chapter8.evaluation

7/24/2019 Chapter8.Evaluation

1/16

1

CCChhhaaapppttteeerrr888::: CCCUUURRRRRRIIICCCUUULLLUUUMMMEEEVVVAAALLLUUUAAATTTIIIOOONNN

LEARNING OUTCOMES

When you complete this module will be able to:

State what is curriculum evaluation

List reasons for evaluating the curriculum

Explain the characteristics of the CIPP model

Describe the features of Stakes model of curriculum evaluation

Explain the characteristics of Eisners Connoisseurship model

Compare the different instruments of data collection

OVERVIEW

8.0 Introduction

8.1 What is curriculum evaluation?8.2 The CIPP evaluation model8.3 Application of the CIPP

evaluation model8.3 Stakes evaluation model

8.4 Eisnersconnoisseurshipevaluation model

8.5 Data collection methods

8.5.1 Interviews8.5.2 Observations8.5.3 Tests8.5.4 Surveys8.5.5 Content analysis

8.5.6 PortfolioDiscussion QuestionsReadings


2/16

2

Dont Make Physical Education (PE) an Examination Subject

The Education Ministry has askedministry officials to look into introducingPhysical Education (PE) as an

examination subject. I think PE should notbe an exam subject.

In the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and1980s, PE was never an exam subject andyet the country produced world-classsportsmen and women in badminton,weightlifting, hockey, athletics and other

events. People like Jegathesan, MokhtarDahari, Tan Aik Huang, Rajamani, Ng

Boon Bee, Nurul Huda, Marina Chin,

Karu Selvaratnam, Nashtar Singh, ZaitonSulaiman, Ghani Minhat, Tan Aik Mong,Dhanapal Naidu and many others.

We had no sports schools inthose days. All schools were sportsschools. How did we produce excellentsportsmen and sportswomen? We had

supportive parents, interestedheadmasters, dedicated and committed PEteachers, coaches and disciplined

sportsmen and sportswomen.

[Source:Letters to the Editor, New Straits Times, February 1, 2005]

The sporting calendar for

Term 1 (January to April) had football,athletics, cross country. Term 2 (May

to August) it was athletics and cricket.Term 3 (September to December it washockey and rugby. As for the courtgames, they were played all year round.

There were inter-house gamesand if your school had six houses you

would play at least five matches foryour house. There were inter-schoolgames and the rivalry was very intense.

Today, inter-house games areextinct and even if they do have them,

it is on a knock-out basis. It is the samefor inter-school games.

Sporting activities havebecome a burden to schools. There is

little organisation and the faster theyare over, the better. The school savesmoney and teachers have more time forcompleting the syllabus and revision inpreparation for national examinations.

- Retired Physical Education

Teacher

In Module 7, we discussed the implementation

of the curriculum plan. We looked at why people resist

change, the role of teachers, students, administrator and

parents in ensuring the successful implementation of

change. In this chapter, we will focus on determiningwhether the curriculum plan implemented has achieved

its goals and objectives as planned. In other words, the

curriculum has to be evaluatedto determine whether all

the effort in terms of finance and human resources has

been worthwhile. Various stakeholders want to know

the extent to which the curriculum has been successfully

implemented. The information collected from evaluating a curriculum forms the basis

for making judgements about how successfully has the programme achieved its intended

outcomes and the worth or value of the programme.

8.0 Introduction


3/16

3

What is evaluation?Evaluation is the process of collecting data on a programmeto determine its value or worth with the aim of deciding whether to adopt, reject, or

revise the programme. Programmes are evaluated to answer questions and concerns of

various parties. The public want to know whether the curriculum implemented has

achieved its aims and objectives; teachers want to know whether what they are doing inthe classroom is effective; and the developer or planner wants to know how to improve

the curriculum product.

McNeil (1977) states that curriculum evaluation is an attempt to throw light on twoquestions: Do planned learning opportunities, programmes, courses and activities as

developed and organised actually produce desired results? How can the curriculum

offerings best be improved? (p.134).

