Signalling shifts in meaning: the experience of social studies curriculum design

Samoan Educators' Perceptions and Experiences of In-service Training in Implementing Curriculum Reform

“…The majority of teachers noted that the curriculum was the same as the previous one, and hence this was a good reason for not altering teaching practices and approaches. This confusion is also highlighted in the literature -policies and changed practices not being made explicitly clear (Aitken, 2006;Spillane et al, 2002). There should be explanation notes in the documents so teachers are able to make clear distinctions between old and new knowledge.…”

“…Spillane et al (2002) stated that teacher intentions are genuine when it comes to implementation by trying to understand how the curriculum can be translated into classroom practice, but cautions that they may in the event misinterpret, rather than undermine policy documents (Spillane et al, 2002). Davis and Krajcik (2005) and Aitken (2006) emphasised that policy makers and curriculum designers should ensure that the "essence of intention" of the curriculum is relayed explicitly in the document for teachers, and that it fosters and promotes the pedagogical design capacity of teachers, so that the teaching and learning is enhanced (p. 6). But Robinson and Lai (2006) also highlight the need and relevance of getting teachers to engage in their prior knowledge in order for them to understand the changes taking place.…”

“…They noted that while teacher intentions are genuine when it comes to curriculum implementation, by trying to interpret how the document can be translated into classroom practice, they may misinterpret what is actually in the document. Spillane (2004) and Aitken (2006) caution that the danger in this predicament is that teachers may operate (unconsciously) on misunderstandings. Spillane (2004) states that this "unwitting and unknowing undermining" (p. 169) is a cognitive process in which implementing agents (teachers in this case) "first notice, then frame, interpret and construct meaning" (Spillane et al, 2002, p. 392).…”

“…Hayward, Priestley and Young (2004) stress that external agencies have little influence in the understanding and acceptance of reform, therefore they need to ensure that design is explicit and well documented so problems such as that noted by Spillane et al (2002) is avoided. Davis and Krajcik (2005) and Aitken (2006) emphasise that policy makers and curriculum designers should ensure that the "essence of intention" of the curriculum is relayed explicitly in the document for teachers, and that it fosters and promotes the pedagogical design capacity of teachers, so that teaching and learning is enhanced (p. 6). Spillane et al (2002), Aitken (2006) and Ball and Cohen (1996) therefore stress the significant contribution of design to ensure that the curriculum implements the essence of intention (Davis & Krajcik, 2005).…”

“…Davis and Krajcik (2005) and Aitken (2006) emphasise that policy makers and curriculum designers should ensure that the "essence of intention" of the curriculum is relayed explicitly in the document for teachers, and that it fosters and promotes the pedagogical design capacity of teachers, so that teaching and learning is enhanced (p. 6). Spillane et al (2002), Aitken (2006) and Ball and Cohen (1996) therefore stress the significant contribution of design to ensure that the curriculum implements the essence of intention (Davis & Krajcik, 2005).…”