ERIC Number: ED234042
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1983-May
Reference Count: 0
Conceptual Development and Curriculum Change: Or is it Rhetoric and Fantasy?
Patriarca, Linda A.; Buchmann, Margret
This case study offers an account of the processes of program development. Specifically, it reports on the experiences of a faculty team that developed a preservice program to prepare students for teaching pupils from diverse backgrounds, with the ultimate goal of fostering equity in educational institutions. An analysis is made of written documentation of the topics covered in the two-year period during which the team met to develop the new program according to stated goals. Four stages of program development are identified: (1) concept clarification--what do diversity and equity mean? (2) course development--what shall we teach in our individual courses? (3) program design--how do all these courses hang together? and (4) bureaucratic approval--how can we get the program passed? It is concluded that, although discourse emphases were appropriate during these stages, the discourse in the meetings was neither cohesive nor cumulative and that persistent flight from addressing substantive issues in program development resulted in a continuous erosion of program goals. A brief discussion is presented on the implications of these findings for the implementation of educational innovations in general. (Author/JD)
Descriptors: Change Agents, Concept Formation, Cooperative Planning, Curriculum Development, Decision Making, Discussion, Educational Change, Group Dynamics, Higher Education, Interpersonal Communication, Policy Formation, Preservice Teacher Education, Program Development, Schools of Education, Teacher Education Curriculum, Teacher Education Programs, Teamwork
Institute for Research on Teaching, College of Education, Michigan State University, 252 Erickson Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824 ($3.25).
Publication Type: Information Analyses; Reports - Descriptive
Education Level: N/A
Audience: Teachers; Administrators; Practitioners
Sponsor: National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.
Authoring Institution: Michigan State Univ., East Lansing. Inst. for Research on Teaching.
Note: An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New York, NY, March 1982).