Curriculum Mapping Major Trends and Issues

Copyright © 2001 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

Stages of Curriculum Mapping

Although authors do not necessarily agree on the specifics of each stage of curriculum mapping,
most would agree that components of the process could be categorized into four stages: (1) planning
and preparing for curriculum mapping, (2) mapping and reviewing the taught curriculum, (3)
revising and aligning the taught curriculum with standards and assessments, and (4) validating
alignment and planning for continuous curricular improvement.

Planning and Preparing for Curriculum Mapping

Before initiating curriculum mapping, a school or district must make certain decisions regarding
purpose, policies, and procedures and clearly communicate them to all staff. In AEL's two-year
curriculum mapping and alignment process, successful completion of the curriculum mapping
process requires substantial commitment on the part of district administrators, building principals,
and teachers. Therefore, a school or district should not initiate curriculum mapping without
thoughtful analysis and careful planning of its needs. This planning stage is the time to determine
and communicate the "whys" and benefits of curriculum mapping.

Schools and districts should use data-based decision making at least six months prior to initiating
curriculum mapping. They may review dropout and graduation rates as well as student attendance
and discipline records. Careful analysis of district, school, and classroom student achievement data
helps staff identify specific areas of strength and weakness in student performance, problems with
alignment between taught curriculum and state standards, and professional development needs.
These data also provide goals for school improvement that districts and schools can incorporate into
the strategic plans that most states require.

For example, prior to implementing AEL's Teaching/Learning Mapping Strategy (TLMS), a group
of teachers and administrators from each school in Hancock County, Tenn., reviewed the summary
scores on the Terra Nova, a norm-referenced test given annually to students in grades 3–8.
Participants used three colors of highlighters to identify strengths and weaknesses in student
performance by highlighting scores above the norm in green, the scores at or slightly below the norm
in yellow, and scores significantly below the norm that were in need of immediate improvement in
red. Each teacher also received a copy of the individual test report for each student in the next year's
class and marked their scores in the same manner. This process enabled teachers to group students
for instruction based on their individual learning strengths and needs and to target specific goals for
instructional improvement. These goals were included in each school's improvement plan. As they
continued to map the curriculum, teachers reviewed curriculum maps each grading period to
determine if instruction adequately and appropriately addressed the targeted areas.

Teachers and administrators in Lunenburg County, Va., used a similar process prior to beginning
curriculum mapping. During the "introduction to mapping" workshop, each school faculty reviewed
its Standards of Learning test data for grades 3, 5, 8, and end-of-course and then selected the weakest
content area (math, science, language arts, or social studies) and specific strand (e.g., geometry,
reading comprehension, scientific investigation) for emphasis during the school year. Teachers of
exploratory and elective courses identified ways to reinforce the targeted content areas in their

Page 1 of 20
classes. As teachers reviewed their maps, they began to collaborate across the curriculum to improve
learning in the targeted content areas.

These districts established the purpose for using curriculum mapping, and it became the major
component in the districts action plans for accomplishing instructional improvement goals. During
curriculum mapping, the schools focused all professional development on specific interventions
related to instructional analysis and improvement after identifying these needs in dialogue with staff
and by reviewing curriculum maps.

A planning meeting of key district and school leaders is an effective way to reach consensus on an
action plan for curriculum mapping. When a district decides to use curriculum mapping, two
essential components should be in place prior to implementation: scheduling and leadership (Burns,
2001). Scheduling includes

? Training for administrators and teacher leaders the summer prior to implementation.
? One inservice day prior to the beginning of the school year for all staff to participate in an
introductory workshop.
? A minimum of two days during the school year for follow-up training for mapping leaders.
? Release time for teacher mapping leaders to facilitate mapping in their schools and to meet
with leaders from other schools.
? A minimum of three days during the school year for all staff to participate in professional
development related to curriculum mapping and alignment.
? One week after the first school year for the district curriculum committee to complete its
review and revision of the curriculum, and three days after the second year to complete the
validation of curriculum alignment.
? Daily or weekly common planning time for elementary grade-level teachers and middle and
high school interdisciplinary teams or departments, a portion of which is dedicated to
curriculum mapping.

These decisions should be made prior to finalizing the district calendar, school schedules, and staff
assignments.

