Shaping the College Curriculum E-Book

Lisa R. Lattuca

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Bildung
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 719

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Beschreibung

Shaping the College Curriculum focuses on curriculum development as an important decision-making process in colleges and universities. The authors define curriculum as an academic plan developed in a historical, social, and political context. They identify eight curricular elements that are addressed, intentionally or unintentionally, in developing all college courses and programs. By exploring the interaction of these elements in context they use the academic plan model to clarify the processes of course and program planning, enabling instructors and administrators to ask crucial questions about improving teaching and optimizing student learning. This revised edition continues to stress research-based educational practices. The new edition consolidates and focuses discussion of institutional and sociocultural factors that influence curricular decisions. All chapters have been updated with recent research findings relevant to curriculum leadership, accreditation, assessment, and the influence of academic fields, while two new chapters focus directly on learning research and its implications for instructional practice. A new chapter drawn from research on organizational change provides practical guidance to assist faculty members and administrators who are engaged in extensive program improvements. Streamlined yet still comprehensive and detailed, this revised volume will continue to serve as an invaluable resource for individuals and groups whose work includes planning, designing, delivering, evaluating, and studying curricula in higher education. "This is an extraordinary book that offers not a particular curriculum or structure, but a comprehensive approach for thinking about the curriculum, ensuring that important considerations are not overlooked in its revision or development, and increasing the likelihood that students will learn and develop in ways institutions hope they will. The book brings coherence and intention to what is typically an unstructured, haphazard, and only partially rational process guided more by beliefs than by empirically grounded, substantive information. Lattuca and Stark present their material in ways that are accessible and applicable across planning levels (course, program, department, and institution), local settings, and academic disciplines. It's an admirable and informative marriage of scholarship and practice, and an insightful guide to both. Anyone who cares seriously about how we can make our colleges and universities more educationally effective should read this book." --Patrick T. Terenzini, distinguished professor and senior scientist, Center for the Study of Higher Education, The Pennsylvania State University

