened to men and women who caught between the contradictory demands of the school administrators and those of the students. Teachers do not constitute the management nor the workers, instead, they are in charge and responsible for the students they teach. The teachers typically work alone and this gives them the opportunity to observe their students as they execute the tasks assigned to them. This obligation and opportunity can be erroneous perceived to be some form of professional independence particularly in regard to tasks that are performed in the confines of the classroom. Looking closely at the organization of the teaching job demonstrates that even though it is associated with a lot of responsibility, it involves very little power in deciding what the curriculum needs or does not need. A pointer of this blend of huge responsibility but little power is the prevalent practice among the teachers that involves spending their own money to buy materials to be used in the classroom. Research has showed that public school teachers spend almost one percent of their yearly salary on curriculum supplies as well as materials that will be used as teaching aids in the classrooms. The expenditures that come from the teachers’ pockets demonstrate the significant responsibility, obligation as well as answerability on the part of the teachers in view of the extraordinary lack of responsibility and answerability in regard to the organizations that have employed them. Therefore, the teachers should not be held accountable for an issue that is out of their control. They should instead be consulted and the contributions they make to the development and implementation of the curriculum be increased to match the responsibilities they shoulder. References Abs, H. (2009). Introducing quality assurance of education for democratic citizenship in schools :comparative study of 10 countries. 1st ed. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publ. Hart, S. (2005). Differentiation and the secondary curriculum. 1st ed. London: Routledge. Hodson, R. (2001). Dignity at work. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ledger, S., Vidovich, L. and ODonoghue, T. (n.d.). Global to local curriculum policy processes. 1st ed. Luke, A., Woods, A. and Weir, K. (2013). Curriculum syllabus design and equity. 1st ed. New York: Routledge. Strike, K. and Nickelsen, J. (2011). Mentoring the educational leader. 1st ed. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education. Ylimaki, R. (2010). Critical curriculum leadership. 1st ed. New York: Routledge. Read More