Ornstein and Hunkins (1998) define curriculum evaluation as a process or clust erof processes that people perform in order to gather data that will enable them to

decide whether to accept, change, or eliminate something- the curriculum in general

or an educational textbook in particular (p.320).

Worthen and Sanders (1987) define curriculum evaluation as the formaldetermination of the quality, effectiveness, or value of a programme, product,

project, process, objective, or curriculum (p.22-23).

Gay (1985) argues that the aim of curriculum evaluation is to identify its weaknesses

and strengths as well as problems encountered in implementation; to improve the

curriculum development process; to determine the effectiveness of the curriculum

and the returns on finance allocated.

Oliva (1988) defined curriculum evaluation as the process of delineating, obtaining,

and providing useful information for judging decision alternatives. The primary

decision alternatives to consider based upon the evaluation results are: to maintain

the curriculum as is; to modify the curriculum; or to eliminate the curriculum.

Evaluation is a disciplined inquiry to determine the worth of things. Things

may include programmes, procedures or objects. Generally, research and evaluation are

different even though similar data collection tools may be used. The three dimensions

on which they may differ are:

First, evaluation need not have as its objective the generation of knowledge.Evaluation is applied while research tends to be basic.

8.1 Curriculum Evaluation

ACTIVITY 8.1Read the newspaper report at the beginning of the chapter and answer the

following questions

1. Do you think physical education be made an examination subject?

2.

Do you agree with the writers opinions on the state of sports in schools?


4/16

4

When the cook tastes the soup,

thats formative evaluation;

when the guests taste the soup,

thats formative evaluation.

- Robert Stakes

Second, evaluation presumably, produces information that is used to make

decisions or forms the basis of policy. Evaluation yields information that has

immediate use while research need not.

Third, evaluation is a judgement of worth. Evaluation result in value judgementswhile research need not and some would say should not.

As mentioned earlier, evaluation is the process of determining the significance or

worth of programmes or procedures. Scriven (1967) differentiated evaluation as

formative evaluation and summative evaluation. However, they have come to mean

different things to different people, but in this chapter, Scrivens original definition will

be used.

8.2.1 Formative evaluation:

The term formative indicates that data is gathered during the formation ordevelopment of the curriculum so that revisions to it can be made. Formative evaluation

may include determining who needs the programme (eg. secondary school students),

how great is the need (eg. students need to be taught ICT skills to keep pace with

expansion of technology) and how to meet the need (eg. introduce a subject on ICT

compulsory for all secondary schools students). In education, the aim of formative

evaluation is usually to obtain information to improve a programme.

In formative evaluation, experts would evaluate the match between the

instructional strategies and materials used, and the learning outcomes or what it aims to

achieve. For example, it is possible that in a curriculum plan the learning outcomes and

the learning activities do no match. You want students to develop critical thinking skills

but there are no learning activities which provide opportunities for students to practice

critical thinking. Formative evaluation by experts is useful before full-scale

implementation of the programme. Review by experts of the curriculum plan may

provide useful information for modifying or revising selected strategies.

In formative evaluation

learners may be included to review

the materials to determine if they

can use the new materials. For

example, so they have the relevant

prerequisites and are they

motivated to learn. From theseformative reviews, problems may be discovered. For example, in curriculum document

may contain spelling errors, confusing sequence of content, inappropriate examples or

illustrations. The feedback obtained could be used to revise and improve instruction or

whether or not to adopt the programme before full implementation.

8.2.2 Summative evaluationThe term summative indicates that data is collected at the end of the

implementation of the curriculum programme. Summative evaluation can occur just

after new course materials have been implemented in full (i.e. evaluate the effectiveness

of the programme), or several months to years after the materials have been

implemented in full. It is important to specify what questions you want answered by theevaluation and what decisions will be made as a result of the evaluation. You may want

8.2 Formative and Summative Evaluation


5/16

5

to know if learners achieved the objectives or whether the programme produced the

desired outcomes. For example, the use of a specific simulation software in the teaching

of geography enhanced the decision making skills of learners. These outcomes can be

determined through formal assessment tasks such as marks obtained in tests and

examinations. Also of concern is whether the innovation was cost-effective. Was the

innovation efficient in terms of time to completion? Were there any unexpectedoutcomes? Besides, quantitative data to determine how well students met specified

objectives, data could also include qualitative interviews, direct observations, and

document analyses

How should you go about evaluating curriculum? Several experts haveproposed different models describing how and what should be involved in evaluating a

curriculum. Models are useful because they help you define the parameters of an

evaluation, what concepts to study and the procedures to be used to extract importantdata. Numerous evaluation models have been proposed but three models are discussed

here.