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Praise

Title Page

Copyright Page

PREFACE

An Overview of the Contents

Acknowledgements

THE AUTHORS

CHAPTER ONE - CURRICULUM: AN ACADEMIC PLAN

The Need for a Definitional Framework

Defining Curriculum as an Academic Plan

Contextual Influences on Academic Plans

Constructing Plans: Curriculum Development

Evolution of the Academic Plan Concept

Advantages of the Academic Plan Model

CHAPTER TWO - EXTERNAL INFLUENCES: SOCIOCULTURAL CONTEXT

Patterns of Curriculum Debate

Evolving Educational Purposes

Debating General Education and Specialization

Learners: An Emphasis on Access

Content Debates: Prescription vs. Choice

Instructional Process: Occasional Innovations

Evaluation Debates: Emphasis on Quality Control

Influences and Potential Reforms

CHAPTER THREE - INTERNAL INFLUENCES: COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY CONTEXTS

Institutional Influences

Unit-Level Influences

Emerging Internal Influences

Converging Influences

CHAPTER FOUR - INTERNAL INFLUENCES: ACADEMIC FIELDS

Characterizing Academic Fields

Differences in Course Planning

Seeking Academic Community

Building on the Strengths of Academic Fields

CHAPTER FIVE - CREATING ACADEMIC PLANS

Course Planning

Program Planning

College-Wide Planning

Systematic Design Models

Sharing Responsibility for Curriculum Design

CHAPTER SIX - LEARNERS

Learner Influences on Course Planning

Learner Influences on Program Planning

Learner Influences on College Planning

Multiple Perspectives on Learning

Learners and Learning Processes

Understandings of Learning and Knowledge

Learning in Academic Fields

Considering Learners in Curriculum Design

CHAPTER SEVEN - INSTRUCTIONAL PROCESSES

Teaching Styles

Contextual Influences on Courses and Programs

Expanding Choices Among Instructional Processes

Teaching for Intentional Learning

Reflecting on Planning and Teaching

CHAPTER EIGHT - EVALUATING AND ADJUSTING ACADEMIC PLANS

Defining Evaluation and Assessment

Evaluating and Adjusting Course Plans

Evaluating and Adjusting Program Plans

College-Wide Evaluation

Evaluating Evaluation

Responding to Accountability Demands

CHAPTER NINE - ADMINISTERING ACADEMIC PLANS

Curriculum Leadership and Administrative Roles

CHAPTER TEN - MODELS AND STRATEGIES FOR CURRICULAR CHANGE

Evolution, Adaptation, and Strategic Change

Scope of Curricular Change

Models of Change

Using Multiple Strategies for Curricular Change

Learning to Change in Academic Organizations

Maintaining Change

Academic Plans in Context

REFERENCES

NAMES INDEX

SUBJECT INDEX

More Praise forShaping the College Curriculum, Second Edition

“A solid concept—curriculum planning—is couched in a new purpose: curriculum improvement within interactive contexts and cultures. The authors’ vision of coherent curricula leading to student engagement and integrative learning is a must-read.”

—Marcia Mentkowski, director, Educational Research and Evaluation, Alverno College

“Anyone serious about engaging in curriculum development or reform should read this book. The concepts presented clarify the complex interactions between curricula and the many internal and external influences that must be accounted for in successful curricular projects.”

—Thomas J. Siller, associate dean for academic and student affairs, College of Engineering, Colorado State University

“This new edition of an important book is a must-read for college and university leaders trying to foster curricular reform and instructional practices that emphasize student learning, and it is a comprehensive guide for individual faculty who seek a systematic academic plan for designing an effective course or program.”

—Constance Ewing Cook, associate vice provost and executive director, Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, University of Michigan

Copyright © 2009 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Published by Jossey-Bass A Wiley Imprint 989 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94103-1741—www.josseybass.com

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax [phone], or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax [phone], or online at www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Readers should be aware that Internet Web sites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Jossey-Bass books and products are available through most bookstores. To contact Jossey-Bass directly call our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 800-956-7739, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3986, or fax [phone].

Jossey-Bass also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Lattuca, Lisa R.

Shaping the college curriculum : academic plans in context / Lisa R. Lattuca and Joan S. Stark.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-7879-8555-4 (cloth)

1. Education, Higher—Curricula—United States. 2. Curriculum planning—United States.

3. Curriculum change—United States. I. Stark, Joan S. II. Title.

LB2361.5.L38 2009

378.1’990973—dc22

2009012618

HB Printing

The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series

PREFACE

By viewing a college curriculum as a plan, Shaping the College Curriculum: Academic Plans in Context encourages instructors and administrators to think about curriculum as a decision-making process with important implications for teaching and learning. The academic plan model we advocate reveals the complexity of curricular decision making, but also clarifies the process, thus enabling instructors and administrators to ask important questions about how curricula might optimize student learning. Updated and substantially revised since its original publication in 1997, this new volume serves as a resource for individuals and groups whose work includes planning, designing, delivering, evaluating, and studying curricula in higher education. Having used Shaping the College Curriculum as a text in our graduate courses and in professional development workshops for a number of years, we have learned first-hand how the academic plan concept enables faculty, administrators, and graduate students not only to grasp the complexity of postsecondary curricula, but to see the academic plan as a heuristic for designing curricula and guiding research on curricula. College and university administrators and faculty members, policy makers, researchers, graduate students, and others who share an interest in the improvement of teaching and learning in higher education will find valuable information to guide their practice. Today, concerns about what colleges and universities are teaching and how well, assessment and accountability demands from government agencies and funders, the rise of for-profit higher education, and advances in communications technology have brought curricula and teaching under increased public scrutiny. The potential for change in postsecondary education is enormous. Our efforts aim to promote curriculum change that is guided, not misguided.

In this volume, we focus on the everyday realities of curriculum planning in colleges and universities. Like its predecessor, the revised Shaping the College Curriculum stresses research-based educational practices and addresses the concerns of instructors, administrators, and researchers who ask questions such as:

• How can instructors design courses that balance a focus on subject matter with attention to students’ needs?

• How can instructors and programs accommodate students’ diverse educational, social, and cultural backgrounds?

• What does research tell us about how to create educational experiences that effectively support students’ learning?

• What impact do institutional and program contexts—missions, resources, cultures, and histories—have on curriculum planning?

• How can the results of courses and programs, as well as the achievements of students, be evaluated and improved?

• How can programs and institutions achieve needed curricular change in complex environments?

