Curriculum Analysis For An English Composition Course: Research

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/275968373
Curriculum Analysis For An English Composition Course
Research · May 2015

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1440.9126
CITATIONS READS
0 3,527
1 author:
Eduard C Hanganu
19 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Lexical Borrowing From English into Romanian View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Eduard C Hanganu on 08 May 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Curriculum Analysis For An English Composition Course 1
Curriculum Analysis for an English Composition Course

Eduard C. Hanganu
B.A., M.A., Linguistics
Lecturer in English, UE
Draft 7
Revised – April 28, 2015
© 2015
Curriculum Analysis for an English Composition Course

Curriculum design raises a complex and difficult challenge for the educators, as there is
no “pattern” or “matrix” curriculum that would guide the process, and no documented universal
standards or outcomes. Whereas “the development of standards represents a movement toward
consensus about what it is that students should learn,” agreement in this area does not also mean
that there is consensus on curriculum, as “the experts in our [education] field are in fundamental
disagreement” concerning curriculum issues (Posner, 2004, p. 4).
The Purpose of Curriculum Analysis
Left with the confusion created by this “fundamental disagreement” among curriculum
experts, educators seem to have three alternatives: “1. Ignore all experts and just use one’s own
common sense; 2. Follow one authority’s ideas; 3. Borrow from all experts as long as their ideas
“work.” (Posner, 2004, p. 4). As each of the referred to options “is fraught with danger,” Posner
thinks that “the only viable answer…is one that includes the idea of reflective eclecticism.” This
concept “is based on the assumption that, much as we would like to deny it, there is no panacea
in education,” and that “what curriculum decision makers need is an understanding of the myriad
curriculum alternatives,” and the “dilemmas that underlie each curriculum decision,” and to “be
able to unpack the tacit assumptions behind each alternative,” since “when they can do this, they
will have gained the ability to assess critically the alternatives and the claims their proponents
make (Schwab, 1971)” (Posner, 2004, p. 4).
The instrument which would “contribute to the development of reflective eclecticism” for
curriculum designers is curriculum analysis, defined by Posner (20004) as:

…an attempt to tease a curriculum apart into its component parts, to examine those parts
and the way they fit together to make a whole, to identify the beliefs and ideas to which
the developers were committed and which either explicitly or implicitly shaped the
curriculum, and to examine the implications of these commitments and beliefs for the
quality of the educational experience” (2004, p.14).
This paper, the curriculum analysis of a course in English Composition I which is taught
at Ivy Tech Community College in Evansville, Indiana, is based on Posner’s (2004) “Curriculum
Analysis Questions,” listed on pages 20-22 of his book Curriculum Analysis.
Curriculum Analysis: The English Composition Course
Curriculum Analysis Questions
First Set: Curriculum Documentation and Origins
I. How is the curriculum documented? (Chapter One)
I.1 On what curriculum and standards documents and other resources will you base your
analysis? Which state and national standards are relevant to the curriculum you have chosen?
The English Composition I (ENG 111) course taught at Ivy Tech Community College in
Evansville, Indiana is based on a curriculum “template” designed by the Curriculum Committee
of the Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana. This curriculum “matrix” or “pattern” is entitled
College-wide Course Outline of Record – ENG 111, English Composition,” and is the standard
course document template which all Ivy Tech Community College campuses must follow when
the English Composition I course is taught (Catalog, 2005, p. 222).
The College-wide Course Outline of Record – ENG 111, English Composition document
establishes the course title (English Composition I), course number (ENG 111), all prerequisites
(Demonstrated competency through appropriate assessment or earning a grace of “C” or better in

ENG 025 Introduction to College Writing II and ENG 032 Reading Strategies for College II),
credit hours (3), contact hours (3), course catalog description, Statewide Major Course Learning
Objectives, course content, suggested texts/curriculum materials, suggested readers, suggested
handbooks, instructions concerning access to the Ivy Tech College Virtual Library, instructions
concerning methods of Evaluation, minimum Faculty Credentials, Academic Honesty Statement,
and required, additional, and optional syllabus Information (Catalog, 2005, p.222).
On the basis of the different choices provided in the template of the College-wide Course
Outline of Record – ENG 111, English Composition document, the English Departments on each
campus design customized versions of the course document. Among the customized matters are
the course textbooks (text/curriculum sources, or English Composition textbook, the Reader, and
the Handbook), the methods of evaluation, and the syllabi or course calendars. This document is
the analysis of the adapted version of the College-wide Course Outline of Record – ENG 111,
English Composition for the English department of the Ivy Tech Community College, Evansville
campus. The Major Course Learning Objectives are those established and authorized all through
the state campuses by the Curriculum Committee of the Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana.
The basis of this curriculum analysis is, therefore, the Ivy Tech Community College of
Indiana – Evansville, Course Outline, the English Composition textbook, Writing Today:
Contexts and Options for the Real World, Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2005, written by Donald Pharr
and Santi V. Buscemi, the Reader, 75 Readings Plus 7th ed., Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2004,
written also by Santi Buscemi with Charlotte Smith, and the Handbook, A Writer’s Reference
5th ed., Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003, written by Diana Hacker.

I.2 On what aspects of the analysis do the curriculum and standard documents focus?
The College-wide Course Outline of Record – ENG 111, English Composition document
provides the Catalog Description, which defines the purpose of the course (“designed to develop
students’ abilities to think, organize, and express their ideas clearly and effectively in writing”),
and the Major Learning Course Objectives. The English Composition textbook, Writing Today:
Contexts and Options for the Real World, establishes the objective of the textbook in relation to
“the careers that today’s students aspire to, and the preparation that they need for those careers,”
in the context of “the electronic revolution in communications.” (p. xix). The purpose is to offer
the students “a curriculum that challenges them in the classroom, provides them with skills they
can use in other college courses, and, most important, prepares them to communicate effectively
in the professional and business worlds” (p. xvii). The Reader, 75 Readings Plus (7th ed.) is the
source of student reading selections, and is used by the instructor as part of classroom evaluation
of the students performance and progress. Hacker’s A writer’s reference offers the grammar and
punctuation exercises which are also used in the classroom for assessment and evaluation.
The annotated edition of the English Composition textbook Writing Today: Contexts and
Options for the Real World, which is designed for instructors, contains different information that
enables the instructors to design mini-lessons on different composition topics, provides hints and
suggestions about various teaching strategies which could be used for teaching elaborate matters.
Both the student and teacher editions of the English Composition textbooks offer access to a web
database and exercises site which provides a large source of information, and abundant exercises
that cover grammar, punctuation and mechanics, and which can be used for writing and grammar
practice or for assessment and evaluation.