8.3.1 Context, Input, Process, Product Model (CIPP Model)

Daniel L. Stufflebeam (1971), who chaired the Phi Delta Kappa National Study

Committee on Evaluation, introduced a widely cited model of evaluation known as the

CIPP (context, input, process and product) model. The approach when applied to

education aims to determine if a particular educational effort has resulted in a positive

change in school, college, university or training organisation. A major aspect of the

Stufflebeams model is centred on decision making or an act of making up ones mindabout the programme introduced. For evaluations to be done correctly and aid in the

decision making process, curriculum evaluators have to:

first delineatewhat is to be evaluated and determine what information that has

to be collected (eg. how effective has the new science programme has been in

enhancing the scientific thinking skills of children in the primary grades)

second is to obtain or collect the information using selected techniques and

methods (eg. interview teachers, collect test scores of students);

third is to provide or make available the information (in the form of tables,

graphs) to interested parties. To decide whether to maintain, modify or eliminate

the new curriculum or programme, information is obtained by conducting the

following 4 types of evaluation: context, input, process and product.

8.3 Curriculum Evaluation Models

SELF-TEST 8.1

1.

Identify the key words in the five definitions of curriculum

evaluation.

2. Why do you need to evaluate curriculum?

3.

Whats the difference between formative and summativeevaluation?


6/16

6

Stufflebeams model of evaluation relies on both formative and summative evaluation to

determine the overall effectiveness a curriculum programme (see Figure 8.1).

Evaluation is required at all levels of the programme implemented.

FORMATIVE

SUMMATIVE

Figure 8.1 Formative and summative evaluation in the CIPP Model

a)Context Evaluation(What needs to be done and in what context)?This is the most basic kind of evaluation with the purpose of providing a

rationale for the objectives. The evaluator defines the environment in which the

curriculum is implemented which could be a classroom, school or training department.

The evaluator determines needs that were not met and reasons why the needs are not

being met. Also identified are the shortcomings and problems in the organisation under

review (eg. a sizable proportion of students in secondary schools are unable to read at

the desired level, the ratio of students to computers is large, a sizable proportion of

science teachers are not proficient to teach in English). Goals and objectives are

specified on the basis of context evaluation. In other words, the evaluator determines the

background in which the innovations are being implemented.The techniques of data collection would include observation of conditions in the

school, background statistics of teachers and interviews with players involve in

implementation of the curriculum.

b) Input Evaluation(How should it be done?)

is that evaluation the purpose of which is to provide information for determining

how to utilise resources to achieve objectives of the curriculum. The resources of the

school and various designs for carrying out the curriculum are considered. At this stage

the evaluator decides on procedures to be used. Unfortunately, methods for input

evaluation are lacking in education. The prevalent practices include committee

deliberations, appeal to the professional literature, the employment of consultants andpilot experimental projects.

Context

Input

Process

Product


7/16

7

c) Process Evaluation (Is it being done?) is the provision of periodic feedback while

the curriculum is being implemented.

d) Product Evaluation(Did it succeed?)or outcomes of the initiative. Data is collected

to determine whether the curriculum managed to accomplish it set out achieve (eg. towhat extent students have developed a more positive attitudes towards science). Product

evaluation involves measuring the achievement of objectives, interpreting the data and

providing with information that will enable them to decide whether to continue,

terminate or modify the new curriculum. For example, product evaluation might reveal

that students have become more interested in science and are more positive towards the

subject after introduction of the new science curriculum. Based on this findings the

decision may be made to implement the programme throughout the country.