Leadership involves selecting a district facilitator and at least three leaders (principal and two
teachers) for each school. In addition to facilitating the mapping process, these leaders should take
the following steps to ensure successful implementation of curriculum mapping (Weinstein, 1986;
Hoyle, English, & Steffy, 1994; Jacobs, 1997; Burns, 2001).

? Determine curricular areas to map.

? Review a variety of sample maps.
? Determine format and level of specificity for mapping.
? Purchase or design a computer program for entering and storing mapping data. Although
some teachers may prefer to begin the process with a paper-and-pencil template, all
curriculum maps should eventually be entered into a computer program. (For a recommended
listing of computer programs, see the Curriculum Resources section of this chapter, p. 57.)
? Decide how often mapping is to occur and for how long. Many school districts use a monthly
or grading period time frame and complete the mapping and reviewing stage in one year.
They then complete revision, alignment, and validation in the second year.

Page 2 of 20
 ? Determine the costs of mapping and allocate appropriate funds. Consider the cost of staff
training, consultants, and computer programs, as well as for providing release time,
substitutes, and stipends for teacher leaders.
? Identify activities that will follow curriculum mapping. For example, consider how the
mapping process will be evaluated, for what purposes maps will be used in the future, and
what policy changes will be needed to support continuous curricular improvement.
? Communicate decisions and expectations to all staff.
? Participate in leadership training for curriculum mapping.

Mapping and Reviewing the Taught Curriculum

Because the purpose of this stage is to collect authentic data about what is taught in the course of a
school year, it makes sense to begin mapping on the first day of school. Schools should conduct
mapping and review during the first year so that data are recorded as teaching and learning actually
occur. Most school districts schedule several planning and professional development days prior to
the beginning of the school year. These teacher work days are the most appropriate time for district
and school mapping leaders to provide an introductory workshop for all staff.

School districts can deliver this introduction in various ways. In a small district (one to three
schools), it may be appropriate to bring all staff together for the introduction to curriculum mapping.
In larger districts, or in rural districts where schools are sometimes miles apart, it may be more
effective to introduce mapping within each building on the same day. In very large districts, schools
may decide to come together in K–12 feeder areas for an introductory workshop. However a district
accomplishes the introduction, mapping leaders should be sure take these specific steps (Burns,
2001; Jacobs, 1997;Weinstein, 1986):

? Provide an overview of the mapping process that explains "whys" and "hows."
? Reassure teachers that mapping will not be used for teacher evaluation purposes.
? Emphasize that mapping is a strengths model, not a deficits model. It capitalizes on what is
sound, innovative, and creative in existing classroom practice.
? Explain that teachers will have faculty meeting time to work on maps and that a portion of
their weekly and monthly planning time will be used for team meetings to compare and
discuss mapping data.
? Encourage teachers to use computers for mapping, as all maps will eventually be entered on a
computer. Provide instruction and hands-on experience in how to use the selected computer
program.
? Give a time frame for completing maps (monthly or by grading period is recommended).
? Show teachers sample maps in the format selected by the district leadership team.
? Explain that it is important for each teacher to complete a map so they can gather realistic
data about the curriculum and build on the existing strengths in teacher and student
performance.

Once individual teacher mapping has begun, principals and teacher leaders should schedule and
organize weekly or biweekly team meetings in their school during common planning time. Team
meetings are essential in facilitating curriculum mapping and in promoting reflective, results-
oriented teaching. In an elementary school, a team is generally all those teachers who teach a
particular grade— or grade cluster in a multi-age setting. At the middle school level, interdisciplinary
grade-level teams are more frequent. In high schools, a team may be interdisciplinary, departmental,

Page 3 of 20
or just whoever has planning during a certain block. In all settings, teachers of special education and
exploratory or elective programs (e.g., art, music, physical education) should map their curriculum
and meet intermittently with teachers of core classes to coordinate student learning experiences.

Team meetings provide time for leaders to support and encourage the mapping process and to
facilitate communication across the building. Many teachers are concerned about what they should
record on their maps. Leaders should encourage them to record the topics, themes, or skills that are
actually taught. For example, if teachers are using integrated or interdisciplinary units, they should
record their content in this way. After the first month or grading period, team meetings become a
time to review and analyze the data collected. Using computer programs also makes communication,
networking, and data analysis across buildings possible.