The three textbooks have different rationales and functions in the teaching of the English
Composition course, and meet specific instructional purposes, as they provide information about
different phases of the writing process or include literature which helps students improve various
skills needed for writing, but all of them complement each other, with a minor degree of overlap,
reinforcing the English composition information provided. The different methods of information
organization are due to the specific purposes for which each book has been designed: instruction
concerning the basics of writing and different writing modes, data on the formal language of the
academia and writing standards, and samples of the best literature available.
All together, the curriculum documentation provides the rationale of the curriculum, the
learning objectives or final outcomes, the expected consequences the curriculum should have on
the students and their socio-economic environment, a chronological source of book information,
suggestive approaches to teaching content, and guidelines regarding student evaluation.
1.3 What limitations in documentation do you find?
The information collected so far appears to be adequate for the analysis of the Ivy Tech
Community College of Indiana – Evansville, Course Outline, English Composition I course, but
there are unanswered questions related to the development of the college-wide course matrix or
template for the course. It seems that the template was designed at least one or two decades ago,
and the Curriculum Committee members who participated in the design are either retired or do
not work anymore for Ivy Tech. This fact leaves the historical elements related to the course in
the “fog” of time. Though the template has been “revised” a few times, no major changes have
been made to the critical content of the course outline, that is, no updating has occurred. Due to
this fact, the course template seems rather outdated, and would benefit from a major upgrading.
There is also a local historical element which remains in the dark concerning the origins
of certain writing assignments which differ from the ones used on other campuses. The issue is
again related to the departure of the previous English Department chair who might have known
something about the matter. Though those writing assignments do not appear to fulfill anymore
their intended purpose, they remain on the English Composition I syllabus as a tradition relic.
The information included in the textbooks provides readers with the names of the authors
and their professional backgrounds, but not with the reasons which influenced the creation of the
textbooks—publisher request, desire of the authors, or classroom need.
II. What situations resulted in the development of the curriculum (Chapter Two)
II.1 If you can find out, who made up the cast of characters in the development of the
curriculum? What were their names, with what institution were they affiliated, and what were
their respective roles in the project? Within the project team, which represented the learners, the
teachers, the subject matter, and the milieu? Was there an obvious blind spot on the team?
The College-wide Course Outline of Record – ENG 111, English Composition document,
was designed in the beginning by the Curriculum Committee of the Ivy Tech Community College
of Indiana. As I mentioned before, due to the fact that the course had been designed two decades
ago, and since then the members of the Curriculum Committee have either retired or have left the
college, it is not possible for me at this time to find out who those members were. The “adapted”
curriculum, though, which has been in use during the past decade at Ivy Tech College Evansville
campus, has a known origin. Two members of the English Department have made the adaptation
of the standard “matrix” for the Evansville campus: Nancy Grammer, the department leader, and
Carole Chapman, a senior member of the department. Between the two, Professor Chapman had
the major role in the structuring of the course calendar, the establishment of assignments, and the
definition of assessment methods, as the main English Composition instructor, while Grammer’s
role was that of supervisor, guide, and consultant on different matters related to the course.
The English Composition I textbook, Writing Today: Contexts and Options for the Real
World, has been written by Donald Pharr and Santi V. Buscemi. Professor Donald Pharr teaches
world literature, English Composition, and film at Saint Leo University. Professor Buscemi, the
chair of the Department of English at Middlesex College teaches reading and writing. The main
writers of the book are “composition instructors with sixty years of experience between [them],
but because “no text is the product of its authors alone,” 41 English Composition teachers from
different colleges “across the country” are also listed as contributing to the writing of the course
textbook. All of them have extensive teaching experience in English composition—reading and
writing. Pharr and Buscemi seem to have the main roles in the production of the textbook, while
the other instructors appear to have the role of consultants.
The book which supplements Writing Today, entitled 75 Readings Plus, has been written,
as mentioned, by Dr. Buscemi, the chair of the Department of English at Middlesex College, and
Charlotte Smith, who leads the Center for Reading and Writing at Adirondack College. As in the
case with Writing Today, the authors “have sought the advice of many colleagues” regarding the
content of the Reader, in order to “make this book even more effective and appealing” for all the
students, both readers and writers. Both writers appear to have worked in an equal manner to the
publication of the book, sharing the responsibilities on the same level.
The last item included in the curriculum for English Composition I is the textbook called
A writer’s Reference, published by the late Diana Hacker, who had been instructor in the English
Department at Prince George’s Community College. This reference book contains information
on all phases of writing—composing and revising, document design, sentence style, word choice
and usage, grammar, mechanics, research, and writing styles (MLA, APA, and CMS). Professor
Emerita of English, Diana Hacker worked for more than a decade to develop the Reference. The
writing of the textbook benefited from the input of Barbara Fister, a reference librarian, and from
the suggestions of the students who attended the English courses which Hacker taught.
From the information collected about those who designed the four constituent parts of the
curriculum, that is, the outline of the course, and the three textbooks, it appears that most of them
were experts in the subject matter – Pharr, Buscemi, Smith, and Hacker. Grammar and Chapman
represented the teachers, but had also knowledge and experience in English Composition. All the
people involved in the curriculum had teaching experience, and were capable in course structure
organization, classroom education, and evaluation of student knowledge.
All the curriculum builders understood “teachers and the complexities of the classroom,”
and “the demands teachers face,” (Posner, 2004, p.35), because of their professional experience,
which implied also an understanding of the “economic and political realities of the community,”
together with the “social problems related to these realities,” (Posner, 2004, p. 35), but between
the six participants in the curriculum design Grammer and Chapman had specific knowledge of
the social, economical, and political context in which the students lived, because they resided in
the same geographical area. In this sense, these two college instructors could perceive in a better
way the “needs of the students” than the textbook writers, and be prepared to adapt the syllabus
to the particular needs of the students in the area (Posner, 2004, p. 35). This knowledge, though,
could not be considered “expertise” in the true sense of the word, but general experience which
had been accumulated through years of practice in education and contact with the students. The
knowledge Grammar and Chapman had of their milieu extended also into the organizational and
physical areas, because both were senior instructors in the college and knew the institution well
from personal contact with the departments which composed the college, and the facilities of the
institution.
Students were not represented as direct contributors in the curriculum design process, but
their “needs” were established on the basis of the professional knowledge of the textbook writers
and of the college instructors. No interviews were conducted to assess students’ specific interests
or concerns related to the teaching of the course by social workers, or student psychologists.
Posner (2004) remarks that “the composition of a curriculum development team frames a
curriculum,” and therefore “interpreting it requires knowing who was and who was not involved
in developing it,” which knowledge permits the identification of “potential blind spots” (2004, p.
35). In this situation, the “blind spots” of the curriculum are a few: (1) no professional experts in
subject matter participated in the curriculum design; (2) neither psychologists nor social workers
were involved in the assessment of students needs; (3) no student or student representatives were
invited to participate in the design process; (4) elected officials, parents, or local area groups had
no input into the curriculum design, and (5) no social matters specialists, or sociologists, worked
together with the curriculum designers to establish the social needs of the learners.
II.2 To what social, economic, political, or educational problem was the curriculum attempting
to respond?
English Composition I is a basic, required course, which must be taken by all the college
students, irrespective of the concentration of their coursework, or degree. The goal of the course
is to introduce freshmen to college or academic writing, and to provide them with the knowledge
needed for paper writing in different subjects and for the various courses offered in college. This
course has also the purpose to develop the critical thinking skills students need for research, and
professional development.
In a general sense, also, the English Composition curriculum was intended to prepare the
students for a full intellectual, social, and political life. Those who finish the course will have the
reading, writing, and critical skills which permit them to take part in various kinds of intellectual
activities, among which are to continue their formal education, write, publish books, be members
in different societies and associations, hold social and political function, and participate in the
politics of the United States at the local or national or international level.
II. 3 What planning elements dominated the curriculum development process?
Beauchamp states that a well-designed and balanced curriculum should include four main
subdivisions:
Optimally, a curriculum should contain four parts: 1) a statement of intention for use of
the document as a guiding force for planning instructional strategies, 2) statements
outlining the goals for the school(s) for which the curriculum was designed, 3) a body of
culture content that has the potential for the realization of the goals, and 4) a statement of
an evaluation scheme for determining the worth and the effectiveness of the curriculum
and the curriculum system. (1982, p.25)
The curriculum for English Composition I contains a statement of intention or rationale
in the course catalogue description:
English Composition is designed to develop students’ abilities to think, organize, and
express their ideas clearly and effectively. This course incorporates reading, research,
and critical thinking. Emphasis is placed on the various forms of expository writing such
as process, description, narration, comparison, analysis, persuasion, and argumentation.
Numerous in-class writing activities are required in addition to extended essays written
outside of class. (Catalog, 2005, p. 222)

The content of the English composition I course was included in the textbooks assigned
for the course, and listed in order of assignments in the syllabus. The topics to be covered were
related to the structure of the essay, the different writing modes used in essay writing, grammar,
punctuation and mechanics, sentence style, paragraph writing, and essay review and editing.
The course objectives or outcomes were listed in thee Major Course Objectives section.
At the conclusion of the semester, students are expected to have obtained the following abilities
and skills:
1. Understand communication theory and the roles audiences play in the writing
process.
2. Apply critical reading and thinking skills to the writing process.
3. Demonstrate an awareness of language as a tool for learning and communication.
4. Develop strategies for making independent, critical evaluations of student and
published texts.
5. Research and critically evaluate information to produce writing with appropriate
documentation.
6. Apply strategies for the composition process such as drafting, collaboration,
revision, and peer evaluation to produce written documents.
7. Write well-organized essays with a firm thesis and a clear introduction, body, and
conclusion.
8. Engage in pre-writing activities, including narrowing a topic, generating ideas,
determining the audience and the relationship between audience and content, and
setting an appropriate tone.

9. Demonstrate an understanding of the various rhetorical modes, including
argumentation and analysis, and apply that understanding in various writing
environments, including an essay test.
10. Support a thesis statement with valid reasons and evidence.
11. Follow the conventions of standard written English, in sentence structure,
punctuation, grammar and usage, and spelling.
12. Recognize and develop styles appropriate to varied writing situations (Ivy Tech
Community College of Indiana – Evansville, Course Outline, pp. 1-2)
In order for the students to meet all the course goals, the curriculum had to be designed in
a fashion that would cover all the learning skills and experiences and practices that would permit
students to acquire all the course information, and the writing abilities and skills contained in the
purpose or outcome area. There were reading assignments, with the goal to improve or enhance
the students’ reading and comprehension, writing assignments (major and minor papers) planned
to develop the students’ writing skills, and grammar exercises for classroom and home that were
intended to develop in the students understanding of the formal college English, and all the rules
that need to be followed in academic writing.
Because the course was an introduction to writing, the students were assumed to have the
knowledge of a high school graduate. For this reason the lessons were organized in a manner that
would take into account even those students who had graduated from the high school a long time
before, and whose writing skills were almost forgotten and in great need to be reactivated.
The course content sequence follows to a large degree the structure of the textbooks, and
exceptions seldom occur. Each class meets for one hour and fifteen minutes twice a week, while
the written assignments are spaced in an even manner throughout the semester.
From an estimation of the weight which various planning elements have in this particular
curriculum design, it appears that the following elements have been given more prominence: (1)
the course objectives and outcomes, (2) the writing activities, which are intended to aid students
to develop their reading and writing skills and abilities, (3) content structure, and (4) the reason,
or rationale of the course. The order in which the items are listed reflects their curricular weight.
III. What perspective, if any, does the curriculum represent? (Chapter Three)
The English Composition I course is taught through a combination of approaches which
embrace the traditional, structure of disciplines, behavioral, and constructivist perspectives. The
most widespread method of instruction, though, is “the transmissionist” approach, the traditional
“lecture,” during which lessons are “focusing on learning objects which are transmitted from one
person [the teacher] to another [the student]” (Thompson, 2005, p. 3).
Second set: The Curriculum Proper
IV. What are the purposes and content of the curriculum? (Chapter Four)
IV.1 What aspects of the curriculum are intended for training, and what aspects are intended for
educational context?
The English Composition I course is part of the required college courses, and its function
is to provide students with fundamental college knowledge. If the notion of “training,” as Posner
(2004) defines it, “refers to contexts in which we can predict with some confidence the specific
situations in which people will use what they learn,” while the concept of “education” is defined
as referring “to context in which we cannot predict with any specificity or certainty the situations
in which people will use what they learn,” (p. 70), then English Composition I is not intended to
be a training course, but an “opening” for the students towards a career choice. Ivy Tech College
offers both “training and educational contexts” (Posner, 2004, p. 71). After the completion of the
required courses the students can opt for a concentration which would lead to an associate degree
in liberal arts, or to a diploma in nursing, computer science, automotive science, pre-engineering,
manufacturing technology, business administration, design technology, etc. The course structure
reflects its fundamental purpose, as there are no sections dedicated to training in exact vocational
skills, but in general college reading and writing skills and abilities.
IV.2 At what level, if at all, does the curriculum express its purpose?
The curriculum expresses its purpose first in the title, “English Composition,” suggesting
that the course is going to be geared towards “composition,” that is, paper writing. This rationale
is then defined in a paragraph statement under the section “Catalog Description” in the outline of
the course. The purpose of this course is further reiterated in the learning objectives or outcomes,
course calendar, and textbooks, that is, through all documents that are used in the course.
IV.3 What educational goals and educational aims are emphasized, and that are their relative
priorities?
The educational goals are clearly stated in the “Catalog Description” of the course, while
some educational aims are also emphasized in the same paragraph:
English Composition is designed to develop students’ abilities to think, organize, and express
their ideas clearly and effectively. This course incorporates reading, research, and critical
thinking. Emphasis is placed on the various forms of expository writing such as process,
description, narration, comparison, analysis, persuasion, and argumentation. Numerous in-
class writing activities are required in addition to extended essays written outside of class.
The paragraph above makes evident that the course emphasis falls in the first place on the
acquisition of skills related to writing research documents in various exposition writing “modes,”
which necessitate description, explanation, and interpretation skills. This kind of writing requires
advanced reading, writing, and critical analysis skills that must be developed during research and
composition.
IV.4 What types of learning objectives are included and emphasized in the curriculum?
The learning objectives for English Composition I are included under the “Major Course
Learning Objectives” section as course objectives, or course outcomes, as follows:
Major Course Learning Objectives:
Upon successful completion of this course the student will be expected to:
1. Understand communication theory and the roles audiences play in the writing
process.
2. Apply critical reading and thinking skills to the writing process.
3. Demonstrate an awareness of language as a tool for learning and communication.
4. Develop strategies for making independent, critical evaluations of student and
published texts.
documentation.
conclusion.
8. Engage in pre-writing activities, including narrowing a topic, generating ideas,
determining the audience and the relationship between audience and content, and
setting an appropriate tone.

