School-based Curriculum Development in Britain

A Collection of Case Studies

John Eggleston

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780429846267
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Originally published in 1980. School-based curriculum development was the dominant form of curriculum development in Britain. Though there were national projects, it was thought that the initiative for change must come from within the schools. Curriculum development arose directly from the needs and enthusiasms of the schools, their pupils and their teachers. Some large schools had undertaken their own programmes while others joined forces, sharing common needs and enjoying common achievements or based effective in-school initiatives on national projects. Given how much things have changed since, this book is enlightening.

Case studies: Codsall, Staffordshire; Manor Park, Newcastle; Abraham Moss Centre, Manchester; and Hele's School, Exeter. There are also studies of the Independent Learning in Science Project and in the Nuffield Integrated Science Project.

Chapter 1

The Independent Learning in Science model of school-based curriculum development

Eric L. Green

For over a decade now, science teachers in the United Kingdom have been experimenting with a variety of schemes of independent learning, initiated by themselves with the intention of improving the quality of learning of their students. In part, this kind of development has occurred in science teaching in response to the emergence of inquiry-based curricula, which to many science teachers implies independent learning, that is, schemes of work differentiated according to the age, ability and aptitude of individual students. In part, the improved provision of educational technology in schools and/or at local teachers’ centres has made the provision of suitable resources for independent learning easier, and has therefore contributed to the establishment of such learning schemes in schools. A further contribution to this process is the arrival of the unstreamed class, where traditional class teaching is seen to be inappropriate, but there is also evidence¹ that many teachers involved with streamed classes see the methods of independent learning as more appropriate to the needs of their students than traditional methods.

Initially, this movement to independent learning in science was virtually unrecognised, certainly having no formal organisational structure, and consisted of essentially randomly dispersed operations by individual science teachers. Early methods put considerable emphasis on an individualised approach,² and there were clear links, at that time, with the ideas and methods of programmed learning.³ A marked increase in the reporting of these experiments, in the literature of science education, suggested the need for a formal professional group which could collect, collate and disseminate examples of good practice, and perhaps assist the improvement of that practice.⁴ It was in this context, and as a result of informal discussions among science teachers involved in this kind of work, that the conference ‘Individual and Small Group Methods in the Teaching of Science’ was held at Countesthorpe College, in April 1973.⁵ To the surprise of the organisers, over one hundred school and university teachers, inspectors, advisers and publishers took part, clearly indicating that the time was ripe for such a conference to be held. The meeting provided a stimulating opportunity for consultation, confirmation, exploration and elaboration of ideas and methods, and in hindsight proved an important watershed for those involved in the school-based development of independent learning in science. There was an immediate recognition of mutual interests and the need for a supportive professional organisation of like-minded practitioners, with the result that, towards the end of the conference, the ILLS organisation was founded. The establishment of the organisation was considered vitally important at the time, and there is no doubt that it has played an essential supportive and developmental role in the creation of independent learning in science in schools. By the manner in which the ILIS organisation functions, it represents a novel emphasis in curriculum development, certainly in science education, and one which it is felt is particularly congruent with the school-based curriculum development. The central organisation, through its officers and publications,⁶ is not a curriculum writing and development team, but provides the vital supportive, co-ordinating and promotional link between teachers in schools.

The local, school-based groups should be seen as the engine-room of the development. It should be clear to all science teachers that all local groups are open to access by anyone with interest or ideas. It is, I believe, essential to the success of such a learning scheme that the individual teacher should be able to take a very active role in devising his own scheme, based on these resources, and not merely a passive agent doling out the prescribed materials.⁷

It is believed that the ILIS organisation provides an important model for school-based curriculum development, and it is suggested that its methods and structure might be imitated in many other areas of the curriculum. Curriculum development in the individual school is the vital and fundamental requirement of curriculum change, but in isolation fails to disperse its achievements, tends to neglect similar experiences of others which might otherwise be extremely useful, and misses out on that corporate spirit of endeavour which illuminates the horizons and carries one through the difficult and frustrating periods of curriculum change. This model carries with it many important implications—the co-ordinating role of the central organisation, development of local workshop/resource centres, in-school training, in-service training, communications between teachers, teacher participation—and it is hoped that these factors will become quite explicit as the description of the ILIS organisation is developed. Members themselves, of course, have a continuing dialogue about such matters.