• How can administrators promote continuing attention to curricula and support a culture of improvement?

The academic plan concept, introduced and elaborated in the original Shaping the College Curriculum, provides the framework for this volume. However, because our thinking about academic plans is always evolving, this volume reflects refinements and extensions of our understanding of postsecondary curricula. For example, we have expanded our discussion of the sociocultural contexts in which students learn and curricula are created. This is reflected in the change in the subtitle of the volume—from “Academic Plans in Action” to “Academic Plans in Context.” An expanded review of theory and research on learning enhances our discussion of how the needs of learners can be addressed in the design of academic plans. A new chapter on curricular change builds on research on organizational change and provides practical guidance to assist faculty members and administrators who are considering and implementing substantial improvements in programs. Each chapter includes updated research findings relevant to curriculum planning, accreditation, teaching, and learning. Finally, information on curriculum planning in for-profit institutions and online education programs supplements our primary focus on planning in not-for-profit institutions.

To purposefully and effectively improve teaching and learning, educators must consider how educational research may be applied. Whether instructors and administrators are engaged in the ongoing task of curriculum revision for courses or programs, in revising general education requirements, incorporating new instructional technologies, or refining student evaluation, assessment, or program review processes, their work is enhanced when they are knowledgeable about research findings as well as about current practices. Those who study higher education—researchers and graduate students—also require resources that synthesize relevant theory, research, and practice so that investigations are well-grounded and well-informed. Accordingly, we have expanded our emphasis on the practical use of the academic plan concept in this revised volume while simultaneously building on past and current research to expand our framework, deepen our understandings of curriculum development and reform, and support our recommendations.

An Overview of the Contents

In 1997, we wrote, in the preface to Shaping the College Curriculum, “Faculty, administrators, and scholars need new ways of thinking about curriculum if they are to respond to current challenges and future demands for excellence in higher education.” The need for new thinking remains. To produce this revision, we asked ourselves what we had learned about postsecondary curricula, teaching, and learning since Shaping the College Curriculum was first published. We questioned our prior understandings and considered how new information from research, theory, and practice might add to—or alter—those ideas. We added two new chapters and rearranged content from existing chapters to facilitate use of the book by researchers, faculty, administrators, and graduate students. We also pruned carefully but purposefully, eliminating a few chapters entirely and substantially reworking others to promote understanding of essential issues.

In the first edition of Shaping the College Curriculum, the elements of the academic plan served as the organizational scheme for individual chapters. In this revision, the model still provides the backbone of the book, but it guides its overall conceptualization more fully than the organization of each chapter. The overview that follows briefly summarizes each chapter.

Chapter 1 sets the stage for an extended discussion of the development and revision of college and university curricula by explaining the academic plan model. We define academic plans, discussing each of the eight elements that comprise a plan—purpose, content, sequence, learners, instructional processes, instructional materials, evaluation, and adjustment. We also introduce the concept of educational contexts, particularly noting the many influences—social, cultural, historical, and institutional—that shape postsecondary curricula.

Having defined the concept of the academic plan in Chapter 1, we explore in Chapters 2, 3, and 4 the variety of influences that affect curriculum planning in colleges and universities. Each chapter treats a different, but critical, set of influences. Chapter 2 provides an historical overview of social, cultural, economic, and political forces and debates that have shaped higher education curricula in the United States. Chapter 2 also presents current information on the nation’s higher education institutions and student populations. Existing educational structures both constrain and facilitate curriculum planning and reform. By tracing the evolution of several elements of the academic plan (for example, educational missions and goals, content, instructional processes, learners, and evaluation), this chapter reveals the sources of contemporary thinking about postsecondary programs, teaching, and learning as it provides an historical perspective on the current state of higher education in the United States.

Different histories lead to different institutional structures and cultures that can significantly affect educational decision making and processes. In Chapter 3, therefore, we examine the varying organizational structures and cultures of colleges and universities (for example, research universities, community colleges, liberal arts colleges, for-profit institutions), consolidating information about institutional characteristics and influences that was embedded in several chapters in the original Shaping the College Curriculum. This chapter will be particularly useful for those with limited familiarity with different higher education sectors and how variations in institutional characteristics generally affect curricular and teaching practices; in short, it offers a primer on faculty and administrative roles and responsibilities in U.S. colleges and universities.