10. Support a thesis statement with valid reasons and evidence.
12. Recognize and develop styles appropriate to varied writing situations (Ivy Tech
Community College of Indiana – Evansville, Course Outline, pp. 1-2).
The learning objectives, or outcomes, included in the English Composition course outline
could be categorized into three groups among which are understanding the English language and
the process of communication, becoming writing proficient, and learning the principle or rules of
the standard or academic English. In the implementation of the curriculum, about five objectives
out of the whole twelve seem to take precedence, in the following order of importance:
conclusion.
documentation.
IV. 5 What are the primary ways in which the curriculum represents the subject matter to
students?
The main English Composition textbook, Writing Today, is divided into 21chapters, out
of which seven discuss paper purpose and audience, essay format, paper writing, editing, global
revisions, proofreading, and business paper formats, ten chapters illustrate the rhetorical modes,
and four chapters discuss blending modes, the research process, and writing formats. The reader,
75 Readings Plus, provides examples of literature in different rhetorical modes, and the Writer’s
Reference contains overlapping information concerning the format of an academic paper and the
basic approaches to writing, and provides teaching on the conventions of formal written English,
sentence structure, punctuation, grammar and usage, and spelling. Most of the documentation is
presented in text format, with a few exceptions (comics, pictures, charts, and exercises). During
the past three years there has been an increased emphasis on the use of technological devices in
the classroom. More and more instructors are using computers and projectors to run PowerPoint
or other graphic applications in order to create variation in the instructional process.
IV.6 Does your curriculum have a view of multicultural education in its content? Would you
consider it an assimilationist, multiethnic, or social reconstructionist view?
Evansville and the surrounding areas (Indiana, Kentucky, and Illinois) have been known
as homogenous for a long time from an ethnic perspective. Most people who live in the area are
third generation Americans. Until about a decade ago, foreign people were uncommon and rare
in the region, as were people who belonged to other ethnic groups. There is a rather small group
of African-Americans in this area that is dominated by people whose ancestry goes back to the
white European lands. Due to such socio-cultural setting, there has been no need for the college
to develop awareness for ethnic diversity, and the curriculum does not contain any elements that
would refer to multicultural education, in spite of the fact that during the past seven years there
has been a large arrival of Russians, Mexicans, Indians, and Pakistani which will have a visible
impact on the ethnic structure of the population in the region. It appears that at this moment the
dominant social perspective is that of assimilationism. Foreigners are encouraged to incorporate
into the social weave of the area, and no peculiar accommodations are provided for them at this
time, though there are strong signs that the college will have to recognize the demographic shift
soon, and create programs and curricula which will address the new social environment, and the
needs of the various ethnic groups who will become part of the student population.
IV.7 How is it determined if students have met the standards? What are the consequences for
students, teachers, and schools, if it is determined that students have not met standards? Does it
matter if you adhere to the standards?
The English Composition I (ENG 111) course standards have been established during the
design of the College-wide Course Outline of Record – ENG 111, English Composition template
by the Curriculum Committee of the Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, and are mandated
statewide, that is, all Ivy Tech College campuses are required to use them as estimated outcomes
and goals for the course. Students are expected to demonstrate a certain degree of competency in
order to different values of passing grades for the course, as listed under the section “Methods of
Evaluation” in the course outline. The determination of students’ knowledge and abilities levels,
which is the determination whether students have met the course standards, is performed through
evaluation and assessment testing administered during the course (Catalog, 2005, p. 222).
Since the standards are integrated in the English Composition I course outline, instructors
must adhere to the college regulations and follow them in order to make sure that the assessment,
evaluation, and grading of students was fair and correct. Disregard of standards will cause wrong
student assessment, evaluation and grading, and will be grounds for the student complaints to the
English Department chair and other college administrative bodies, causing dismissal of violators.
The students are responsible to instructors for meeting the course requirements, or standards, and
their lack of success to do so will impact on the course grade and could lead to course failure.
There is no information available regarding the consequences which would follow failure
on the part of the Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana or any of its campuses to abide by the
English Composition I, or other course standards. The funds the college obtains from the Indiana
State government do not seem to be dependent on the college performance, but the Indiana State
Board of Education has a mission statement adopted on April 9, 1998, which affirms:
The Mission of the Indiana State Board of Education is to fulfill its statutory
responsibility by establishing policies that promote excellence in learning for all students.
The Board shall provide Leadership, Vision, and Advocacy to secure optimum
educational opportunity and benefit to the citizens of Indiana. (http://ideanet.doe.state.in.)
In reference to Adoption of academic standards, The Indiana State Board of Education’s
IC-20-321-3-1, also states:
Sec 1. The state board shall adopt clear, concise, and jargon free state academic standards
that are comparable to national and international academic standards. These academic
standards must be adopted for each grade level from kindergarten through grade 12 for
the following subjects: (1) English/language arts; (2) Mathematics; (3) Social studies; (4)
science. (http://ideanet.doe.state.in)
These public school standards are similar to the accreditation standards to which colleges
in the United States are held by different accreditation agencies. The college education standards
insure that the accredited institutions consent to the “policies that promote excellence in learning
for all students.” Ivy Tech college has been endorsed by The Higher Learning Commission of the
North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, and as an accredited institution, it must be in
compliance with all the required standards, otherwise it would lose accreditation (College, 2005,
p. 6).
IV.8 Is the curriculum aligned with the standards? Does the curriculum facilitate student
understanding of the content and processes espoused by the standards? Are portrayals of the
nature/structure of the discipline congruent between the curriculum and the standards? Are the
balances of depth and breadth of the curriculum and the standards congruent? Are the standards
cited for each topic/activity?
The English Composition I course has been designed on the basis of the “competencies,”
or “ends-means,” curriculum model, the established design pattern in the second half of the past
century (Eisner, 1979, p. 33) that began curriculum design with the objectives of the curriculum
and continued with the structure of the subject-matter and with assessment and evaluation. Such
design made alignment of curriculum and standards easier, as the curriculum formation resulted
from the content and organization of the standards. This curriculum configuration is much more
easier to be understood by students, since “the objectives of the curriculum are derived from the
standards for the discipline,” which means that objectives and curriculum are all aligned (Posner,
2004, p. 93).
There is congruence between the structure of the English composition curriculum content
and the standards, because the curriculum structure derives from the standards, but there appears
to be less balance between the breath and depth of the curriculum and the standards, which is
due to a higher emphasis on the standards, or outcomes, and a lesser focus on student knowledge
acquisition.
The course standards are cited for each topic or practical application of information, as in
the example below taken from the Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana – Evansville, Course
Outline for English Composition I, p. 5):
WEEK READINGS WRITING OBJECTIVES

ASSIGNMENTS
1, 4
Introduction to Course
Course Outline and Syllabus
1 Writing Today [WT]—Ch 1, The

Essay (1-23)
75 Readings Plus [75+]—“Writing

Drafts” (102-106)
A Writer’s Reference [Hacker]—

Composing & Revising (3-36)
WT—Ch 2, Shaping Your Essay Essay #1 due—in-class 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 10,

(24-50) writing 11, 12
Ch 3, Developing Strong Paragraphs (Self-Discovery I)
2 (51-77)
75+—“Coming to an Awareness of
Language” (33-38)
Hacker—Document Design (57-78)
IV.9 How does technology affect the content of the curriculum?
The writers of the English Composition textbook, Writing Today, state in the preface of
the book:
Today, a writer’s context almost always includes some form of technology. In keeping
with this reality, we have thoroughly integrated Writing Today with Catalyst, the most
complete electronic resource for research and writing available. “More Options On-line”
notes on the margin tell students when they can go online and find additional advice, on-
line writing tutors, help with research, diagnostic tests, over 3,000 practice exercises, and
more. In addition, the text includes explanations of the use of word processors, the
Internet, databases, and other tools generated by the electronic revolution, along with
helpful hints for using electronic resources for researching, drafting, and editing. (2004,
p. xviii)
All these web resources, available to students and instructors, augment the contents of the
textbook, and provide various means for instruction, assessment, and evaluation. Each classroom
is also equipped with a computer and a VCR, connected to a ceiling projector, which can be used
for Power Point presentations, projection of handouts, and for playing media documents, helping
in the instruction process through the diversification of the methods of information transmission.
Most students have a good knowledge of computers and word-processor uses, and during
the semester English Composition instructors also schedule library orientations, which introduce
students to on-line research in different databases. Most of the course documents are also posted
on Blackboard, where students can also access their grades, and upload their assignments. These
new opportunities for access to information make learning more appealing and effective.
V. What assumptions underlie the curriculum’s approach to purpose or content? (Chapter Five)
V.1 What conceptions of learning, objectives, curriculum, and teaching underlie the materials
you are analyzing?