8.4.2 Case Study:

Evaluation of a Programme on Technology Integration in Teaching and

Learning in Secondary Schools

The integration of information and communication technology (ICT) inteaching and learning is growing rapidly in many countries. The use of the internet

SELF-TEST 8.2

1.

What is the difference between context evaluation and input

evaluation according to the CIPP model? Give specificexamples

2. What is the difference betweenprocess evaluation andproduct

evaluation according to the CIPP mode? Give specific

examples.

Context Input

Product Process

GOALS PLANS

OUTCOMES ACTIONS

CORE

VALUES


8/16

8

and other computer software in teaching science, mathematics and social sciences is

more widespread today. To evaluate the effectiveness of such a programme using the

CIPP model would involve examining the following:

Context: Examine the environment in which technology is used in teaching and

learning How did the real environment compare to the ideal? (eg. The programme

required five computers in each classroom, but there were only two computer

labs of 40 units each for 1000 students)

What problems are hampering success of technology integration? (eg.

technology breakdowns, not all schools had internet access)

About 50% of teachers do not have basic computer skills

Input:Examine what resources are put into technology integration (Identify the

educational strategies most likely to achieve the desired result)

Is the content selected for using technology right?

Have we used the right combination of media? (internet, video-clips, etc)

Process:Assess how well the implementation works (Uncovers implementation

issues)

Did technology integration run smoothly?

Were there technology problems?

Were teachers able to integrate technology in their lessons as planned?

What are the areas of curriculum in which most students experienced

difficulty?

Product:Addresses outcomes of the learning (Gather information on the results ofthe educational intervention to interpret its worth and merit)

Did the learners learn using technology? How do you know?

Does technology integration enhance higher order thinking?

ACTIVITY 8.2Withreference to Case Study 8.4.2

1. Suggest other questions you would ask regarding process

evaluation (i.e. implementation issues).2. What data collection techniques would you recommend for

carrying out product evaluation to determine the teaching

and learning outcomes of technology integration?


9/16

9

INSTRUCTION

Student &teachercharacteristics,curriculumcontent,instructionalmaterials,community

context.

Communication

flow, time

allocation,

sequence of

events, social,

climate

Student

achievement,

attitudes,

motor skills,

effect on

teachers and

institution.

8.4.3 Stakes Countenance ModelThe model proposed by Robert Stake (1967) suggests three phases of curriculum

evaluation: the antecedent phase, the transaction phase and the outcome phase. The

antecedent phase includes conditions existing prior to instruction that may relate to

outcomes. The transaction phase constitutes the process of instruction while the

outcome phase relates to the effects of the programme. Stake emphasises twooperations; descriptionsandjudgements.Descriptions are divided according to whether

they refer to what was intended or what actually was observed. Judgements are

separated according to whether they refer to standards used in arriving at the judgements

or to the actual judgements.

Antecedents Transactions Outcomes

Figure 8.3 Stakes Countenance Model

8.3.2 Eisners Connoisseurship ModelElliot Eisner, a well known art educator argued that learning was too complex to

be broken down to a list of objectives and measured quantitatively to determine whether

it has taken place. He argued that the teaching of small manageable pieces of

information prohibits students from putting the pieces back together and applying themto new situations. As long as we evaluate students based on the small bits of information

students we will only learn small bits of information. Eisner contends that evaluation

has and will always drive the curriculum. If we want students to be able to solve

problems and think critically then we must evaluate problem solving and critical

thinking, skills which cannot be learned by rote practice. So, to evaluate a programme

we must make an attempt to capture the richness and complexity of classroom events.

He proposed the Connoisseurship Model in which he claimed that a

knowledgeable evaluator can determine whether a curriculum programme has been

successful, using a combination of skills and experience. The word connoisseurship

comes from the Latin word cognoscere, meaning to know. For example, to be a

connoisseur of food, paintings or films, you must have knowledge about and experiencewith different types of food, paintings or films before you are able to criticise. To be a


10/16

10

food critic, you must be a connoisseur of different kinds of foods. To be a critic, you

must be aware and appreciate the subtle differences in the phenomenon you are

examining. In other words, the curriculum evaluator must seek to be an educational

critic. When employing the procedure of educational criticismthe following questions

may be asked:

What has happened in the classrooms as a result of implementation of the newcurriculum?

