Through out my career I have been involved in many working groups that had a focus of developing new curriculum and updating existing curriculum. One of the things that was constant in all these groups was that there was always someone who resisted the process of change.
Resistance to curricular change or even change in general, is usually not for lack of desire or capacity to improve but more so that professionals value autonomy, worry about workload constraints and by nature are averse to risk (Jorgenson, 2006).
When looking at ways to engage faculty in the process of revision and/or development of curriculum, I think it is important to view the process like engaging students in a classroom. Creating a safe space where the goals and objectives are transparent and where people feel protected when sharing thoughts and ideas. Evans (2004) stated that faculty have a right to have three understandings made clear from the start of the process of revisions of curriculum: Why is change necessary? What are we changing to? How will we get there?
By beginning the process with clear intentions about why the change is happening and how it will impact faculty, will allow for a safe environment and will result in more engagement.
What are other methods of engagement have you seen in your practice when looking at curriculum development or revision?
References:
Evans, R. (2004, August). "The human side of change." Presentation to the Hawaii Preparatory Academy faculty, August 6, 2004. Kamuela, Hawaii.
Jorgenson, Olaf. (2006). Why curriculum change is difficult and necessary. Retrieved from: National Association of Independent Schools https://www.nais.org/magazine/independent-school/summer-2006/why-curriculum-change-is-difficult-and-necessary/
Comments