The theoretical conceptions or principles that characterize the curriculum for the English
Composition I course differ, depending on the section of the curriculum under investigation. For
example, the objectives or outcomes of the curriculum indicate a behavioral perspective because
the purpose of the objectives is to change the behavior of the students, as behaviorists affirm that
“learning is a change in behavior,” and “the learner is, for all practical purposes, a blank slate (a
tabula rasa) on which the environment writes” (Posner, 2004, p. 105).
Such a perspective requires that objectives be “expressed as know-hows (“the learner
will be able to”),” and therefore “presented in lists of succinct sentences,” that must “include
objects describing highly specific content,” so that “behavioral objectives [will] express know-
that’s or know-withs only by transforming them into know-hows” (Posner, 2004, p. 107), and
such is the case with the objectives of the English Composition course which involve skills
acquisition.
The acquisition of knowledge, on the other hand, implies a different learning perspective,
which is known as the “constructivist” approach, and which demands “meaningful learning (e.g.,
reading comprehension, mathematical skills and science problem solving, and story
composition) and [the] other tasks that require understanding and sense making” (Posner, 2004,
113), and such is the case with other English Composition objectives which demand cognitive
processes such as “thinking, reasoning, …decision making, memory, and perception” (Posner,
2004, 113).
Reaching five objectives out of the twelve from the English Composition I course outline
(1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) depends on the above-mentioned cognitive skills, and involves a different view
of the learning process that “focuses on internal though processes and cognitive structures, rather
than on performance [behavior],” therefore constructivists “believe that objectives should refer
to [internal] changes in students that are not directly observable” as it happens with those five
goals which relate to perception, thinking, reasoning, and decision making (Posner, 2004, p.
114).
Instructor teaching and student learning depend in a large measure on the perspective that
applies to each section of the curriculum. While “the behavioral view places the responsibility on
the teachers, since they presumably control the instructional environment, constructivism allows
that students have a significant role in instruction,” and that “making explicit and challenging the
students’ existing conceptions are the major tasks facing the teacher” (Posner, 2004, p. 116).
V.2 What aspects of a hidden curriculum are likely to accompany the conceptions and
perspectives underlying the curriculum?
In his comments on the effects of the hidden curriculum on students Posner (2004) states
that “the hidden curriculum is not generally acknowledged by school officials” nevertheless, this
curriculum could have “a deeper and more durable impact on students,” than either the official
or the operational curriculum, “due to the fact that “the messages of the hidden curriculum
concern issues of gender, class and race, authority, and school knowledge” (p. 13). The central
goal of the hidden curriculum for the English Composition I course is to instill into the students
the desire to become conscious of the value of language use in the social and professional world.
The students are also acquainted with the particulars of academic life and the rules that define
this atmosphere, learn how to approach matters related to possible discrimination and abuse, and
become involved in social and political issues.
V.3 To what extent is the curriculum likely to play a hegemonic role in its purposes or content?
English Composition I is an introduction to college writing, and prepares students for the
specific degree concentrations chosen for different professions, and, as mentioned, its major aim
is to make the students aware of the importance of language for life and career. The course is the
elemental writing class students are required to take in preparation for their other courses, and is
not intended to dominate their course schedules or their degree concentrations, or to control their
career plans or goals.
VI. How is the curriculum organized? (Chapter Six)
VI.1 What provision, if any, is made for macro-level vertical and/or horizontal organization?
On a macro level (Posner, 2004, p. 128), the Liberal Arts program with a concentration in
English at Ivy Tech Community College offers the following courses:
ENG 111: English Composition
ENG 112: Exposition and Persuasion
ENG 205: Creative Writing
The courses represent the vertical dimension of the English Language degree, and must
be taken in numerical sequence, as the lower course levels are perquisites for the higher course
levels.
On a micro level (Posner, 2004, p. 128), or concerning the English Composition I course,
there are provisions made for both the vertical and horizontal organizations of the English
course curriculum, and these provisions are evident in the Writing Today structure of content,
and in the course calendar. The chapters in Writing Today could be divided into three subject
groups which discuss the following matters: (1) essay writing, (2) rhetorical choices, and (3)
writing styles. All three topics are organized in progressive lessons which build on the previous
ones. Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 discuss essay writing from purpose to editing and proofreading.
Rhetorical modes are presented also in progression through chapters 6 to 19, while the chapters
20-21discuss the research paper and its format. This vertical structure of the textbook, in which
lessons build on each other on the vertical axis, represents the sequencing of the curriculum
(Posner, 2004, pp. 129-129).
The scope of the English Composition course, or the organization on the horizontal axis,
is represented in the content of each individual chapter of Writing Today. The 21 chapters cover,
with a few exceptions, three sections: (1) description of the rhetorical option, (2) writing method,
or approach, and (3) examples of writing which reflect the specific rhetorical mode. The crucial
information is reinforced in each chapter through constant reviewing.
VI.2 What basic configurations of content are found at a more micro level?
The three sections contained in each chapter are divided, at a more micro level, into more
sections, this time discussing discrete pieces of information, which embrace “multiple, unrelated,
concepts or skills” in a pyramidal, or hierarchical’ structure” (Posner, 2004, p. 131). This design
insures that the students will receive adequate exposure to fundamental writing concepts through
all the chapters of the book, and will be able to use their knowledge in the process of writing.
IV. 3 How are various media and technologies employed to deliver the curriculum?
Posner (2004) defines “media” as linked to “the ways in which instructional activities,
methods, and materials—“media” in the broadest sense—relate to particular objectives.”(p. 132),
and describes three basic approaches use of media: “parallel,” “convergent,” and “divergent.”
All approaches have their strengths and weaknesses. The answer is “between these extremes,”
where one can see a “mixed curriculum” that capitalizes on the strengths of each activity and
method to teach certain content but regularly focuses all the activities on a common objective”
(p. 132).
The use of such a “mixed curriculum” allows the teaching of English Composition course
through a multitude of approaches and devices. The textbooks include the course content, and
the course calendar organizes this content into the planned sequence. All the 21chapters of the
textbooks contain developments of various topics, writing samples, lexicon exercises, questions
concerning the message of the reading selections, and suggestions for writing. Teachers can use
these subject and exercise materials for class discussion, writing and editing exercises, grammar
exercises, and research on parallel topics and skill development.
Knowledge is sometimes delivered through the “transmissionist,” method which uses the
“lecture” and centers “on learning objects which are transmitted from one person [the teacher] to
another [the student]” (Thompson, 2005, p. 3). Students can also research and find information
themselves, guided by appropriate questions. The on-line Catalyst database provides resources
on different subjects in its database, work with on-line tutors, and practice exercises on the web.
The computer and audio-visual class equipment serve for Power Point presentations, picture and
sound images, handout projection, and Blackboard instruction.
Traditional and non-traditional classroom activities which contribute to learning could be
also used to teach students reading and writing skills: reading and interpreting literature, forming
and editing paragraphs, generating outlines, taking on-line composition and grammar tests, doing
research on assigned and free topics, examining and correcting a peer’s paper, etc.
VI. 4 What organizational principle does the curriculum employ? Does or can technology play a
role in curriculum organization?
Posner (2004) advises as organizational principles for the curriculum Schwab’s structure
scheme, or commonplaces: (1) the subject matter, (2) the learner and the learning process, (3) the
teacher and the teaching process, and (4) the milieu in which education takes place”(p. 139). The
four organization principles are used in the course in a weight order similar to the one mentioned
in Schwab’s commonplaces scheme. The subject matter is emphasized in the course at the macro
level of organization through the course description and the content structure of the major course
textbook, Writing Today. The subject matter is also an important part of the course objectives.
The content of the English Composition course is taught as distinct and separate subject
matter, self-contained and independent of other courses. For some degrees English Composition
(ENG 111) is the sole English course required in the coursework for graduation. As a result, the
course content is taught “in what we might call the ‘separate subjects’ organization” mentioned
in Posner in relation to the macro level of some curricula (2005, p. 139). The micro organization
level can also be defined as discreet within the chapters, though connections are drawn between
different sections of the same chapters.
Though there has been an unbroken attempt to make the learners as important as possible
to the curriculum organization, and consider “their interests, problems, needs, abilities, previous
experiences, preconceptions, and developmental levels” in the instructional process, the tradition
continues to take its toll on approaches to instruction. The teacher seems to assume the main role
in the interaction with the student, and bear the main burden for student performance.. His work
is to distribute instruction to the class, while students are expected to receive and use the chunks
of information delivered to them. Greater emphasis on the students’ interests, problems, previous
experiences and developmental levels would improve the effects and results of instruction on the
them and their rate of success.
On the other hand, one of avowed goals of the Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana
is to increase the level of education of the population, and to provide businesses with a worker
pool that would meet the industrial standards on a national level. The social context, therefore,
operates as a guiding element, directing the organization of the college in order to meet precise
economic goals of the state, and to make available the future political leadership in the area.
The English Composition curriculum organization can, and does benefit from the use or
application of technology. The course is taught both face-to-face manner and on the Blackboard.
The course structure on Blackboard is quite different from the structure of the course in the face-
to-face approach, due to the special instructor and student needs in the web courses.
For the largest part, though, the English composition course is delivered through a blend
of the traditional, structure of disciplines, behavioral, and constructivist approaches, and all these
have certain influences on the organization of the course and the structure of the information.
VI. 5 What are the social and political implications of technology in curriculum organization?
The role of technology in the English Composition course is of support and enhancement
of the curriculum content and instruction. From a social perspective, the use of computers, of the
multimedia devices available at the college, and the Internet creates information literate students,
and raises the general level of education in the state. Because students are given multiple choices
for the attendance of the English Composition course, and due to the fact that computer and web
skills knowledge are still at a low or intermediate level, most students choose to take face-to-face
courses, and therefore the negative implications related to lack of access to the Interned among
the Ivy Tech students is not significant. In the immediate future, though, things will be different,
because web instruction will be provided used more and more to deliver learning. No political
implications appear to be issues in relation to the use of technology for the English Composition
course.
VI.6 Does the curriculum organization increase or decrease the likelihood that tracking will be
used?
Posner (2004) states that tracking provides a “different kinds of education for children of
different social, economic, and ethnic background,” and explains that it was established due to
the fact that “schools became overcrowded and classes unruly” with immigrants (p. 157). Public
school educators still use tracking to manage “social, economic, and political pressures” (Posner,
2004, p. 157). Ivy Tech College does not use tracking in the educational process.
VII. What assumptions underlie the curriculum’s organization? (Chapter Seven)
The English Composition course is structured as an uneven arrangement of organization
approaches, among which the bottom-up structure takes a central position, while the project and
top-bottom structures follow in the listed order of importance. Much of the content of the course
is acquired through the learning of “prerequisite skills,” which is done “working backward from
the intellectual skills desired at the completion of the curriculum.” This is how, for an example,
students are instructed in college paper structure, drafting, editing and proofreading. Rhetorical
choices, on the other hand, are first described, then broken down into their crucial parts, and then
exemplified through different works of literature in the top-down approach, while in the project
approach instructors and students plan together the creation of research papers. All these three
perspectives are based on some epistemological, psychological, and other assumptions that will
be discussed below.
VII. 1 What epistemological assumptions, if any, underlie the curriculum’s organization?
The bottom-up epistemological assumptions that reside at the foundation of the English
Composition curriculum claim that “all complex or general knowledge and skills can be
analyzed into more specific or simple elements,” those of the top-down view are that “each
discipline is distinct and has its own structure,” based on “fundamental themes, concepts, or
principles,” while the notions of the project method announce “recurrent cycles of thought-
action-reflection”(Posner, 2004, pp. 167, 175, and 183). Most of the content of the English
Composition course is taught through the bottom-up model. For instance, the complex process of
essay writing is broken down into the following steps: planning, drafting, revising and proof-
reading. Rhetorical modes (description, argument, etc.) are first defined, then discussed, and
afterwards exemplified, through the top-down approach, while writing projects are completed
through a process of whose steps are research, analysis, and synthesis.
VII. 2 What psychological assumptions, if any, underlie the curriculum’s organization?
The psychological assumptions of the bottom-up model are that “people acquire complex
or general knowledge and skills from simpler, more specific elements,” the ones of the top-down
model are that “the learning process of children is similar to the inquiry process of scholars,” and
those of the project perspective are that “schooling should attempt to educate the whole person”
(Posner, 2004, pp. 167, 175, and 183). The principal psychological assumption on which English
Composition is based is that acquisition begins with simple concepts and advances toward
complex information through gradual steps. The top-down and project assumptions are on lower
levels of emphasis and curriculum control.
VII. 3 What other assumptions, if any, related to your curriculum organization underlie the
curriculum?
Educational assumptions related to the organization of the English Composition I course
also depend on the three approaches. The bottom-up method claims that “education should focus
on teaching intellectual skills rather than facts,” and secure learning success for all students, the
top-down viewpoint claims that “education should consist of understanding the structure of each
major discipline of knowledge,” while the project method states as the goal of education to “help
students to reconstruct or reorganize their experience” (Posner, 2004, pp. 167, 175, and 183). In
the Ivy Tech College English Composition is designed to teach intellectual skills, though various
facts which reinforce knowledge are also woven into the information. The top-down educational
approach is used on the tangent in connection with knowledge acquisition, and some research
paper could involve the reconstruction and reorganization of students’ personal experience and
knowledge.
Third Set: The Curriculum In Use
VIII. How should the curriculum be implemented? (Chapters Eight and Nine)
VIII.1 What are the temporal, physical, organizational, and politico-legal requirements of the
curriculum?
Temporal Requirements
English Composition I face-to-face course is in general scheduled to be taught two times
a week for 1:15 hours, hence students meet with their instructors for a total of three hours each
week. There are a few other options, also, including a once-a-week schedule on every Friday, or
a Blackboard version of the course which does not suffer from time restraints. The full duration
of the course is sixteen weeks, with a total number of forty instruction hours. The allocated time
for the course appears to be realistic, and good planning allows instructors to keep pace with the
course calendar.
Physical Requirements
Due to the limit imposed on the number of students who can register for a class, which is
20-22 students, classrooms can provide sufficient physical space for all students. Most, if not all
classrooms are equipped with the usual blackboard, computer, projection screen and projectors.
The use of computer labs where each student in the class can do work on a computer can also be
scheduled for writing and editing assignments, research, assessment, and evaluation. The college
building is only about five years old, and has been designed with all the students’ technological
needs in perspective. The sufficient number of seats in the classroom provides a relaxed physical
frame within which the English Composition course is taught. The technological devices that are
available to the teachers make research procedures, editing, and testing possible in class.
Organizational Requirements
Textbook adoption decisions for the English Composition course, curriculum design and
course schedules are determined in the English Department, approved by the English department
chair and confirmed by the General Education division chair. Besides textbook adoption, design
of the curriculum, and schedule of classes, the English Department also determines the schedule
for the Writing Center.
Political-Legal Requirements
English Composition I course has been approved as part of the Liberal Arts degree by the
Indiana State Board of Education. As the Community College of Indiana, Tech College has been
organized to provide a community college level of education for as many residents of Indiana as
possible in order to raise the level of basic education in the state and to provide all the businesses
with the trained workforce needed in the state.
VIII. 2. What are the probable costs and benefits associated with the curriculum change?
In general, a change in the English Composition curriculum is implemented when better
textbooks are published for the course. Because all instructors who teach English Composition
are credentialed, a change in the curriculum would involve a change of textbooks and a change
in the course calendar. Most of the textbooks that are published this time are supported through
websites which come free with the use of the textbooks for both instructors and students. Prices
for textbooks differ, therefore students may have to pay more for their textbooks if the new ones
are more expensive than the ones used before.