Jacobs (1997) recommends that review and analysis take place after the completion of yearly maps.
However, teachers that use the diary method (i.e., recording what happens in the classroom in real
time) should conduct more frequent reviews and analyses of mapping data. One practical reason is
that so much is going on at the end of the school year that teachers are usually tired, which can lead
to incomplete or inaccurate review and analysis. Also, it is important to begin instructional
modification based on mapping and student achievement data as soon as possible, keeping in mind
that the ultimate goal of mapping is to produce a coherent curriculum that is aligned with standards,
builds on teacher creativity, and enables all students to be successful.

During the first year of mapping, team meetings should focus on establishing common goals for
student learning; identifying consistencies, differences, and innovations in curriculum and
instruction within grades or courses; finding opportunities to connect and reinforce learning across
the curriculum; noting unintended curricular gaps and repetitions; and sharing resources and
teaching strategies that promote student learning.

Research has shown that team meetings help enhance teaching practice and curricular coherence.
Teachers become critical friends as they share effective and ineffective instructional practices with a
focus on student engagement and learning. As teachers review their maps to identify examples of
instruction to share with others, they might consider the following six criteria for innovative and
effective instructional activities (Burns, 2001):

? They address the requirements and expectations of specific standards (note the use of verbs
such as plan, investigate, create, describe, compose).
? They encourage students to participate actively (e.g., students teach lessons, create projects,
design experiments).
? They ensure that all students learn to their full potential by addressing multiple intelligences
and learning styles.
? They connect lessons to the real world through example, application, process, information,
and so on.
? They require students to use higher-order thinking skills.
? They provide choices for students.

As teachers learn from one another, they become more creative in designing instructional activities
and units. Furthermore, teachers develop expertise in aligning knowledge and skills to the language
of standards and in adapting or adjusting innovative practices as needed to meet standards. Through
discussion and collaboration, teachers find effective ways to connect and reinforce learning across

Page 4 of 20
the curriculum. Finally, teachers also develop a greater sense of efficacy through a shared
commitment to goals for student learning, and in this way team meetings usually evolve into
professional learning communities.

In field testing the Teaching/Learning Mapping Strategy, AEL evaluators designed an Effects on
Schools questionnaire to measure four aspects of learning communities: shared vision, collegiality,
collaboration, and supportive leadership. They administered the questionnaire once to all teachers
and administrators in Hancock County, Tenn.— during the second year of mapping; once in Morgan
County, Tenn.— in year one; and twice in Lunenburg County, Va.— once at the beginning of the first
year of mapping and once during the second year. A comparison of results across sites indicated
higher mean scores on the shared vision, collegiality, and collaboration subscales at sites in the
second year of implementation as compared to sites in the first year. A second and more compelling
finding was that the subscale mean scores in Lunenburg County significantly increased from year
one to year two. When effect sizes were examined, the increases in perceived shared vision,
supportive leadership, and collaboration were not only statistically significant but also suggested that
true positive changes were occurring in these aspects of the school environment in Lunenburg
County (Chadwick, Burns, & Howley, 2001).

Another critical component of the mapping process is professional development focused on specific
needs that emerge from student achievement data or that teachers identify as they review maps
across and between schools. Although team meetings promote continuous professional growth, often
teachers need to be introduced to new research-based strategies that improve learning. Although
needs may vary from school to school, some common needs can be identified across schools. For
example, if reading scores are low across the district, teachers may need additional strategies for
improving literacy; if achievement data indicate that certain groups of students are performing
consistently lower than others, teachers may need more information on how to differentiate
instruction. As teachers review maps within or across schools, they may identify particular content,
skills, or standards that students have difficulty mastering or for which they need alternative teaching
strategies.

Depending on the identified needs in a district, professional development may be school-based or

districtwide. It is generally a good idea to provide some of both. School-based professional
development provides an opportunity for staff to focus on their students' specific learning needs. It
also allows them time to review and discuss mapping data vertically— what Jacobs (1997) describes
in her mapping phases 2–4 as read-through of maps by individual teachers, mixed small-group
review to share findings, and large-group review to compile findings for the school. Figure 1,
Curriculum Map Review Form, is a tool for schools to use in this process. Teachers use the form to
help identify what standards they have addressed, to what degree they have "spiraled"— reinforced
and extended with increasing complexity— instruction on specific standards throughout the year,
how well they have matched their teaching activities to standards, and how rigorous the curriculum
is. A mixed small group can then meet to review the data from each teacher's Curriculum Map
Review Form.