What are some of the events that took place? (eg. more students are participating

in field work, more students are asking questions in class, even academically

weak students are talking in group activities)

How did students and teachers organise themselves in these events?

What were the reactions of participants in these events? (eg. students enjoyed

working collaboratively in projects)

How can the experiences of learners be made more effective as suggested by

students, teachers and administrators? (eg. more resources are needed for

fieldwork, more computers are needed to integrate the internet in teaching and

learning).

You will notice that these questions places more emphasis on the process of learning

and the quality of experiences by those involved in the implementation of the

curriculum; namely, students, teachers and administrators. According to the

Connoisseurship Model, evaluators provide a description and interpretation of the

curriculum plan implemented:

1) Description: The evaluator records the actions, the features of the environment

and experiences of students, teachers and administrators. People who read the

evaluation report will be able to visualise what the place looks like and theprocesses taking place. The aim here is to help the reader see the school or

classroom and get a feel of what the curriculum evaluator or critic is attempting

to understand and help others understand.

2) Interpretation: The evaluator explains the meaning of events reported by

putting it in its context. For example, why academically weak students were

motivated to ask questions; why reading comprehension skills improved; why

enthusiasm for doing science experiments increased and so forth.

To be able to describe and interpret the implementation of a curriculum the evaluator

has to collect data and the following are examples of activities an evaluator may engagein:

o The evaluator observes what is going on the classroom and records

teachers and students in action using videotapes, audiotapes and

photographs.

o The evaluator keeps notes of what is done, what is said and more

importantly what is not said. The evaluator should strive to describe the

toneof the curriculum in action (Ornstein and Hunkins, 1998).

o The evaluator interview students, teachers and administrators about the

quality of the curriculum

o The evaluator would analysis students work

.


11/16

11

One of the great benefits of Elliot W. Eisner's activities has been the way in

which he has both made the case for a concern with connoisseurship and criticism, and

mediated these concerns for educators and researchers. The importance of his advocacy

of these ideas cannot be underestimated - especially at a time when rather narrow

concerns with instrumental outcomes and an orientation to the technical dominate.Together they offer educators a more helpful and appropriate means to approach

evaluation, for example.

Advocating moving beyond technocratic and behaviouristic modes of thinking -and for having a concern for 'expressive outcomes'.

Calling to attend to fundamentals. Eisner has consistently warned against

educational fads and fashion. He has criticized dominant paradigms and

invited educators and others to ask questions such as 'what is basic in

education?'.

Arguing that schools should help children create meaning from experience,

and that this requires an education devoted to the senses, to meaning-making

and the imagination. Eisner argues for a curriculum that fosters multiple

'literacies' in students (especially by looking to non-verbal modes of learning

and expression) and a deepening of the 'artistry' of teachers.

Over the time that Eisner has been writing there have been significant shifts inthe context in which schools have to operate. While there have been other voices

calling for changes in the culture of schooling (notably Howard Gardner in this

arena), the impact of globalization, growing centralization in many schooling systems,

reaction against more process-oriented forms of pedagogy, and a growinginstrumentalism education have served to make Eisner's message both more pertinent

to schools, and more difficult to respond to.


12/16

12

1. Aspects of the

curriculum to be

evaluated

The evaluator determines what is to be evaluated which may

be the total school system, a particular district, a

particular grade level or a particular subject. The objectives

of the evaluation activity are clearly stated.

Identify the information to be collected and the tools for

collecting the data which may involve interviews, giving of

questionnaires, tests, collection of documents and so forth.The evaluator also identifies the people from whom data is

to be collected.

The data collected is analysed and presented in the form o

tables and graphs. Statistical tools are often used to comparsignificant differences and to establish correlation o

relationship between variables.

Reports are written describing the findings and interpretatio

of the data. Based on the findings, conclusion are made o

the effectiveness of curriculum implementation effort

Recommendations are made to reconsider certain aspects o

the curriculum.