VIII.3 To what extent will the curriculum be consistent with and appropriate for the teachers’
attitudes, beliefs, and competencies?
All instructors who teach English Composition have advanced degrees in English, and
are competent to teach the course. The working atmosphere in the English Department is good,
and the members of the faculty collaborate with one another. There is a continuous effort from
the members of the English department to improve the curriculum and make it more efficient
and appropriate for students, though there is also some natural resistance to change and lack of
interest for innovations both from the adjunct faculty and from the senior members.
English Composition is a “neutral” course, that is, no strong social, cultural, or political
perspectives are included in the curriculum. Though some of the reading selections in the main
textbook, Writing Today, or in 75 Readings Plus may appear objectionable to people who share
certain religious beliefs, instructors have the choice to use for the class those readings that will
not include highly questionable or offensive content. Some instructors, though, might choose to
allow questionable selections to be read in the class in order to educate their students on certain
matters, or provoke debate and argument for the benefit of the students.
The attitudes cultivated in the English Department in connection to students and teaching
appear to indicate interest and dedication. There is a need, though, for a better understanding of
the students and their backgrounds and learning types, and for a better rapport between teachers
and students.
VIII. 4 What values are embedded in the curriculum, and how well are these values likely to be
suited to the community?
The values embedded in the English Composition curriculum are related to an increased
awareness of the Standard English language in its spoken and written forms, its role in academic
and business communication, the importance of having good writing skills, the need for critical
and independent thinking, hard work, and high academic and professional ethics. Such qualities
align well with the work ethics and moral perspectives prevalent in the social milieu of the area
where the college functions.
VIII.5 To what extent is the curriculum aligned to the standards?
Because the English Composition curriculum design represents the “ends-means,” or the
“competencies,” model, the established design pattern during the second half of the 20th century,
and which is still the standard in American curriculum (Eisner, 1979, p. 33), content is organized
“into logical units which could be standardized,” because the design of the curriculum guides the
instructor and “provide[s] the basis for planning, conducting and evaluating instruction”( Allen,
cited in Herschbach, 1992, p. 17), and the “objectives become the criteria by which materials are
selected, content is outlined, instructional procedures are developed and tests and examinations
are prepared” (Tyler,1949, p. 3). The conclusion is that in the design of the English Composition
course, the curriculum follows the standards, a situation which results in full alignment between
the two.
VIII.6 What technologies are required for implementation of the curriculum?
The English Composition I course requires a computer for writing assignments. All other
technologies are optional, that is, are not required in order to meet relevant curriculum standards.
Still, most classrooms have computers, VCRs, and projectors, which allow instructors to provide
course content through various approaches such as Power Point presentations, web research and
writing exercises (paragraph writing and editing, and grammar lessons, exercises, and quizzes).
The technologies allow instructors to combine text with image and sound, serving students with
learning styles which incline towards sensorial knowledge acquisition, offer self-testing choices,
and permit students to learn at their own pace. Using such technologies requires special training
for instructors and students, and Ivy Tech College provides such training. Support staff provides
help when instructors and students run into computer or other device problems.
VIII.7 To what extent does the curriculum take into account the students’ cultural, ethnic, or
social backgrounds? To what extent does it accommodate gender differences?
The southern part of Indiana in which the Ivy Tech College is located, has been inhabited
by a homogenous group of people with a white European background. The major group has been
of British origin, while the second largest population has had German roots. There has also been
a small African-American group in Evansville, and a few scattered African-Americans spread in
the suburbs. This situation has continued for as long as the people in the area can remember, and
only in the past ten years a slow and gradual change has been occurring in the demographic base
of the area, with the arrival of a few small groups of Russians, Romanians, and Mexicans. In the
past five years this changes has accelerated. More Russians, and a lot of Mexicans have come to
Evansville and the surrounding areas, but their number is still small compared to the established
groups of British and German origin.
Due to the structure of the population in the Evansville area, the Ivy Tech College has not
been in the situation to develop programs that would address particular cultural, ethnic, or social
student backgrounds from a multicultural perspective. There has been little emphasis on the need
for the instructors to customize curricula in order to accommodate such students. During the past
years, though, because of an explosive influx of immigrants—Russian and Mexican for the most
part—a sustained effort has been made in the college to raise the level of awareness and educate
instructors concerning multicultural matters and the need to adjust their approaches to instruction
in accordance to the needs of the various students in their classes. This is a proactive preparation,
as there is no immediate need for addressing ethnic and cultural issues in the college.
More consideration, though, needs to be given to the local students and teachers “need to
use [education] strategies compatible with those [students] backgrounds” (Posner, 2004, p. 208),
their “social and economic class,” the students’ “personal interaction at home,” and the students
need to be “aware of the differences in writing from one situation to the next” (ibid, p. 209).
VIII.8 What approaches to curriculum change seem to be consistent with the curriculum?
Given the historical information related to the design of the English Composition course,
the collaborative approach would seem to be most consistent with the curriculum. The approach
of the research, development and diffusion method is focused “on a particular set of materials or
technique, which teachers are given and expected to use in the intended manner” and the work is
done in a mode that “seems inconsistent with how educators behave, and more importantly, with
how they should behave” (Posner, 2004, p. 227). The collaborative approach, on the other hand,
endeavors “to develop a collaborative relationship between teachers, administrators, and outside
consultants,” and takes into consideration “both the professional development of teachers and the
educational development of children [or students]” (Posner, 2004, p. 235). This approach is most
adequate for change implementation in colleges, where the methods of instruction fluctuate from
instructor to instructor, and where collaboration between members of a certain department is the
order of the day, and not an exception to the rule.
VIII.9 If your curriculum has already been implemented, what approaches characterized the
change efforts?
The curriculum for the English Composition course was changed in the Summer of 2005,
with the adoption of new textbooks, and the change effort was completed through a collaborative
work between a senior member of the English Department, Carole Chapman, and the department
chair, Nancy Grammar, with input from the other members of the faculty in the department.
IX. What can you learn about the curriculum from an evaluation point of view? (Chapters Ten
and Eleven)
IX.1 What, if any, available data does the curriculum provide? What conclusions about the
curriculum seem warranted based on the data provided?
Posner (2004) mentions two purposes for curriculum evaluation: “to provide information
for making decisions about either individuals or the curriculum.” (p. 239). Concerning decisions
about individuals Posner mentions six fundamental purposes: “diagnosis, instructional feedback,
placement, promotion, credentialing, and selection.” The most essential of them is the diagnosis
concerning “strengths and weaknesses and determination of areas that need special instructional
attention.” Posner (2004) also mentions the following diagnosis methods: “(1) observations of
student performance; (2) attitude, interest and behavior scales; and (3) standardized achievement
and aptitude tests with subscores.” (p.239)
Concerning curriculum decisions Posner (2004) affirms that their purpose is “a judgment
regarding the value or worth of such a document [content outline, syllabus, etc.]. Is the document
complete, internally consistent, and well written? Does the document represent a curriculum that
has sufficient depth and breadth and is well organized, rigorous and up-to-date?” and “How can
it be improved?” (p. 241). These questions are relevant and important, and could prove of great
valued to the instructors who use the curriculum.
The English Composition curriculum, though, contains no evaluation data that concerns
the value or worth of the document, because no evaluation has been performed on the course in
the English Department. There are informal comments about the curriculum from the instructors
who have been implementing it in their classes, but the usefulness of such comments is limited
because the information is not objective and reliable. The English department doesn’t even seem
to have an evaluation protocol for the courses it teaches. Due to the lack of data, no conclusions
can be drawn “regarding the value or worth” of the document (Posner, 2004, p. 241).
IX.2 What standardized tests are relevant to this curriculum? How well is the curriculum aligned
with the relevant standard tests?
Standardized tests help measure “progress in some disciplines,” student learning ‘can be
quantified, tabulated, efficiently graded, recorded, and publicized,” and “used by policy makers
to support new programs, “ and “to initiate reforms and to control, to a great extent, curricula in
schools” (Posner, 2004, p. 243). No standardized tests are used for the evaluation of the English
Composition curriculum or of the students who take the course.
IX.3 What instruments or suggestions for collecting data does the curriculum provide? Are these
tools equally fair for all social, economic, cultural, and ethnic groups?
The publishers of Writing Today and A Writer’s Reference textbooks provide web-based
assessment and evaluation tools and practice evaluations that can be used both by instructors and
students. Such services are offered around the clock and include a large number of exercises that
are very useful to students. There is no indication, though, that these products are correlated with
state and/or national standards. Because these resources come also from the writers of the course
textbooks, the perspectives they reflect about the nature of the discipline are as identical to those
presented by the course standards. Designed in a rather neutral manner, these tools are fair for all
the social, economic, cultural, and ethnic groups which compose the classroom population.
The textbook Writing Today also contains in the chapters which discuss rhetorical modes,
different exercises on the English language lexicon, style and strategy questions, critical thinking
questions, and suggestions for possible writing topics, and suggestions for the use of the Internet
for “insights and information to use when developing [topics]” (p. 457).
IX.4 What are your concerns about the curriculum that could be clarified by evaluation data?
Consider the short-term outcomes, long-term outcomes, antecedents, and transactions.
Concerning the process of planning a curriculum evaluation, Posner (2004) poses the
following questions which would guide the evaluation:
What are the kinds of things you would want to evaluate regarding the curriculum? How
would you know if the curriculum were a success? What is supposed to occur in the
classroom, labs, or the field when the curriculum is fully implemented and taught
properly? What are your concerns about the curriculum that an evaluation could help you
clarify? Answers to these questions can help you determine what aspects of the
curriculum you would want an evaluation to focus on (p. 249).
There are a few instructor concerns related to the English Composition curriculum that might be
clarified through the collection of evaluation data, but though “there are many aspects of a given
curriculum about which to inquire,” the fact is that “most evaluations focus on outcomes,” which
determines Scriven (1967) to call them “bottom-line,” or “pay-off” evaluations (Posner, 2004, p.
249). Posner also states that “in fact, most evaluations focus on only those outcomes that reflect
the curriculum’s goals and objectives, what we shall term the “narrow” sense of outcome-based
evaluation”(2004, pp. 249-250). The main question which the evaluator seems to ask is: “How
well did the curriculum achieve what it intended to achieve?”(ibid., p. 250).
Because whether predicted or unexpected, curricula have both long-term and short-term
outcomes (ibid., p. 250), the evaluation needs to deal with both these aspects. The most essential
information for students and instructors seems to come from short-term outcomes, and “includes
what students remember and can do during and immediately after taking a course, then “teacher
satisfaction with a curriculum,” and last, “community support for a curriculum” (ibid., p. 250).
Due to the fact that the English Composition curriculum does not present a controversial
subject, there are no negative issues related to the attitude of the community towards the course.
The important concerns instructors have on the topic of short-term outcomes are: “what students
remember and can do during and immediately after taking [the English] course, and what is the
level of “teacher satisfaction with the curriculum.”
Instructors seek to assess and evaluate student performance and progress on a permanent
basis during a course, and an estimation of the result of the multiple factors which have a role in
the students’ success or failure could provide the educators with a provisional conclusion which
might answer the questions: “Do students learn?” Do they retain what they are taught?” “Is their
progress acceptable?” There is no chance, though, at this time, for the instructors who teach the
English Composition course to find answers to the above questions or to one other question that
trouble them, “Do students still remember the information immediately after taking the course?”
because no follow-up is performed at Ivy Tech College on the students who took the course.
The answers to the above questions would provide instructors with a needed feedback on
the effects of instruction in English Composition, that is, would give them a notion of the quality
of the course, and the effectiveness of the instruction. There is still a pending issue, though, even
if all data had been collected from questionnaires on the above questions: How consistent would
data be, considering that assessment and evaluation are not standardized, and data differs among
instructors? It is possible that the cumulation of information would prove to be so irregular, that
it would not provide an accurate conclusion on the student-related short-term outcomes.