Figure 1. Curriculum Map Review Form

Grade/Content
Standard Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. March April May Do assessments

Page 5 of 20
 (number match closely to the
and topic) intent of the
standard?( - = not
quite; v = good
match; + = excellent)

One benefit of districtwide professional development is that it allows teachers of particular grades
and content groups to come together to review maps across schools, either by grade and course or
vertically within a discipline. It also can address similar professional growth needs identified across
schools, such as improving math instruction or teaching writing across the curriculum.

Revising and Aligning the Curriculum with Standards and Assessments

When teachers have completed yearly curriculum maps and each school has conducted a final
review of all maps, all faculty members should come together to compile and examine the findings
and identify new information and places that may require revision. Faculty members decide as a
group which revisions can be handled at their site and which have implications with other sites
across the district (Jacobs, 1997). The schools then send compiled lists of identified gaps and
overlaps in the curriculum and potential areas for integration to the district curriculum committee,
which reviews data across schools and recommends revisions to align the curriculum with standards.

The district curriculum committee is composed of several teachers from K–12 grade levels who
represent all curricular areas, as well as the mapping leaders from each school. It is especially
important to have adequate representation on the committee from all curricular areas and grade
levels that are included on state tests. The district curriculum mapping facilitator and school
mapping leaders may lead the committee's work, or they may choose to use a curriculum mapping
consultant. The work of the district committee, which generally is accomplished in five days, begins
with review of mapping data in each content area and grade level across schools.

When working with district committees, elementary teachers should be grouped in grade-level teams
for the first activity. For example, 1st grade teachers should work together to review and summarize
findings from all schools in language arts, math, science, and social studies. Or, if one is working in
a large district where there are more grade-level representatives, teachers can work in smaller groups

Page 6 of 20
where each group reviews one of the curricular areas. Likewise, middle and high school content
teachers on the committee review and summarize all mapping data compiled for their courses.

Also, it's a good idea during this activity for teachers to review some curriculum maps. With all
teachers' maps in a computer program, it is easy to pull them up, print them, and review the findings.
With some computer programs (see Curriculum Resources, p. 57), users can search all maps for a
particular course or grade level or they can search the database by standard to determine where, how,
and to what extent a particular standard has been taught.

The outcome of this first step in districtwide map review is a summary of unintended gaps and
repetitions and potential areas for integration by discipline and grade level. A recorder for each
group writes the list on chart paper or in a word processing program. With this information in hand,
it is now time for a vertical review in each content area.

Teachers convene in K–12 groups by content (curricular areas that have been mapped) to identify
unintended gaps and repetitions in content, skills, teaching strategies, and assessments. Each
elementary teacher on the committee reviews one discipline so all disciplines have a K–12 vertical
representation. During this phase of review, teachers often gain much new information about
missing pieces and unintended repetitions. For example, they may find repetitions rather than
spiraling of skills from grade to grade. "Without question, students need to practice, review, and drill
skills, but they should do so only in the spirit of working toward more complex mastery of those
skills" (Jacobs, 1997, p. 19).

The complexity of assessments also should increase as students progress through the grades. The
committee will need to identify good examples of spiraled instruction and assessment from the maps
and provide these as exemplars for other teachers. Sometimes the teachers will discover unintended
repetition of content, such as the same novel being taught in different grades. Teachers tend to
develop strong ownership of content they like to teach, however. A high school English teacher at
one seminar was heard to exclaim, "I will never give up Romeo and Juliet!" In another district, a
number of elementary teachers attended a science inservice workshop where they learned an activity
that involved making weather vanes. That year every class in the school made weather vanes. The
teachers had to decide which grade this activity was most appropriate for, then brainstorm different
activities for other grades that would teach related concepts and skills. Situations like this are not
always easily resolved, but the committee is charged with working out sensible solutions. It's
important to value teacher creativity and innovation highly, but all teachers must be aware of the
curriculum's big picture and where their course fits within that picture. Most creative teaching
strategies can be adapted for different content or contexts.

Review of the maps may also identify gaps between standards and what is actually taught. In one
Tennessee school district, students in grade 3, 5, and 8 consistently scored poorly on the geometry
section of the math test. As teachers reviewed curriculum maps, they observed that teachers were
omitting geometry instruction in almost every grade. They identified one reason for the omission:
the chapter on geometry was at the end of the textbook, and many of them simply were not getting to
it by the end of the year. Of course, this had implications for sequencing what was taught based on
student learning needs and assessment data rather than relying on a textbook, but the teachers were
also eager to learn new strategies for teaching geometry.