No matter what evaluation model is used in evaluating a curriculum, themethods of data collection and the instruments used are more or less similar. The

common instruments used in curriculum evaluation are interviews, observations, tests,

survey, content analysis and portfolios (record of work or products).

8.6.1 Questionnaires and ChecklistsWhen you need to quickly and/or easily get lots of information from people in a

non threatening way, questionnaire and checklist are useful data collection techniques.

Questionnaires and checklists can complete anonymously and relatively inexpensive to

administer. Since data collected is quantitative, it is easy to compare and analyse and

can be administered to many people. Massive amount of data can be obtained. It is also

easy to design as there are many sample questionnaires already in existence. However,the information obtained may not be accurate as it relies how truthfully subjects respond

2. Data Collection

3. Analysis of

Information

4. Reporting of

Information

8.6 Instrumentation for Curriculum Evaluation

8.5 Phases of Curriculum Evaluation


13/16

13

to the questions. There is also the fear that the wordings used can bias client's responses.

Questionnaires are impersonal and since only a sample of subjects are given the

instrument, we not get the full story.

8.6.2 InterviewsInterviews are usually one-on-one situations in which an individual asks

questions to which a second individual (which may be a teacher, principal, student,

parent) responds. The person asking the questions is called the interviewer while the

person giving answers to the questions is called the interviewee. Interviews are used

when you want to fully understand someone's impressions or experiences, or learn more

about their answers to questionnaires. There are two general types of interviews

depending on the extent to which the responses required are unstructured or structured.

In an unstructured interview, the interviewer does not follow a rigid script and

there is a great deal of flexibility in the responses. For example; Why do you think the

recommended textbook for the course is difficult for low ability learners? The teacher

responding to such a question will give a variety of reasons. Some of the reasons givenmay be of a general nature while others may be specific to certain sections of the

textbook. This makes the task of keeping track of responses more difficult. The open-

endedness of the question will require that the interviewer record all responses and

make sense of it later. The advantage of the unstructured interview is that it allows the

evaluator to gather a variety of information, especially in relation to the interviewees

knowledge, beliefs or feelings toward a particular situation.

In a structured interview, the questions asked usually require very specific

responses. For example, Is the recommended textbook difficult for low ability learners

because: a) there is too much content; b) the language used is beyond the

comprehension of low ability learners, c) or there are too few examples and illustrations.

Regardless of which type of interview is used, evaluators should ensure that each

question is relevant for its intended purpose. In the end, the data must be translated into

a form that can be analysed and this has to be dome carefully to preserve accuracy and

to maintain the sense of the data. The advantage of interviews is that it can get a full

range and depth of information and it develops a relationship with teachers and students

and it is more flexible. However, interview can take much time, can be hard to analyze

and compare, can be costly and interviewer can bias client's responses.

8.6.3 ObservationsTo gather accurate information about how a program actually operates,

particularly about processes. In other words to view operations of a program as theyare actually occurring. For example, can the people involved adapt to events as they

occur.

8.6.4 DocumentsWhen we want impressions of how a programme operates without interrupting

the programme; we can review the memos, minutes, etc to get a comprehensive and

historical information about the implementation of the programme. However, we

should be quite clear about what looking for as there may be a load of documents.


14/16

14

Method Overall Purpose Advantages Challenges

questionnaires,surveys,

checklists

when need to quicklyand/or easily get lots of

information from people ina non threatening way

-can complete anonymously

-inexpensive to administer

-easy to compare andanalyze

-administer to many people-can get lots of data

-many sample questionnaires

already exist

-might not get careful

feedback

-wording can bias client'sresponses

-are impersonal-in surveys, may need

sampling expert

- doesn't get full story

interviews

when want to fullyunderstand someone's

impressions or

experiences, or learn more

about their answers to

questionnaires

-get full range and depth ofinformation

-develops relationship with

client

-can be flexible with client

-can take much time-can be hard to analyze and

compare

-can be costly

-interviewer can biasclient's responses

documentation

review

when want impression ofhow program operates

without interrupting the

program; is from review of

applications, finances,

memos, minutes, etc.