Teacher satisfaction with the curriculum is another matter of importance because it could
provide an answer to the question: “How adequate is the English Composition curriculum design
for the teaching of the course?” A questionnaire containing pertinent prompts related to the issue
would be quite useful for curriculum evaluation, but no such questionnaires have been dispensed
to the members of the English Department at Ivy Tech College in Evansville.
Among the long-term curriculum outcomes, Posner names “what students remember and
can do with their knowledge well after the details of the course are forgotten,” “student attitudes
toward the subject matter,” and the “general support for the school generated by the curriculum”
(Posner, 2004, p. 250). Answers to such questions would also be rather useful for understanding
of the long-term effects of the English Composition course on the students, regarding the general
perception students have about the course, and the long-term impact produced by the curriculum
of the English Composition course on the students’ attitude towards the college. Data collection,
though, would require in this case longitudinal follow-up research on the students that could last
decades, and there seems to be no interest in the college at this time for this kind of exploration.
One other issue that could be clarified through curriculum evaluation is the “antecedents”
matter. Posner explains “antecedents” as those “conditions existing before students interact with
teachers and subject matter” (2004, p. 251). Antecedents are said to be “essentially equivalent to
frame factors,” and include “characteristics of students and teachers, state mandates, community
expectations, and available resources” (ibid, p. 251). Knowledge of antecedents is good because
the gained information “is useful in determining whether certain claims made by curriculum are
empirically supported.” Among such claims could be that the curriculum “is appropriate for the
students with a broad range of abilities” (ibid, p. 251).

