		Home
		Curr= iculum=20 Mapping
		Resources
		Materials
		Services
		Pricing
		Testimonials Photo=20 Gallery
		About<= BR>Janet=20 Hale
		Presentat= ions=20 Calendar

A Guide to =
Curriculum=20 Mapping:
Planning, Implementing,
And Sustaining the=20 Process

Foreword by
Dr. Heidi Hayes=20 Jacobs

Published By Corwin Press

Click=20 here
to read=20 Table of Contents
and Foreword.

Click=20 here
to read = interview=20 featured
in Curriculum Designers'
CM = E-newsletter,
February=20 2008.

Order=20 Now

Purchas= e=20 = Order
Information

The real = voyage of=20 discovery
consists not in seeking new = landscapes,
but in=20 having new eyes.
--Marcel Proust

Curriculum=20 Mapping Model | Curriculum=20 Mapping Focuses
Curriculum=20 Mapping and Change | The=20 Curriculum Mapping Journey

The United States educational = system is=20 experiencing one of the largest accountability = movements in=20 its history. Federal laws such as No Child Left = Behind; stakes=20 testing; instruction based on best practices; = standards=20 alignment =85 The list goes on and on!

There are a myriad of research-based = frameworks=20 and models designed to help cultivate educational = reform.=20 Within these frameworks and models there is the = necessity to=20 consider not only what teachers are teaching, but more = importantly, what students are truly experiencing and=20 learning. Curriculum Mapping clearly addresses this = requisite.

Curriculum=20 Mapping Model

The current Curriculum Mapping model = is based on=20 the work of Dr. Heidi Hayes Jacobs (1997). Udelhofen = (2005)=20 states "=85the concept of curriculum mapping = originated in the=20 1980s with the work of Fenwick English=85" (xviii). = Dr. Jacobs=20 embraced and enhanced the earlier work by adding a = variety of=20 teacher-driven curriculum maps, horizontal and = vertical=20 alignments, cyclic reviews, and professional = curricular=20 dialogue. Jacobs (2004) states, "=85curriculum maps = have the=20 potential to become the hub for making decisions about = teaching and learning. Focusing the barrage of = initiatives and=20 demands on schools into a central database that can be = accessed from anywhere through the Internet can = provide relief=20 =85 Mapping becomes an integrating force to address = not only=20 curriculum issues, but also programmatic ones." = (p.126).

Curriculum Mapping emphasizes the = requisite that=20 teachers and administrators focus on the balance = between what=20 really took place in individual classrooms with what = was=20 individually or collaboratively planned. This data is = measured=20 in real time: recorded by months or grading periods. = Most=20 types of curriculum maps are recorded monthly. = Teachers record=20 what has taken place, or is planned, individually at a = school-site level (Diary Map, Projected Map); = collaboratively=20 planned curriculum at a school-site level (Consensus = Map,=20 oftentimes referred to as a Core Map, Master Map, or = Benchmark=20 Map); or collaboratively planned curriculum at a = district=20 level (Essential Map).

To gain insight into gaps, absences, = and=20 repetitions in a school or district's K-12 curriculum, = it is=20 critical to create quality maps. During the initial=20 learning-to-map-phase the most commonly recorded data = includes=20 content, skills, assessments, resources, and their = alignment=20 to one another other and state (or other) standards. = In=20 subsequent and more advanced phases of mapping, = additional=20 data such as evaluation processes, attachments of=20 best-practice lesson plans and activities, essential=20 questions, and other curricular information is often=20 included.

Curriculum maps are never considered = "done."=20 Curriculum Mapping does not perceive education as a = static=20 environment since learning, and learning about = learning, is a=20 continual process. As long as teachers have new = students, new=20 classes, and new school years, newly created and = revised=20 curriculum maps provide evidence of a school or = district's=20 ongoing curriculum.

Curriculum maps are never used for = teacher=20 evaluation or punitive damage. They are designed to = provide=20 authentic evidence of what has happened or is being = planned=20 within a school or a district. Encouraging individual = and=20 collaborative renewing and re-visiting of data = (curriculum=20 maps and other sources) through curricular dialogues = is=20 essential to mapping and becoming a thriving = educational=20 environment that continually improves student = learning.

Curriculum=20 Mapping Focuses

Curriculum Mapping focuses on three = Cs:=20 Communication, Curricular Dialogue, and = Coherency.