Although college and university missions, structures, and cultures are important influences on faculty members as they plan curricula, the influence of academic fields on course planning, program planning, and educational beliefs is pervasive. In Chapter 4 we rely on research about course planning to help readers understand how instructors in different fields of study approach the task at the course and program levels. Since views about course planning and teaching vary by discipline, this chapter is essential to understanding why instructors from different fields have different views of what and how they should teach. Tapping the knowledge base about the influence of academic fields on faculty work, we describe how socialization in an academic field shapes an instructor’s course planning decisions and complicates program and college-wide planning. Importantly, Chapter 4 recommends strategies for sensitizing instructors to the assumptions they bring to the table when they engage in curriculum planning and the sources of their disagreements, thus suggesting how educators might bridge differences to enable curricular improvements.

With Chapter 5 we begin a multi-chapter discussion of curriculum planning that describes current strategies for course and program planning, considers research and theory about learners and learning, and discusses the implications of this information for the development of instructional processes, as well as for the effective evaluation and improvement of academic plans. Chapter 5 focuses on current curricular planning processes at the course, program, and institutional levels. Our review of research on course planning allows us to contrast what college and university instructors typically do when planning courses with what they might do more effectively in a purposeful and ongoing curriculum planning process.

We turn our attention to learners in Chapter 6. To provide the groundwork for improved attention to learners and learning, we present an interdisciplinary treatment of how students learn drawn from the fields of education, cognitive psychology, educational psychology, anthropology, and sociology. This introduction to the complex phenomenon of human learning emphasizes intellectual development and thinking, but also considers how personal characteristics such as academic preparation, interests, and cultural background influence can influence what is learned as students interact with course content, peers, and instructors.

College and university instructors are typically unfamiliar with research on learning, but should be aware of its many implications for the purposeful design and delivery of courses and programs. In Chapter 7, we offer many empirically or theoretically grounded recommendations for improving instructional processes at the course, program, and college levels. Each section of this chapter builds on the research findings on learning discussed in Chapter 6.

In Chapter 8 we turn to evaluation and adjustment, the final two elements of the academic plan model. We describe current practices in course and program evaluation, but also suggest procedures and systems to encourage periodic, rather than episodic, review of curricula at the course, program, and institutional levels. The chapter covers classroom assessment techniques, program review approaches, accreditation, and college-wide assessment programs—all of which are increasingly prominent in the minds of educators in an era of heightened demands for accountability and quality assurance.

The final chapters of Shaping the College Curriculum treat the issues of improvement and innovation in academic planning. In Chapter 9 we discuss administrative responsibility for, and leadership of, curriculum development and improvement processes. In doing so, we return once more to the academic plan model elaborated in the early chapters of the book, highlighting the local educational environment in which curriculum plans are constructed. Although faculty members, as experts in their academic fields, are responsible for academic planning in not-for-profit colleges and universities, administrators have a critical role to play in creating a supportive environment in which experimentation and innovation can be pursued. Administrators are also responsible for helping instructors recognize and respond successfully to external challenges that might influence curricula in colleges and universities. This chapter includes many practical checklists that can help instructors and administrators assess and promote the efficacy of their curriculum planning efforts.

Curriculum change in higher education is often portrayed as a slow, tedious, and contentious process—but does it have to be so? Chapter 10 is devoted to the issue of curricular change, assuming that, while innovation is a regular feature of academic life in institutions committed to improvement, any change presents a challenge. This chapter synthesizes recent research on organizational and curricular change to identify principles and conditions that facilitate improvement. From this review, we have drawn many practical recommendations for productive renewal and innovation processes. Ideally, curriculum change is a continuous and collaborative learning process in which faculty members and administrators work together to learn what works and why.

Acknowledgements

Many individuals contributed to the completion of this volume. India McHale and Jennifer Domagal-Goldman, doctoral students and graduate research assistants in the Higher Education program at Penn State, devoted many hours to research for the book and more hours than they will wish to recall to fact-checking, table and figure construction, formatting, and the reference list. India and Jen supplied sharp minds, good humor, and moral support at crucial times, and their work is greatly appreciated. In addition, a number of other graduate students at Penn State researched specific issues for this volume. Most have since completed their degrees and taken faculty or administrative positions in higher education. We are grateful to Christian Anderson, Sam Museus, Joan Pecht, and Stephen Quaye for their valuable contributions. Publishing technologies have changed since Shaping the College Curriculum was first published in 1997, and Beverly Ladrido, administrative assistant in the Center for the Study of Higher Education, effectively bridged the gap for us, updating computer files from the first edition so that we had a reasonable facsimile of each chapter to work on for this revised volume.

