Abstract
In the curriculum evaluation literature, there appears to be no consensus on what curriculum is. The term ‘curriculum’ is used by different stakeholders to mean different things. It is not uncommon for teachers to equate curriculum to ‘the syllabus’, the content, the topics and the knowledge to be taught at each grade level. ‘Curriculum’ has also been variously used by educators to mean the ‘prescribed’ teaching materials for use across grade levels. In environments when teachers have academic standards (criteria to determine achievement for a particular subject area at a particular grade level) to adhere to, the standards are the curriculum (Erickson, H. L. (2007). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press). Consequently, parents tend to equate curriculum to what is to be covered in (high-stakes) tests and exams. A common question asked of teachers during parent-teacher meetings or through email these days is ‘Will this be tested? If not, why are you teaching it?’ It is probably true that the testing tail wags the curriculum dog especially in systems where success is inextricably tied to student performance in standardised exams and international studies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Applebee, A. N. (1996). Curriculum as conversation: Transforming traditions of teaching and learning. London: University of Chicago Press.
Ariely, D. (2010). You are what you measure. Harvard Business Review, June, 38.
Black, J., & Gregerson, H. (2002). Leading strategic change. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bobbitt, J.F. (1918). The curriculum: Boston/New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Bracken, B. A. (2004). The psychoeducational assessment of preschool children (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bybee, R. W., Buchwald, C. E., Crissman, S., Heil, D. R., Kuerbis, P. J., Matsumoto, C., et al. (1990). Science and technology education for the middle years: Frameworks for curriculum and instruction. Washington, DC: National Center for Improving Science Education.
Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24(April), 409–429.
Cronbach, L. J. (1963). Course improvement through evaluation. In A. A. Bellack & H. M. Kilebard (Eds.), Curriculum and evaluation (pp. 319–333). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Cronbach, L. J. (1982). Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Eisner, E. W. (1969). Instructional and expressive educational objectives: their formulation and use in the curriculum. In L. Stenhouse (Ed.), An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Eisner, E. W. (1985). The art of educational evaluation: A personal view. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer Press.
Erickson, H. L. (2007). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Fullan, M. (2003). Change forces with a vengeance. London: Routledge Falmer.
Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or praxis? London/New York : Falmer Press.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1994). The program evaluation standards: How to assess evaluations of educational programs (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kelly, A. V. (1999). The curriculum: Theory and practice (4th ed.). London, UK: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum: Theory and practice (6th ed.). London, UK: SAGE.
Kerr, J. F. (1968). The problems of curriculum reform: Changing the curriculum. London: University of London Press Ltd.
Marsh, C. J., & Willis, G. (2003). Curriculum: Alternative approaches, ongoing issues (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Ministry of Education, Singapore. (1997). Shaping our future: Thinking schools, learning nation.
Ministry of Education, Singapore. (2004). Teach less, learn more.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Paul, R. W. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how? New Directions for Community Colleges, 1992(77), 3–24.
Paul, R. W., & Elder, L. (2001). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Preskill, H. (2008). Evaluation’s second act: Spotlight on learning. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(2), 127–138.
Preskill, H., & Torres, R. (1999). Building capacity for organizational learning through evaluative inquiry. Evaluation, 5(1), 42–60.
Purcell, J. H., Burns, D. E., Tomlinson, C., Imbeau, M. B., & Martin, J. L. (2002). Bridging the gap: A tool and technique to analyze and evaluate gifted education curricular units. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 306–321.
Reis, S., & Renzulli, J. S. (1992). Using curriculum compacting to challenge the above-average. Exceptionality, 10, 113–125.
Rossi, P., Freeman, H. E., & Lipsey, M. W. (Eds.). (2006). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Scriven, M. (1994). Evaluation as a discipline. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 20(1), 147.
Stake, R. (2003). Responsive evaluation. In T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 63–68). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heineman.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1983). The CIPP model for program evaluation. In G. F. Madaus, M. S. Scriven, & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), Evaluation models (pp. 117–142). Hingham, MA: Kluwer Nijhoff Publishing.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). Leadership for differentiated classrooms. The School Administrator, 9(56), 6–11.
Van Tassel-Baska, J. (2003). What matters in curriculum for gifted learners: Reflections on theory, research and practice. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (3rd ed., pp. 174–183). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Van Tassel-Baska, J., & Little, C. A. (2003). Content-based curriculum. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Project Athena: A pathway to advanced literacy development for children of poverty. Gifted Child Today, 29(2), 58–63.
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation? American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 21.
Wenglinsky, H. (2000). How teaching matters: Bringing the classroom back into discussions of teacher quality. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Quek, C.G. (2017). Curriculum Evaluation. In: Tan, L., Ponnusamy, L., Quek, C. (eds) Curriculum for High Ability Learners. Education Innovation Series. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2697-3_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2697-3_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2695-9
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2697-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)