Communication -- 21st = Century=20 curriculum maps are most often developed and = maintained using=20 an Internet-based commercial mapping system. This=20 technological venue provides teachers and = administrators with=20 easy access to both the planned and actual horizontal = (same=20 grade level and/or same discipline) and vertical = (different=20 grade levels and/or different disciplines) curricula = for=20 present and past school years. The commercial=20 systems' search features allow teachers to gain = instant=20 information in regard to mapping data to aid in = curricular=20 dialogue. This means and level of communication is=20 unprecedented. In the not-to-distant past data had to = be=20 printed out, copied, distributed, and an in-person = meeting=20 held to view and discuss the documents. Curriculum = Mapping=20 encourages innovation and thought about meeting = differently=20 and in new ways.

Curricular Dialogue -- = Teachers=20 take part in collegial relationships wherein they make = data-based decisions about grade-level, cross-grade = level,=20 disciplinary, and cross-disciplinary curricula and=20 instructional practices. Teachers become Teacher = Leaders.=20 Curriculum Mapping has two guiding principles: Jacobs = (2004)=20 states that teachers and administrators must consider = "=85the=20 empty chair=85" which represents all students in a = given school=20 or district, and "=85all work must focus on Johnny, = and all=20 comments and questions are welcomed as long as they = are in his=20 best interest" (p.2). Second, if it is in the = students' best=20 interest to change, modify, stop, start, or maintain=20 curriculum practices, programs, and/or other related = issues,=20 there must be data-based proof to do so (Jacobs, = 2002). =20 These two principles are logical, rational, and = well-founded.=20 One may consider them easy to implement, but = oftentimes proves=20 difficult in practice. Barth (2006) refers to the = "=85elephant in the classroom=97the=20 various forms of relationships among adults within the = schoolhouse might be categorized in four ways: = parallel play,=20 adversarial relationships, congenial relationships, = and=20 collegial relationships" (p.10). Not surprising, the = first=20 three ways do not elicit vigorous curricular dialogue. = Barth=20 contends "=85empowerment, recognition, satisfaction, = and success=20 in our work=97all in = scarce supply=20 within our schools=97will = never stem=20 from going it alone =85 success comes only from being = an active=20 participant within a masterful group=97a group of colleagues" = (p.13). Therefore,=20 it is of utmost importance to provide teachers with = ample=20 professional development to hone their skills in all = facets of=20 curriculum mapping and collegial, curricular dialogue. = Allowing teachers time to build personal ownership in = the=20 mapping process empowers them, and subsequently, = improves=20 student learning.

Coherency -- A = combination of 21st=20 Century communication plus curricular dialogue = eventually=20 equals curricular coherency. Many teachers are = currently=20 engaged in what Dr. Jacobs (2001) refers to as = "=85treadmill=20 teaching." Running breathless on grade-level or = content-area=20 treadmills trying desperately to get everything they = believe=20 needs to be taught, taught. If teachers took the time = to slow=20 down their treadmills and personally document and = evaluate=20 both the planned, and most importantly, actual = learning, they=20 may well discover that they are perpetuating a = potentially=20 incoherent curriculum. Curriculum Mapping is designed = to ask=20 teachers to record, reflect on, study, and revise = their=20 individual and corporate work. This cyclic endeavor = eventually=20 leads a school or district to developing and = maintaining an=20 aligned curriculum that makes sense to all=97and most importantly=97to students!

Curriculum=20 Mapping and Change

Curriculum Mapping necessitates that = teachers=20 play an active role in making curricular decisions. = Looking at=20 this historically, it is not the educational norm. = Empowering=20 teachers to become Teacher Leaders is paramount, and a = top=20 priority when introducing the concepts of Curriculum = Mapping.=20 Administration, as always, plays a critical role in = this=20 endeavor. Lyle (2006), a Curriculum Mapping = Coordinator in=20 Marion, Illinois, wrote an excellent article = pertaining to the=20 issue of Curriculum Mapping, leadership, and change. = Here is=20 an excerpt:

Curriculum mapping involves a second-order = change.=20 Marzano, R., Waters, T., and McNulty, B.A. = (2005) state=20 that second-order change "=85involves dramatic = departures=20 from the expected, both in defining a given = problem and=20 in finding a solution" (p. 66). Curriculum = Mapping may=20 be considered a second-order change for our = district=20 because it challenges the status quo of = historical=20 practices and therein may result in resistance. = However,=20 it has the potential of resulting in = transformative=20 learning. Weinbaum (2004, cited Merzirow &=20 Associates, 2001) in stating "=85transformative = learning=20 involves the process by which we revise or = change our=20 fundamental assumptions, perspectives, and = worldviews"=20 (p.16). Curriculum Mapping results in reflective = practices that expand teacher perspectives and=20 responsibilities for student learning from a = micro to=20 macro level. Jacobs (1997) states