Colleagueship is the lifeblood of academia and many friends in the field have encouraged us over the years to produce this revised volume. We thank them for that encouragement, as well as for their insights, from which we benefitted as we wrote the new Shaping the College Curriculum. Finally, we are exceptionally indebted to Josephine Lattuca and Malcolm Lowther, who patiently and lovingly waited for us to be done.

THE AUTHORS

Lisa R. Lattuca is an associate professor of higher education and a senior research associate in the Center for the Study of Higher Education at The Pennsylvania State University.

Dr. Lattuca’s research and teaching interests focus on the intersections of curriculum, teaching, learning, and faculty work in higher education. Three key questions guide her work: (a) how do faculty members’ attitudes, values, and behaviors influence curricula and instruction, and in turn, student learning; (b) why do faculty adopt specific forms of knowledge production (such as interdisciplinary research) and how do their choices shape their research and teaching; and (c) how do disciplinary and interdisciplinary contexts and perspectives affect faculty work and student learning in colleges and universities? She has addressed these overarching concerns in several studies of undergraduate engineering education, an evaluation of the impact of outcomes-based accreditation on undergraduate engineering programs and student learning, explorations of interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty, and investigations of the influence of academic disciplines on research and teaching.

In addition to journal articles and chapters on these and other topics, Dr. Lattuca is the author of Creating Interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary Research Among College and University Faculty (2001) and co-author (with Joan Stark) of Shaping the College Curriculum: Academic Plans in Action (1997). She is also co-editor of Advancing Faculty Learning Through Interdisciplinary Collaboration (2005), College and University Curriculum: Developing and Cultivating Programs of Study That Enhance Student Learning (2001) and Qualitative Research in Higher Education: Expanding Perspectives (2001). Dr. Lattuca has served on the editorial boards of The Journal of Higher Education, The American Journal of Education, Higher Education, and Research in Higher Education. She and her colleagues at the Center for the Study of Higher Education have received several grants from the National Science Foundation to support their research on engineering education.

Before joining the faculty of Penn State’s Center for the Study of Higher Education and Higher Education program, Dr. Lattuca served on the faculty at Loyola University Chicago, as an associate program officer at the Spencer Foundation (Chicago), and in a variety of college administrative positions. She earned a Ph.D. from the University of Michigan, a master’s degree from Cornell University, and a bachelor’s degree from Saint Peter’s College.

Joan S. Stark is professor emerita in the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education and dean emerita, School of Education, The University of Michigan. From 1978 to 1983, she was dean of the School of Education at the University of Michigan. From 1986 to 1991, she was director of the National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL), a national research center funded annually at $1 million by the U.S. Department of Education. From 1991 to 1996 she was also editor of The Review of Higher Education. She has received the Howen Bowen Career Achievement Award, the Research Achievement Award, and the Service Award from the Association for the Study of Higher Education. She has also received the Sidney Suslow Career Award and the Distinguished Membership Award from the Association for Institutional Research and the Exemplary Research Award from Division J of the American Educational Research Association. She retired in 2001.

Before moving to Michigan, Professor Stark was associate professor and chairperson of the Department of Higher/Postsecondary Education at Syracuse University (1974-1978) and associate dean of Goucher College in Maryland (1970-1974). She has also been a community college and high school science teacher, and an editorial writer for major textbook publishers.

A 1957 magna cum laude graduate in chemistry of Syracuse University, Professor Stark received a master’s degree from Teachers’ College, Columbia University, and a doctorate in administration of higher education from the State University of New York at Albany.