It would be useful for the members of the English Department at the Ivy Tech College to
obtain information about student, teacher, and community antecedents because such data would
help instructors to adapt the English Composition curriculum to the needs of the students and of
the community.
The third item that might be of concern regarding the English Composition curriculum is
the “transaction” issue, that is, the events that occur “whenever a student interacts with a teacher,
guidance counselor, coach, librarian, other students, or instructional material” (Posner, 2004, p.
251). Such transactions, remarks Posner, “comprise the process of education (ibid, pp. 251-252),
and therefore “data on transactions are particularly important in curriculum evaluation to explain
why certain outcomes did or did not occur” (ibid, p. 252), as for example, a student participation
in classroom activities.
Posner proposes a cluster of transactional issues and questions that might help instructors
who teach English Composition to understand better how the curriculum functions, and to utilize
it in the best manner:
Data on transactions also give the evaluator information on the way the curriculum has
functioned, the variety of ways it has been implemented, and the possible pitfalls a
teacher might face in using it. What are the potential problems or rough spots in its
operation? What aspects have been crucial for its success? How has the curriculum been
implemented? What kinds of adaptations have been counterproductive? What have been
the trades-off? (2004, p. 252)
The questions mentioned in the above paragraph are of major concern to both instructors
and students, and adequate responses to them would produce a significant change in instruction,
that is, in the approach instructors would take for the implementation of the English Composition
curriculum.
IX. 5 Does the approach to student evaluation in the curriculum manifest a measurement-based
or an integrated approach, or both?
In his argument concerning assessment and evaluation, Beauchamp (1978) distinguishes
between “measurement” assessment and evaluation of particular outcomes, and “culture content”
assessment and evaluation. The first looks at curriculum as a group of “specific objectives,” and
converts each objective “into a test item or into a mode of observation,” because “the criteria for
making evaluative judgments are inherently built into the specific objective” (p. 406). The other
approach, assesses and evaluates from a “culture content” perspective, is more difficult, because
a whole series of factors needs to be considered in the process, and the work of assessment and
evaluation needs to be performed “in light of the degrees of curriculum implementation and the
quality of instruction that took place” (p. 408).
Posner (2004) distinguishes two assessment methods: (1) measurement-based evaluation,
and (2) integrated evaluation. Concerning the first approach, he states:
The dominant perspective on evaluation is a close relative of the technical production
model of curriculum development. To review, this model is based on two assumptions:
(1) that educational practices are justified by the learning outcomes educators seek to
achieve, and (2) that these outcomes can be measured (p. 257).
There is a rather strong criticism against this method. Posner reviews the most common
arguments in the following words: “The problem with measurement-based evaluation, according
to its critics, it its focus on trivial and contrived tasks, “as “these tasks may not test the students’
ability to use their knowledge and skills in the real world” (p. 261).
The integrated approach to evaluation seems to be better and more adequate in education,
because of its comprehensive perspective:
In contrast with measurement-based evaluation, an integrated evaluation tends to be more
consistent with an experiential perspective, though its proponents would likely object to
any labels. Like experiential education, integrated evaluation tends to be growth-oriented,
student-controlled, collaborative, dynamic, contextualized, informal, flexible, and action-
oriented. While few, if any, evaluations have all of these characteristics, many curricula
provide for at least some of them. (Posner, 2004, p. 261)
In the English Composition course, evaluation combines the measurement-based method
with the integrated approach, due to the fact that some curriculum objectives are “specific,” and
can be converted into test items, while other objectives, “because a whole series of factors needs
to be considered in the process,” and therefore evaluation must be performed “in the light of the
degrees of curriculum implementation and the quality of instruction that took place,” need to be
treated as “culture content”( Beauchamp, 1978, p. 408).
The “scientifically-based” testing instruments—the writing and grammar exercises which
are contained on the web site that accompanies Writing Today and A Writer’s Reference—should
be considered in the measurement-based group of evaluation methods. The writing exercises that
are included in the textbook Writing Today, on the other hand, are not standardized. Some of the
exercises refer to the lexicon of the English language, some to writing, editing, proofreading, and
final revisions of the papers, and some to critical thinking and topic research.
The multiple-choice grammar tests and the writing, editing, and grammar exercises found
on the Writing Today website might be group-administered, or individually administered, but the
most efficient approach is the one that includes the whole group of students in the classroom. On
the other hand, the assigned research papers for the course are individual projects, and teamwork
is not allowed for such projects.
Posner (2004) shows that “much of measurement-based evaluation is exemplified by the
work of Ralph Tyler (1942, 1949, 1958),” and follows the seven evaluation steps included in the
Rationale. Tyler’s influence is most evident in the effort educators make to define the objectives
of a course in behavioral terms, and also in “the general emphasis by educators on ‘alignment,’
or consistency, between the curriculum objectives and the testing instruments employed”. Such
an alignment seems to be difficult in the process of evaluation for English Composition courses
because no precise conversion can be done from objectives into test items in relation to writing.
Posner (2004) also mentions that Walker and Schaffarzick‘s (1974) research pointed out
that “there is no such thing as a curriculum neutral test,” as an achievement test “measures what
the teacher taught and vice versa—i.e., it measures alignment,” and not“ whether the curriculum
was worth teaching” (p. 260). In this sense, the results obtained in evaluations implicitly reflect
the educational values which are included in, and characterize the curriculum.
Though the instructors in the English Department are making a constant effort to provide
instruction which includes the positive characteristics of both evaluation approaches, there needs
to be a greater emphasis on the use of evaluations which contain the most relevant features of the
integrated method : (1) growth-oriented, (2) action-oriented, (3) contextualized, (3) flexible, and
(4) dynamic. Allowing students to control the evaluation is still controversial, but comments and
observations on the usefulness of the evaluation tools and some problems related to assessments
are expected and sought for from the students.

IX. 6 What would a non-conservative (or radical) evaluation of the curriculum look like?
For a definition of a “conservative evaluation” Posner (2004) quotes Gouldner (1970) in
the following paragraph which contains the main features of “conservatism:”
What makes a theory conservative (or radical) is its posture toward the institutions of its
surrounding society. A theory is conservative to the extent that it: treats these institutions
as given and unchangeable in essentials; proposes remedies for them so that they work
better, rather than devising alternatives to them; foresees no future that can be essentially
better than the present, the conditions that already exist; and, explicitly or implicitly,
counsels acceptance or resignation to what exists, rather than struggling against it
(Gouldner, 1970, p. 332). (p. 271)
The point of view expressed by Apple (1977) about conservative evaluation is similar to
the one reached by Gouldner:
From Apple’s viewpoint evaluation is conservative to the extent that it focuses on
individuals rather than on institutional structures (for example, tracking of students), and
in so doing, uncritically accepts the very structures that may underlie its problems. The
use of mass testing to determine the deficiencies of students with regard to evaluator-
chosen performance categories, the labeling of students according to a standardized set of
performance categories (like “gifted and talented,” “underachievers,” “slow learners,” or
“remedial problems) and the setting up of programs, or , as evaluations have termed
them, “treatments, “ based on these categories all reinforce this focus. (quoted in Posner,
2004, p. 271)
In contradistinction to the fundaments characteristics of “conservatism” described above,
a “non-conservative,” or “radical” evaluation of the curriculum would be based on a critical look

at the college as an educational institution, and would question the central claims which maintain
its existence, among which are (1) the educational tradition, (2) the contented state of affairs that
characterizes the bureaucratic apparatus of the institution, and (3) the assumed sufficiency of the
theoretical and practical approaches to instruction and learning.
Instead of looking at instructors and students as the reason for educational failure, radical
or non-conservative investigations would search for the hidden reasons that lie at the core of the
problem. In their paper titled “From Teaching to Learning—A New Paradigm for Undergraduate
Education,” Barr and Tagg (1995) state that the lack of education success that plagues colleges is
not due to lack of interest or effort on the part of instructors and students, but to the fundamental
flaws in the organization of such institutions of higher education.
Barr and Tagg (1995) comment: “In its briefest form, the paradigm that has governed our
colleges is this: A college is an institution that exists to provide instruction.” This perspective on
education, “the traditional, dominant paradigm,” is the “instruction paradigm” which mistakes a
means for an end,” because “it takes the means or method—called “instruction” or “teaching,”—
and makes it the college’s end or purpose.” Concerning the structure that supports the paradigm,
the writers affirm: “Under it, colleges have created complex structures to provide for the activity
of teaching conceived primarily as delivering 50-minute lectures—the mission of a college is to
deliver instruction.” Even worse, “the instruction paradigm rests on conceptions of teaching that
are increasingly recognized as ineffective” (p. 13).
Given this fact, the elemental flaw inherent in the “instruction paradigm,” the obligation
of educators is to get to the source of the problem, and change the paradigm. The solution, state
Barr and Tagg (1995), is a perspective change, “a shifting into a new paradigm: A college is an
institution that exists to produce learning,” From this new angle of vision, instructors are helped
to be aware “that our mission is not instruction but rather that of producing learning with every
student by whatever means work best” (p. 13).
A non-conservative (or radical) evaluation of the English Composition course would take
into perspective all the issues above, and examine them in an open manner, in an attempt to align
the configuration of this course with the theoretical perspective that would offer the best learning
context for the students. Risks might have to be taken, and deep changes might have to be made
about content structure, methods of instruction, and assessment and evaluation, but such changes
will make available in the end to instructors and students a learning atmosphere that would cause
the creation of remarkable outcomes.
Some of the perspectives that would have to be reevaluated under the learning paradigm,
and worked into a new educational dimension are:
(1) The role of the students in relation to the curriculum implementation. Under the instruction
paradigm students are handed the curriculum, and their role is that of passive acceptors, with no
active and considered participation in the process. In the learning paradigm students will have to
assume an active role in the shaping of all aspects of instruction.
(2) The role of the students in the learning process. Under the instruction paradigm students are
handed all information, and their obligation is to acquire it. Under the learning paradigm matters
of learning are a cooperative effort between the students and their instructors, as teachers “elicit
student discovery and construction of knowledge” (Barr & Tagg, 1995, p. 16).
The involvement and cooperation of both students and instructors in the learning process
would turn the classroom from a “conference hall” into a “learning center” where all participants
share in the learning and construct knowledge, in constant spiral progression towards an increase
in the understanding and integration of the studied subject.