To make sense of our students' experiences = over=20 time, we need two lenses: a zoom lens into = this year's=20 curriculum for a particular grade and a = wide-angle=20 lens to see the K-12 perspective. The = classroom (or=20 micro) level is dependent on the site and = district=20 level (a macro view). Though the micro and = macro=20 levels are connected throughout a district, = there is a=20 conspicuous lack of macro-level data for = decision=20 making. Yet we need that big picture for each=20 student's journey through his or her years of=20 learning. With data from curriculum mapping, = as school=20 and its feeding and receiving sites can review = and=20 revise the curriculum within a larger, = much-needed=20 contest. Data on the curriculum map can be = examined=20 both horizontally through the course of any = one=20 academic year and vertically over the = student's K-12=20 experience (pp. 3 - 4).

The data generated in curriculum maps can = provide=20 information that enables teachers to identify = and=20 address curricular gaps and repetitions. = Curriculum=20 Mapping is built on a foundation of = collaborative=20 inquiry groups in which "=85teachers construct = knowledge=20 from questioning their own practice and looking = closely=20 at their own students and their work" as well as = the=20 relationship between individual teacher's works = in terms=20 of the big picture of the student's K-12 = experience=20 (Weinbaum, 2004, p. 18). Lambert (2003) states = "=85schools=20 in which staff members discuss student learning = outcomes=20 during continuing professional dialogues tend to = reflect=20 upon and improve practice as a result" (p. 54). = The=20 reflective process of Curriculum Mapping as well = as the=20 variety of collaborative inquiry groups has the=20 potential of significantly impacting student=20 achievement. However Curriculum Mapping can not = be=20 sustained without the proper leadership, = support, and=20 teacher "by-in." Effective Curriculum Mapping = requires=20 nurturing, supporting, and encouraging teacher=20 leadership so that the impetus for systemic = change is=20 fostered by a bottom-up approach rather than a = top-down=20 system. Lambert (2003) suggests:

Directive or command-and-control behavior = may get=20 the immediate task done, but it undermines the = growth=20 and development of those who are subjected to = it,=20 diminishing teacher leadership and the = leadership=20 capacity of the school. Innovation, = risk-taking, and=20 real conversations about teaching and learning = are not=20 to be found in schools governed by directive=20 principals. (p. 44)

Fostering teacher leadership, shared vision, = and=20 "trusting" collaborative inquiry groups is the=20 cornerstone of a curriculum mapping initiative = that=20 results in sustainable change. Barth (2001) = notes that=20 teacher leaders often:

"=85encounter resistance from fellow = teachers"=20 because they "=85violate the taboos of their = school=85" in=20 that "=85principals lead; teachers teach. So = it has=20 been, and so it shall be" or they may feel = impeded by=20 "=85other teachers and administrators who are=20 threatened=85" by the teacher leader's passion = and=20 enthusiasm. (p. 446)

Curriculum Mapping results in a redefining of = teacher=20 and administrator roles and = responsibilities.

References:
Barth, R. S. (2001). Teacher = Leader.=20 Phi Delta Kappan,
82 (6), = 443-449.
Jacobs, H.H.=20 (1997). Mapping the big picture
integrating curriculum = and assessment=20 K-12,
Alexandria, VA: = Association for=20 Supervision and
Curriculum=20 Development.
Lambert, L. (2003). = Leadership=20 capacity for lasting
school improvement, = Alexandria,=20 VA: Association
for Supervision and = Curriculum=20 Development.
Marzano, R.J., Waters, T, = McNulty, B.A.=20 (2005) School
leadership that works = from research=20 to results,
Alexandria, VA: = Association for=20 Supervision and
Curriculum.=20

Critical to understanding Curriculum = Mapping and=20 its collaborative design, one must recognize that = mapping is=20 not an external program or process that "comes and = then goes"=20 in a few years=97it is an = internal,=20 interactive process that becomes a natural component = of a=20 school or district's infrastructure. In an interview = for the=20 Journal of Staff Development (Sparks, 1996), = Michael=20 Fullen shared

