The paper "Assessment of Good Curriculum" is a great example of a research paper on education. The information teachers impart in their learners forms the very foundation of the intellectual abilities they can build upon throughout their life in college or in society. Whether intended, enacted, assessed, or learned, Princess Noura University needs to have a good curriculum which has been assessed carefully in terms of instructional goals and objectives so as to serve the changing needs of students and society at large. The relevant ends should emphasize vital attitudes, knowledge, and skills so that the learning process achieves selected objectives.
By no means do I suggest that the process of assessing the curriculum should be comprehensive. It is therefore paramount to state that the assessment of a good curriculum should entail methods, or its results, constituting comprehensive mechanisms by which students, society, and stakeholders benefit from its outcome. The purpose of this research paper will be to critically carry out an assessment of a good curriculum and demonstrate a method suitable for carrying out such tasks among students in a preparatory year within Princess Noura University.
The research has been undertaken regarding the four levels at which curricula assessment may occur Porter (2002, 2004), that is intended, enacted, assessed, or learned. As an observer assessing the worth of the curriculum presented by the University, my research will attempt to find out how the curriculum was created, which curriculum was adopted, methodologies used to arrange the curriculum for students as well as reasons for the delays in distributing schedules to students. The methodologies to be used to gather data, analyze, and compile my research findings will be based on scientific perspectives and works of the already ongoing conversations in curricula assessment as highlighted by Porter (2004) and Webb (1997). Assessment of the content of the intended curriculum Before giving my assessment of the intended curriculum that was finally adopted by Princess Noura University for students in a preparatory year, definition of some terms is important as they are going to form the basis of my analysis.
My specific interest was in the performance and content expectations as they are communicated in the materials and documents created to guide instruction and assessment. In the Complementary Methods for Research in Education, definitions coined by Andrew Porter (2002) defines the assessment of good intended curriculum as the systematic approach where raw facts regarding the content of curricula are isolated and analyzed for the benefit of learners.
In such a case, Porter adds that the content of the intended curriculum will be the domain-specific declarative, tactile, procedural, and situative knowledge that the intended curriculum targets (p. 57). Being the level at which preparatory students are supposed to know and use the content as it is being communicated by curriculum designers in the document, I assessed the intended curriculum based on the objectives, learning experiences, content, and evaluation of the university.
The assessment covered the objectives and students' expectations. Assessing the intended curriculum the University adopted, I discovered that not only Princes Noura University but almost all colleges and universities in Saudi Arabia have their intended curriculum set to start in the first semester or what students described to me as level one which has been programmed to end in level eight.
However, my target group; students in the preparatory year are automatically enrolled in level 3. To my best understanding, this would be a sophomore year in America. Complains raised by the majority of students I interviewed regarding this part of the intended curriculum argued that Princess Noura University has a curriculum that does count their credits from the preparatory year on to their major. Based on the curriculum that the university intends to use in the implementation of contents, English students I met contended that the University has a rigorous set curriculum whereby students in a preparatory year must take a four hour English lessons daily for the whole week.
Lessons are evenly distributed and the content includes study of grammar, vocabulary, speaking, writing, and listening.
Daggett, W. (2005). Achieving academic excellence through rigor and relevance. International Center for Leadership in Education. Retrieved April 15, 2012, from http://www.leadered.com/white_papers.html
Newberry, P., & Hughes, E. (2006). Activities-, project-, problem-based learning: A
modality of teaching and learning. Retrieved April 15, 2012, from http://www.pltw.org
Niebling, B. C., Roach, A. T., & Rahn-Blakeslee, A. (2008). Best practices in curriculum,
instruction, and assessment alignment. National Association of School Psychologists.
Oliver, B. (2007). Mapping curricula: Peer-reviewed paper presented at the Evaluations and Assessment Conference, Brisbane. Available: http://www.eac2007.qut.edu.au/proceedings/proceedings_ebook.pdf
Porter, A. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice.
Porter, A. (2004). Curriculum assessment. Complementary Methods for Research in
Education. J. Green, G. Camilli, & P. Elmore (Eds.) Washington DC: AERA.
Schmidt, W., McKnight, C., Houang, R., Wang, H.C., Wiley, D., Cogan, L., et al. (2001).
Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Suskie, L. (2004). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide. Anker
Publishing Company: Bolton, MA.
Tierney, W. (1989). Cultural politics and the curriculum in postsecondary education. In
L. R. Lattuca et al. (Eds.), College and university curriculum: Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing.
Tyler, R .W. (1949) Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Webb, N. L. (1997). Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments in mathematics and science education. The University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
Wiggins, G.P., and McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.