Page 7 of 20
It is important to note that even when highly structured textbooks are used as the basis for a
curriculum, teachers sometimes make independent and idiosyncratic decisions about what to
emphasize, add, or delete (Schmoker & Marzano, 1999). Science teachers in Hancock County,
Tenn., identified one example of an unintended curricular gap during their map review. High school
teachers reported that students did not know the metric system when they came to their courses.
When they reviewed science maps for K–12, teachers discovered that the metric system was taught
in 5th grade but was not taught again. The committee recommended that studies of the metric system
be revisited and reinforced in middle school science courses to prepare students for high school
science requirements.

Another gap frequently identified in district review is inconsistent use of vocabulary and processes.
For instance, if students are to learn the process of scientific investigation, they must have
experiences conducting investigations in many different contexts throughout the grades. A
committee of teachers and administrators in King William County, Va., identified scientific
investigation as a consistently weak area of student performance on the science SOL tests. When
they reviewed the curriculum maps, the committee discovered through the recorded teaching
activities that students were not receiving sufficient opportunities to conduct investigations, nor were
they consistently being taught the same vocabulary for the process from teacher to teacher.
Furthermore, the committee found mismatches between the learning activities and their assessments
and the languages and expectations of the standards that related to scientific investigation. The
science teachers on the committee addressed this problem by generating a vocabulary list for all
science teachers to use and recommending specific types of scientific investigations— some gleaned
from creative examples in teachers' maps— that teachers should conduct at each grade level.
Similarly, language arts teachers developed manuscript guidelines for writing assignments for
teachers to use across schools and also recommended that teachers use the state writing assessment
rubric consistently in all grades and courses.

These are just a few examples of how a district committee can review and analyze mapping data and
make recommendations for curricular adjustments that capitalize on effective instructional practice.
The end result of curriculum mapping certainly is not to develop uniformity in instruction, but to
establish consistency, continuity, and sequence of educational experiences. According to Ralph W.
Tyler, author of Basic Principles of Curriculum Instruction, such systematic organization of
educational experiences produces a cumulative positive effect on student learning (Hoyle et al.,
1994).

Another responsibility of the district committee is to examine potential areas for integration and
cross-disciplinary connections— the horizontal relationship of curricular experiences that helps
students see the connections between the content and skills taught and that reinforces student
learning. Once they have identified integration opportunities for each grade, the district committee
must develop skills in designing interdisciplinary instructional units. Developing one
interdisciplinary unit or project or identifying specific interdisciplinary applications that can
reinforce and expand learning at each grade level are tasks that the district committee should
perform. The committee then has examples of units and a design process to share with other teachers
during the second year of curriculum mapping. There are various options for interdisciplinary
design, and teachers or team members can determine which options best suit their students. (See for
example Burns, 1995; Drake, 1993, 2000; Jacobs, 1989; Tchudi & Lafer, 1996.)

Page 8 of 20
Research has shown that many educators do not have a deep understanding of the term curriculum
unit. For many it is a textbook chapter; for some it is a package purchased from a publisher; for
others it may be an array of activities, some of which are nonessential and frivolous; for others it's
"something we get together and do once a year." To develop a coherent written and aligned
curriculum from the taught curriculum, it is necessary to organize the curriculum in a logical
sequence of chunks of learning. Jacobs (1997) suggests that teachers use essential questions to refine
the curriculum map and serve as scope and sequence for a course. Like a table of contents for a
book, essential questions are the range and parameters of a unit and provide a focus and logical
pattern of investigation throughout the unit. As teachers review their maps and begin revising them,
formulating essential questions for each chunk of learning can help them eliminate nonessential
activities, promote integration, clarify what and how to assess learning, and create a more coherent
curriculum "that holds together, that makes sense as a whole, and its parts, whatever they are, are
unified and connected by that sense of whole" (Beane, 1995, p. 3).

Finally, the district committee should gain new knowledge about matching classroom assessments
with standards. "We need evidence of learning to find out if we are effectively meeting our targeted
goals for students. The only evidence we have is in what they write, what they say, what they build,
what they design, and what they compute?not what we cover. It is in the classroom that the student
and the standard meet" (Jacobs, 1997, pp. 22?23). Teachers must decide what evidence they need to
determine if students are mastering the standard. For example, if the standard says, "Students will
plan and conduct scientific investigations," a worksheet or chapter test would not be a matched
assessment for that standard.