People in schools should not take = shortcuts in=20 their search for clarity and solutions. They need to = engage=20 with all kinds of ideas to improve what they are = doing, but=20 not adopt external programs that foster dependency = =85 In my=20 view, teaching is an intellectual and scientific = profession,=20 as well as a moral profession. That means that = schools have=20 to constantly process knowledge about what works and = that=20 teachers have to see themselves as scientists who=20 continuously develop their intellectual and = investigative=20 effectiveness =85 The cognitive sciences teach us = that if=20 information is to become knowledge, a social process = is=20 required. This makes great pedagogical sense. = Information=20 stays as information until people work through it = together=20 in solving problems and achieving goals ... Changing = the=20 culture is even more important because it = establishes norms=20 of continuous interaction. So, information becomes = knowledge=20 through a social process, and knowledge becomes = wisdom=20 through sustained interaction.

This connection between enabling = teachers to=20 create quality data-based curriculum maps and using = the maps=20 for curricular dialogue is critical for a successful=20 Curriculum Mapping initiative. Fowler Elementary = School=20 District, in Phoenix, Arizona, has a district motto:=20 Curriculum Mapping is not one more thing on our = plate=97it is the plate! This = motto is 100%=20 true, but this reality does take time (from my = personal=20 experience, up to three years) to get the majority of = teachers=20 in a school or district to cognitively and emotionally = understand the complexity of the processes and = function in a=20 vigorous, self-challenging manner.

The=20 Curriculum Mapping Journey

Based on current educational demands, = success is=20 based on measurable, improved student learning. = Curriculum=20 Mapping addresses this concern, but goes much deeper. = It=20 travels to the heart of our profession: caring about = the=20 journey a child takes upon entering as a = Kindergartener,=20 exiting as a high-school graduate, and enrolling in a=20 higher-education learning environment ... To be = successful for=20 a lifetime: Prek-16+.

Be advised: Curriculum Mapping is not = a quick=20 fix. Curriculum Mapping has a learning curve to it. = For a=20 time, your teachers will be students. They must be = afforded=20 the cognitive processing time needed to learn = something new,=20 and be well-supported throughout the process. Some = will learn=20 faster than others; some will need more support; and = still=20 others may refuse to learn. Just as curriculum's root = meaning=20 is: a path taken in small steps, it is important to = allow=20 teachers to likewise take small steps.

Learn as much as you can about = Curriculum=20 Mapping by continuously reading, attending conferences = and=20 networking to aid in developing your school or = district's=20 strategic plans, realistic action plans, and = short-term goals.=20 Please use my website to help gain insight into the = world of=20 Curriculum Mapping and support your present or future = work. If=20 you would like to e-mail me or=20 call me to discuss questions or wonderments, please = feel free=20 to do so at any time.

Happy Mapping!

References:

Barth, R.S. (2006). Improving=20 relationships within
the schoolhouse. = Educational=20 Leadership,
63(6). = 9-13.
Jacobs, H.H.=20 (1997). Mapping the big = picture:
integrating curriculum and = assessment=20 K-12.
Alexandria, VA: = Association for=20 Supervision
and Curriculum=20 Development.
Jacobs, H.H. (2004). Getting = results=20 with curriculum
mapping. Alexandria, = VA:=20 Association for
Supervision and = Curriculum=20 Development.
Jacobs, H.H. (2001). Keynote=20 address. National
Curriculum Mapping = Institute. Park=20 City, Utah.
Jacobs, H.H. (2002). Keynote=20 address. National
Curriculum = Mapping=20 Institute. Park City, Utah.
Lyle, V. (2006)=20 Leadership for curriculum mapping.
Unpublished = Manuscript.=20 Marion School District
#2, Marion, = Illinois.
Sparks.=20 D. (1996). Interview with Michael = Fullan.
Journal of Staff = Development,=20 Winter 2003
(Vol.24, No. 1). = Retrieved May 22,=20 2006, from
www.nsdc.org/library/publications/jsd/fullan241.cfm.<= BR>Udelofen,=20 S. (2005). Keys to curriculum = mapping:
strategies and tools to = make it=20 work. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin=20 = Press.

10511 E. Placita Loma=20 Verde  =B7  Tucson, AZ 85748
Cellular = (520)=20 241-8797  =B7  Phone/Fax (520) 298-7349
Janet@CurriculumMapping101= .com  =B7  http://www.curriculummappin= g101.com/
Copyright=20 =A9 2004-2008 Teach Resources. All rights = reserved.