Competency 10

Lead continuous and data-informed curriculum, instruction, and assessment improvement processes.

Educational leaders must have the ability to:

• Incorporate best practices of the field based on research and practice.
• Promote and actively advocate for an effective instructional program.
• Lead and manage curriculum assessment and strategic planning for all learners.
• Support and develop faculty.
• Identify instructional objectives and use valid and reliable performance indicators and evaluative procedures to measure performance outcomes.
• Monitor student learning.
• Evaluate the appropriate use of technology to support instruction.
• Promote e-learning and other new developments.
• Manage the assessment, development, and implementation and measurement strategies to improve quality of education.

Effective educational leaders are skilled developers of curriculum who respond to national, state, and local standards that define what learners should know and be able to do in each area of the curriculum. Content standards define what should be covered in a lesson (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998). Performance standards, though often confused with content standards or missing altogether, define "the required level of proficiency students are expected to display when they have mastered a content standards" (Popham, 2003, p. 38).

Educational leaders must examine standards carefully, understand what the important elements of each are, and be able to prioritize them. Assessments and instruction must be planned to align with standards of learning. Internal alignment refers to "instructional strategies and assessments [that] reflect the language and intent of the standards…. alignment is an even stronger predictor of student achievement on standardized tests than are socioeconomic status, gender, race, and teacher effect" (Drake & Burns, 2004, p. 53).

Recognizing the importance of standards, Wiggins and McTighe have designed a framework for curriculum development that identifies standards, essential questions, and evidence of understanding (assessment) before defining learning experiences. This Backward Design is a departure from traditional curriculum development models. The three stages of Backward Design are:

1. Stage One: Desired Results.
2. Stage Two: Determine Evidence.
3. Stage Three: Learning Plan.

In Stage One, content standards are examined and prioritized, and the desired outcomes in terms of student results are determined. In Stage Two, effective educational leaders design performance tasks that respond to the diverse needs of learners. They begin with the question "What would we accept as evidence that students have attained the desired understandings and proficiencies-efore proceeding to plan teaching and learning experiences?" (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998, p. 8). In Stage Two, effective educators develop multiple and authentic assessments that are aligned with the desired results of Stage One, and are designed to uncover full evidence of student learning. Performance tasks that focus on full understanding of content will include a variety of assessments throughout a unit, rather than the traditional single assessment at the very end. In Stage Three, a differentiated learning plan is developed that provides for the different ways that students learn. The learning plan will enable all learners to demonstrate understanding of course standards and goals identified in Stage One (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998).

Alignment of curriculum that is standards-based and assessment-driven is not, by itself, enough. Accomplished educational leaders understand that instructional activities that are aligned with assessments need to be of interest and relevant to learners (Drake & Burns, 2004; Gregory & Kuzmich, 2004). Because learners are different and their interests and capacity vary, educational leaders also understand that knowledge of learners, their ages, and their developmental level permeates every aspect of lesson planning. In differentiating instruction, effective leaders understand that both learner traits and content must be considered. Tomlinson (2003) identifies "four student traits that must be addressed to ensure effective and efficient learning. Those are readiness, interest, learning profile, and affect…. There are also four elements they can modify in response to variations among students. Those are content, process, product, and learning environment" (pp. 3-4).

Effective educational leaders know that the aim of all instruction is student learning. Knowledge of learners is of paramount importance. In the words of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (1989), "Educators use their understanding of individual and social learning theory, and of child and adolescent and adult development theory, to form their decisions about how to teach. They are familiar with the concepts generated by social and cognitive scientists that apply to teaching and learning. Moreover, they integrate such knowledge with their personal theories of learning and development generated from their own practice" (p. 8). Educational leaders also have "an awareness of the most common misconceptions held by students, the aspects that they will find most difficult, and the kinds of prior knowledge, experience and skills that students of different ages typically bring to the learning of particular topics" (p. 11).

Effective educational leaders understand that assessment-driven, standards-based curriculum and instruction is about the need for all learners to meet high expectations. Such an approach to learning is also consistent with data-informed decision making. Alignment of standards, assessment, and instruction provides better ways to measure what is learned and performance levels of that learning. When better data is available, educators can make more informed choices about effective strategies to meet the needs of each learner (Gregory & Kuzmich, 2004)

References

Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Gregory, G. H., & Kuzmmich, L. (2004). Data driven differentiation in the standards-based classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (1989). What teachers should know and be able to do: The five core propositions of the national board. Retrieved September 12, 2004, from http://www.nbpts.org/about/coreprops.cfm#prop1.

Popham, W. J. (2003). Test better, teach better: The instructional role of assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development..

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.