-get comprehensive and

historical information-doesn't interrupt program or

client's routine in program

-information already exists

-few biases about

information

-often takes much time

-info may be incomplete-need to be quite clear about

what looking for

-not flexible means to get

data; data restricted to what

already exists

observation

to gather accurate

information about how a

program actually operates,

particularly about

processes

-view operations of a

program as they are actually

occurring

-can adapt to events as they

occur

-can be difficult to interpretseen behaviors

-can be complex to

categorize observations

-can influence behaviors of

program participants

-can be expensive

focus groups

explore a topic in depth

through group discussion,

e.g., about reactions to an

experience or suggestion,

understanding common

complaints, etc.; useful inevaluation and marketing

-quickly and reliably getcommon impressions

-can be efficient way to get

much range and depth of

information in short time

- can convey key information

about programs

-can be hard to analyze

responses

-need good facilitator for

safety and closure

-difficult to schedule 6-8

people together

case studies

to fully understand or

depict client's experiences

in a program, and conduct

comprehensive

examination through cross

comparison of cases

-fully depicts client'sexperience in program input,

process and results

-powerful means to portrayprogram to outsiders

-usually quite time

consuming to collect,

organize and describe

-represents depth of

information, rather than

breadth

Table Showing A Summary of Data Collection Instruments


15/16

15

Background: Mathematics Learning and Teaching Initiative (MALATI) was

commissioned by the Education Initiative of the Open Society Foundation for South

Africa in 1996 to develop, pilot and disseminate alternative approaches and tools for

teaching and learning mathematics.

Method: Based on project workers observation and written field notes made during

the implementation of the MALATI curriculum the following findings were obtained:

Findings:

a.

a number of teachers had not yet received the most basic communicationsissued to schools regarding Curriculum 2005

b.

teachers had difficulty interpreting certain aspect of the official curriculum

document. Lack of clarity led to confusion

c.

the curriculum document had content errors

d. content knowledge of teachers was not adequate to handle some of the topic in

the curriculum such as statistics.

e. learners did not have the prior experience assumed in the curriculum eg. in

grade 9, the teaching of probability assumes that learner had done some

statistics in the earlier grades

f. teachers are continuing to teach the topics they are used to and are reluctant to

use the MALATI materialsg. the curriculum suggested that group work be used in teaching probability and

data handling. Learners were not accustomed to group discussion and listening

to one another.

h.

the teaching of the topic took a longer time as teachers struggled to deal with

learners everyday experiences in the teaching of probability

Recommendations:1)

Teachers need workshops on selected aspects of the content

2) Selected parts of the curriculum documents need to be rewritten to reduce

confusion

3)

To convince teachers not to treat the teaching of probability and statistics as

new content but teach it for its mathematical value

[Source: Karin Brodie and Craig Pournara, 2003. Towards a framework for developing and

researching groupwork in mathematics classrooms.http//www.hsrcpress.ac.za.

ACTIVITY 8.21) What are some of the problems identified with the implementation of the

MALATI programme?

2)

Based on the findings list the recommendations made.

8.3 Case Study: Evaluation of a Mathematics Curriculum in South Africa


16/16

16

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:

1.

Identify some problems in the implementation of the Primary School

Integrated Curriculum (KBSR) and the Secondary School Integrated

Curriculum (KBSM)?

2.

Describe how the teaching of science and mathematics in English was

implemented in your school?

3. New curriculum often fail to become established in schools because the

importance and complexity of the implementation phase is not understood

Discuss.

READINGS

Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The Teacher-Curriculum Encounter. Buffalo: StateUniversity of New York Press.

o Chapter 1: Patterns of teachers involvement in the curriculum

endeavour.

o Chapter 3: Teachers concerns about curriculum issues

o Chapter 7; Implications for teacher education and staff development

[available at eBrary].

Ornstein, A. and Hunkins, F. Curriculum: Foundations, principle and

issues. (1998). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Chapter 10: Curriculum

implementation.

Sowell, E. (2000). Curriculum: An integrative introduction. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Chapter 1: Overview of curriculum processes andproducts.