Professor Stark’s research and teaching interests include curriculum development, evaluation and assessment, and undergraduate professional education in colleges and universities. She is the author or editor of numerous other books and monographs, including: Shaping the College Curriculum: Academic Plans in Action (1997); Responsive Professional Education: Balancing Outcomes and Opportunities (1986); Strengthening the Ties That Bind: Integrating Undergraduate Liberal and Professional Study (1988); Reflections on Course Planning (1988); Improving Teaching and Learning Through Research (1988); Student Goals for College and Courses (1989); Planning Introductory College Courses (1990); and Assessment and Program Evaluation (an Association for the Study of Higher Education Reader, 1994). She has also published many articles on curriculum, assessment, accreditation, and professional education in such journals as The Journal of Higher Education, Research in Higher Education, and The Review of Higher Education.

Professor Stark has directed several projects for the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education. She has been president of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, and a consulting editor for numerous journals in the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and South Africa. Professor Stark also has been a member of the U.S. Education Commissioner’s Advisory Committee on Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility; the publications board of the Association for Institutional Research; the board of directors of the Land Grant Deans of Education; the College Board Long-Range Planning Committee; the Harry S Truman Fellowship Regional Review Panel; a trustee of Kalamazoo College; and a member of the Accounting Education Change Commission.

CHAPTER ONE

CURRICULUM: AN ACADEMIC PLAN

Ask any college student or graduate “What is the college curriculum?” and you will get a ready answer. Most think of the curriculum as a set of courses or experiences needed to complete a college degree. Some will refer to the total set of courses a college offers, others will mean the set of courses students take, and a few will include informal experiences that are not listed in the catalog of courses. Some may include teaching methods as part of their definitions, while others will not. At a superficial level the public assumes it knows what a college curriculum is, but complex understandings are rare. Even those closely involved with college curricula lack a consistent definition. A few may point out that we cannot define curriculum without reference to a specific institution because college and university missions, programs, and students vary widely in the United States.

Over the years, we have solicited definitions of curricula from faculty, administrators, graduate students, and observers of higher education. Most people include at least one and usually more of the following elements in their definitions:

• A college’s or program’s mission, purpose, or collective expression of what is important for students to learn

• A set of experiences that some authorities believe all students should have

• The set of courses offered to students

• The set of courses students actually elect from those available

• The content of a specific discipline

• The time and credit frame in which the college provides education. (Stark & Lowther, 1986)

In addition to the elements that provide the primary basis for an educator’s definition of curriculum, individuals often mention other elements, sometimes including their views of learners and learning or their personal philosophy of education. Faculty members with broad curriculum development responsibilities typically mention several elements in their definitions and may be more confident about which of those elements should be included or excluded.

These instructors seldom link the elements they mention into an integrated definition of the curriculum. They tend to think of separate educational tasks or processes, such as establishing the credit value of courses, selecting the specific disciplines to be taught or studied, teaching their subjects, specifying objectives for student achievement, and evaluating what students know. Probably the most common linkage faculty members address is the structural connection between the set of courses offered and the related time and credit framework. Colleges and universities in the United States have emphasized the credit hour since the early 20th century, having modified the Carnegie “unit” first introduced into secondary schools in 1908 (Hutcheson, 1997; Levine, 1978). Curriculum change efforts in the United States often focus on structure because numbers of credit hours and other structural dimensions of curricula are common to all fields. In fact, some observers believe that the most common form of curricular change is “tinkering” with the structure (Bergquist, Gould, & Greenberg, 1981; Toombs & Tierney, 1991), for example, changing course listings, college calendars, or the number of credits required for graduation. Although discussions of curricular reform seem to focus on these structural dimensions rather than on the overall experience envisioned for students, when legislators, policy makers, and the general public talk about “improving curriculum,” they have something more in mind than structural adjustments. To them, curricular changes should result in substantive improvements in student learning, and colleges and universities should be able to demonstrate such improvement. Today, demands for accountability and increased scrutiny of higher education call for greater consensus on what we mean when we say “curriculum.”

The Need for a Definitional Framework

Since the mid-1980s the extensive literature urging educational reform has focused on the ambiguous term “curriculum.” This word has been frequently modified by several equally ambiguous adjectives such as “coherent” and “rigorous” or linked with processes such as integration. Is it the set of courses offered that lacks coherence or integration? The choice of courses made by the students? The actual experiences students take away from the courses? The teaching styles and strategies chosen by the professors? Or all of these? To discuss curriculum reform meaningfully, we need a working definition of curriculum to guide discussion and help us determine what needs to be changed.