There is one feature of this model which is worth special consideration at this point. Curriculum development in science education has, so far, been largely dominated by the centralised curriculum development team, producing materials, essentially in isolation from the schools, which, it is hoped, grateful teachers will accept. Like other, well-known, tablets of stone, such statements are frequently rejected. The ‘mountain top’ type curriculum development, however inspired, must inevitably have such a consequence, because of its lack of grass-roots consultation and participation. It surely was not surprising that the Schools Council funded a project to look into the uptake of its own projects—a matter which has given some cause for concern. ILIS is an organisation involved with decentralised curriculum development, disseminating its ideas and resources by a diffusion process, uptake being primarily dependent on teacher/teacher contact. For example, the Nuffield A-Level Physics Independent Learning Resources were first developed and used at Countesthorpe College, but are now in use at some twenty-five other educational institutions and interest continues to grow. The ILIS organisation exists to facilitate this diffusion process, considering it an important element in school-based curriculum development. Such a process has important implications, not least of which is its cost-effectiveness in supporting teachers in initiating curriculum change in their schools. A large print order is never required, schools sending out copies of their original materials when requested, usually at cost. ILIS is essentially a teachers’ co-operative.

It is important, now, to consider the intentions and practices of the ILIS organisation in some detail so that its significance for teachers involved in school-based curriculum development may be better understood.

Aims of the ILIS organisation

Aim I To provide co-ordination of thought and enterprise in establishing methods of independent learning in science, the main interest, at present, being in the secondary school.

Aim II To provide for co-operative development in the preparation and dissemination of ideas and resources, primarily through local workshop and resource centres.

In elaborating on the aims of the ILIS organisation, it is intended to show that it exists to promote a process consistent in intention with the most informed thinking on localised curriculum development, principally represented by that of the Schools Council.⁸ In other words, it is suggested that the ILIS type development is essentially in the mainstream of current educational thinking and a direct and important expression of it, albeit with significant contributions of its own to that thinking.

The essential elements of the process which the ILIS organisation exists to promote are:

The careful examination, drawing on all available sources of knowledge and informed judgement, of the objectives of teaching . . . The object is to help as many teachers as possible to define, co-operatively, and from personal conviction, these objectives.

The development and trial use in schools, of those methods and materials which are judged most likely to achieve the objectives which teachers agree upon.

The ILIS organisation also concurs with the Schools Council’s basis for curriculum development in that, first, the ILIS model rests on a keen interest on the part of teachers in curricular progress. Groups of science teachers in ILIS are meeting to discuss curriculum problems and Local Education Authorities are making contributions to encourage such groups, in particular helping with such accommodation, apparatus and secretarial assistance as may be necessary.⁹ Second, ILIS encourages Local Education Authorities, either singly or in collaboration with neighbouring Authorities, to consider ways of responding to the expressed wish of teachers to come together to conduct for themselves curriculum development, in order to sharpen their judgments on objectives, improve their experimental procedures and play a full part in assessing the results of development work. Third, the essence in the ILIS programme of curricular review and development is new thinking by the teachers themselves, as well as the appraisal of the thinking of others. This means that ILIS creates regular opportunities to meet together, both nationally and locally, and looks upon the initiation of thought, as well as the trial and assessment of new ideas and procedures drawn from other sources, as an integral part of its professional service to society. Within this context, the local ILIS workshop/resource centres have developed in a manner consistent with the suggested functions of such groups as described by the Schools Council,¹⁰ viz:

The most important function is to focus local interest and to give teachers a setting within which new objectives can be discussed and defined, and new ideas on content and method can be aired. The comments and criticism of local teachers show very clearly whether an idea which works well in one school can succeed in another. Teachers working in these local ILIS groups often seek a wider forum by invoking the help of the local authority or institute of education or both.¹¹

The schools in the area of the local workshop group are usually among those who give new materials their trials. The local centre of interest contributes to the evaluation of materials, providing feedback comment, criticisms and suggestions for improvement directly to the curriculum developers.¹²

The local ILIS groups are kept informed about research and development in progress elsewhere. This is one of the important functions of the ILIS publications and part of the role of the officers of the organisation.

It is suggested then, that the aims of the ILIS organisation are firmly rooted in accepted educational thought about school-based curriculum development, and that t...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Original Title Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Contents
• Notes on contributors
• Editor’s preface
• Introduction: John Eggleston
• 1 The Independent Learning in Science model of school-based curriculum development: Eric L. Green
• 2 Children Investigating and teachers writing: Ken Wild
• 3 Continuing curriculum change at Codsall School: Paul Abbs
• 4 Curriculum development and staff development at the Abraham Moss Centre: Ron Mitson
• 5 The development of a Humanities curriculum at Manor Park School: Patrick Eavis
• 6 Language through the curriculum at Hele’s School: Peter Cloke
• Index