Fourth Set: Critique
X. What is your judgment about the curriculum (Chapter Twelve)
X.1 What are its strengths and weaknesses?
The English Composition curriculum has been changed two years ago when a new course
book and a new reader have been adopted. To most instructors who teach the course, the changes
have appeared to be a regress rather than a progress. Though there seems to be a general concern
in the college concerning the poor educational success generated through the traditional methods
of instruction, no progress seems to be made from the old and outdated “instruction paradigm” to
the newer “learning paradigm,” and this applies also to the English Department.
The theoretical perspective which forms the basis for the new curriculum design does not
differ from the one at the foundation of the old curriculum. The traditional instructional approach
to education still remains. Content is still delivered through lecture. Certain surface changes have
been introduced, for the most part short variations on the same aged lecture theme, that is, Power
Point presentation are used (and sometimes overused) now to transmit information.
The new composition textbook seems to be more difficult for students to learn from than
the previous textbook. The reasons are multiple: (1) the language of the textbook is too academic
for the general level of the students who attend the college. (2) the textbook chapters include too
much information for the needs of the students (3) the structure of the chapters is not simple and
clear enough for the student level. (4) the book does not include writing and grammar exercises,
as such exercises have been relegated to the website which accompanies the book (5) due to the
previous point, the instructor has a difficult time assigning practice exercises, as the students are
not willing to make the additional effort of going to the exercise website.
Content is textbook-based, as in the previous curriculum, and therefore information does
not always reach the students in gradual, logical sequence (in the opinion of the instructors).This
makes it often necessary for the instructor to search for different sections of information through
the book. Because students have little inclination to read the dozens of pages assigned each week
out of the necessity to cover the required course information, a lot of the book remains unread, in
spite of the instructors’ efforts to summarize the information for the students in the class.
On the good side, the new reader includes more reading selections than the previous one,
which allows for more reading practice. Also, each chapter begins with a short description of the
rhetorical mode in which the selections are written. Students often ignore the main textbook, and
turn to the reader in order to get their information on rhetorical modes.
As in the old curriculum, there are too many writing assignments, and not enough writing
practice (paragraph writing, editing, proofreading), and grammar exercises. The consequence is
that students, left with the textbook only, do not have the chance to practice enough their writing
skills, and develop editing and proofreading skills in a slow manner. Instructors need to provide
the needed practice exercises from the textbook web site, or from other existing sources, in order
to help students develop the essential skills needed in the course, and meet the course objectives.
X.2. Of what dangers would you want to be careful if you implemented it?
The dangers that would threaten an instructor who would want to implement the English
Composition curriculum are: (1) the textbook content organization format that does not motivate
students to acquire course information (2) the high English of the composition textbook, which
needs to be interpreted to students (3) the insufficient time allocation for writing practice and the
grammar exercises, which slows the progress of the students in the acquisition of writing skills
(4) the excessive number of writing assignments, which does not allow the students enough time
to draft and edit their papers (5) the lack of assessment exercises, which have been incorporated
into evaluation assignments, and are neither distinct or separate from them. (6) complex rubrics,
difficult to use, which can cause grade inflation if not used with outmost care.
X.3 How would you adapt it to maximize its benefits and strengths and to minimize its
limitations and risks?
Because I have been teaching English Composition based on the new curriculum during
the past two years, and I have become aware of its strengths and limitations, and of the risks that
are inherent in its implementation, I have adapted and changed the course in order to accomplish
its intended purposes, and to avoid its dangers. The modification and adaptation of the course are
the reversal of those characteristics which do not contribute to the proper learning of writing and
grammar skills: (1) the curriculum is reorganized so that content follows in the right, appropriate
sequence, and without information gaps, (2) the difficult sections of the book are explained to
the students, (3) students are asked permanently questions about English Composition course
content for learning assessment purposes, (4) student are permitted enough writing, and grammar
practice time, so that they could internalize the acquired information, (5) both the teacher and the
students work together in the class on some paper assignments in order for the students to have
more time for drafting and editing, (6) classroom assessment is done through assorted editing,
proofing, and grammar exercises, (7) the grading rubrics are used as guides, while a holistic
approach is used in order for the grading to reflect the value of the written assignment, and (8)
the instructor makes often requests for feedback from students about assessment and evaluation
in order to understand how the students perceive them, and in order to adjust the tests when there
are errors in them, or when the tests do not seem to collect accurate data concerning student
knowledge and performance.

The present execution changes from the official curriculum to the operational curriculum
for English Composition course are not adequate enough, though, to provide all students with the
level of instruction required for successful progress in the acquisition of the needed writing skills
and meeting of the course objectives. Only a few students who had come to class with advanced
high school writing skills and practice will meet the expected purposes for English Composition,
and will grow to be much better writers than in the beginning of the class. All other students who
had taken the course will meet the goals in different percentages, due to the fact that the changes
in the curriculum had not had not been comprehensive enough to help them fill in the knowledge
gaps in their public education. The reason for this incomplete adaptation of the curriculum to the
needs of the students who take the English Composition class is the disinclination of the decision
makers in the English Department to allow instructors to make changes that would mover further
than the established tradition. Progress in the adoption of the new “learning college” paradigm at
the college might change the circumstances, though, and result in a better implementation of the
course curriculum.
References
Beauchamp, G. A. (1978). A hard look at curriculum. Educational Leadership, 35 (5), 404-409.
Beauchamp, G. A. (1982) Curriculum theory: meaning, development, and use. Theory Into
Practice, 21 (1) 23-28.
Buscemi, S. V., & Smith, C. (2004). 75 Readings plus, (7th ed). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Catalog 2005-2006. (2005). Ivy Tech Community College. Indianapolis: Ivy Tech Community
College.
Connelly, M. (2003). The sundance reader (3rd ed.). Boston, Mass: Wadsworth.
Eisner, E. W. (1979). The educational imagination. New York: Macmillan.
Hacker, D. (2003). A writer’s reference, (5th ed). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
Herschbach, D. (1992). Technology and efficiency: Competencies as content. Journal of
Technology Education, 3 (2), 4-23.
Indiana State Board of Education (March 31, 2006). Mission statement. Retrieved April 11,
2006, from http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/stateboard.
Pharr, D., & Buscemi, S. V. (2005). Writing today: Contexts and options for the real world.
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Posner, G. J. (2004). Analyzing the curriculum, (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning—A new paradigm for undergraduate
education. Change, 27(6), 12-25.
Thompson, K. (2005). Constructivist curriculum design for professional development: A review
of literature. Orlando: University of Central Florida.
Tyler. R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
View publication stats

Curriculum Analysis For An English Composition Course: Research

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Curriculum Analysis For An English Composition Course: Research

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Curriculum Analysis For An English Composition Course

Research · May 2015

Lexical Borrowing From English into Romanian View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Curriculum Analysis for an English Composition Course

Curriculum Analysis for an English Composition Course

standards or outcomes. Whereas “the development of standards represents a movement toward

disagreement” concerning curriculum issues (Posner, 2004, p. 4).

The Purpose of Curriculum Analysis

make (Schwab, 1971)” (Posner, 2004, p. 4).

curriculum designers is curriculum analysis, defined by Posner (20004) as:

quality of the educational experience” (2004, p.14).

Analysis Questions,” listed on pages 20-22 of his book Curriculum Analysis.

Curriculum Analysis: The English Composition Course

Curriculum Analysis Questions

First Set: Curriculum Documentation and Origins

I. How is the curriculum documented? (Chapter One)

Evansville, Indiana is based on a curriculum “template” designed by the Curriculum Committee

the English Composition I course is taught (Catalog, 2005, p. 222).

(Demonstrated competency through appropriate assessment or earning a grace of “C” or better in

Objectives, course content, suggested texts/curriculum materials, suggested readers, suggested

concerning methods of Evaluation, minimum Faculty Credentials, Academic Honesty Statement,

5th ed., Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003, written by Diana Hacker.

practice or for assessment and evaluation.

suggestive approaches to teaching content, and guidelines regarding student evaluation.

1.3 What limitations in documentation do you find?

textbooks—publisher request, desire of the authors, or classroom need.

the other instructors appear to have the role of consultants.

publication of the book, sharing the responsibilities on the same level.

organization, classroom education, and evaluation of student knowledge.

politics of the United States at the local or national or international level.

II. 3 What planning elements dominated the curriculum development process?

the document as a guiding force for planning instructional strategies, 2) statements

and the curriculum system. (1982, p.25)

The curriculum for English Composition I contains a statement of intention or rationale

in the course catalogue description:

English Composition is designed to develop students’ abilities to think, organize, and

as process, description, narration, comparison, analysis, persuasion, and argumentation.

outside of class. (Catalog, 2005, p. 222)

2. Apply critical reading and thinking skills to the writing process.

3. Demonstrate an awareness of language as a tool for learning and communication.

4. Develop strategies for making independent, critical evaluations of student and

5. Research and critically evaluate information to produce writing with appropriate

6. Apply strategies for the composition process such as drafting, collaboration,

revision, and peer evaluation to produce written documents.

8. Engage in pre-writing activities, including narrowing a topic, generating ideas,

setting an appropriate tone.

9. Demonstrate an understanding of the various rhetorical modes, including

argumentation and analysis, and apply that understanding in various writing

environments, including an essay test.

10. Support a thesis statement with valid reasons and evidence.

11. Follow the conventions of standard written English, in sentence structure,

punctuation, grammar and usage, and spelling.

Community College of Indiana – Evansville, Course Outline, pp. 1-2)

that need to be followed in academic writing.

The English Composition I course is taught through a combination of approaches which

person [the teacher] to another [the student]” (Thompson, 2005, p. 3).

Second set: The Curriculum Proper

in liberal arts, or to a diploma in nursing, computer science, automotive science, pre-engineering,

some educational aims are also emphasized in the same paragraph:

description, narration, comparison, analysis, persuasion, and argumentation. Numerous in-

Learning Objectives” section as course objectives, or course outcomes, as follows: