1512-Week 1

Understandable, Comprehensible, Coherent Curriculum
      The topic of National Standards is a Hot button issue and has been debated for years. The article "A Coherent Curriculum" is a great read for any future or current teacher. This article makes some very good points about curriculum. The article brings up some very important issues that the U.S. should address right now.

     There are gaps between U.S students and those in other countries in the overall ranking in math and science. By not having a coherent curriculum, the performance of US students was average or lower than those in other countries with more coherent curriculums (or national standards). In their examination of what is taught, they looked at “intended” content and “enacted” content. Intended content is what was intended for teachers to teach (i.e. the national, state, or district standards). Enacted content is what teachers actually taught. Intended content is replicated in U.S. textbooks. In the U.S., most teachers “follow” the textbook. Strengths and weaknesses in the intended content can be found in this study. The intended content in the U.S., relative to others in the world, is not focused, highly repetitive, not very demanding, and incoherent. Teachers are covering a wide variety of topics briefly and not going in-depth, therefore, "a mile wide and an inch deep" is fitting to the curriculum of the U.S.

      The article made a good point about how the U.S. has long list of what should be taught and we have market-driven textbooks. Many have widely different opinions about what should be taught therefore the U.S. has broad national standards, more specific state standards, and local districts are left to decide their own as well. All this variation keeps the students of the U.S. at an average or below level compared to other countries.