To decide what evidence they need to determine student mastery of the standard, teachers must be
able to "unpack" the standard and identify the specific knowledge and skills a student will need to
demonstrate. To return to the scientific investigation and vocabulary example, teachers look at the
verbs to decide what students will do to show that they can plan and conduct experiments. Although
the standard is the same throughout the grades, performance indicators or levels of mastery vary.
Perhaps in 9th grade, students need to understand the meaning of certain terms, such as hypothesis
and data, but they also need to know how to formulate a hypothesis, how to collect and analyze data,
how to represent and interpret data on a chart, and how to perform other related tasks. Teachers may
develop a number of assessments to measure various aspects of the learning, and some of these may
be traditional. However, performance-based assessment is appropriate to measure mastery of this
particular standard.

As the committee identifies assessments that are matched with standards, they should select several
of the matched assessments in each grade and content to use as examples for other teachers. The
committee may want to develop additional prototypes of matched assessments. These assessments
should be in two forms: one in the format of the standardized test that students will take, and others
in a performance-based format. Test blueprints or preparation manuals can be useful in developing
traditional assessments in the testing format. Creativity is necessary to design the performances;
however, some states now provide examples of classroom assessments and scoring rubrics that can
be useful in this process. And there are other print or online resources that can be useful. One of the
best resources may be teachers in the district who are already using performance-based assessments
effectively. In some cases it may be appropriate to bring in a consultant who has expertise in
assessment design.

Page 9 of 20
The district committee assumes responsibility for transmitting its findings and recommendations to
other teachers during year two of curriculum mapping. This process begins in the professional
development and preparation days held at the beginning of the school year. Part of the committee's
job is to decide at the end of their week's work how to accomplish this transmission of information.
The same options suggested for the introduction to curriculum mapping can apply here. Teachers
should spend at least part of the time in content work groups, as there will be specific
recommendations from the committee for each content area's revisions.

Mapping leaders and district committee members in each building supervise the revising and
aligning of curriculum during the second year of mapping. Once the district committee's findings
and recommendations have been presented to all staff, teachers begin to apply those findings and
recommendations to their curriculum maps. At this point, teachers begin to work in grade-level or
course teams to achieve instructional consistency. This does not mean that instruction should be
uniform across courses or schools, but rather that it should be consistent in terms of performance
expectations and developmental appropriateness. During the revising and aligning stage, "proven
methods, practices, and lessons aligned with standards become the center of professional dialogue"
(Schmoker & Marzano, 1999, p. 4). Furthermore, each team develops discipline-based and
interdisciplinary curriculum units and designs standards-based assessments for its grade and course.
In some districts, teachers go a step further by developing exit exams by grade and course that
predict students' success on standardized tests. Professional development activities should support
these expectations.

At the end of the revising and aligning stage, each school faculty should review its maps to validate
that recommended revisions and adjustments have been made and that the curriculum, instruction,
and assessment are aligned with standards. If the district has developed and administered exit exams,
it should compare the results of those exams with current standardized test data to validate the
alignment of classroom and state assessment. The district should then use student performance on
these assessments to inform instructional decision making for the next school year as part of a
program of continuous curricular improvement.

Validating Alignment and Planning for Continuous Curricular Improvement

Alignment can only be validated by looking at results. In this case, the results focus on student
achievement. Both Wishnick (1989) and Mitchell (1998) found that alignment is more powerful than
race, socioeconomic status, gender, school size, or teacher bias for predicting results on standardized
tests. Although standardized assessments do not measure everything that is important, success on
these tests in this age of accountability is essential. As teachers work together to strengthen
curriculum alignment in grade and course maps, develop curricular units around essential questions,
and design standards-based assessments, they should be discussing the effects of the changes on
student learning. Examining student work focuses discussion among teachers in a building, grade
level, or department. The examination helps teachers develop commonly held beliefs about what
constitutes quality work (Jacobs, 1997), and it also helps teachers decide what evidence or
performance indicators point to mastery of specific standards. Agreement on standards of quality and
mastery is essential in promoting excellence and equality of teaching and in validating alignment of
curriculum, instruction, and assessment with standards across schools and districts. Furthermore,
"every school year teachers within schools and across the district should review standardized test
data to identify the most pronounced patterns of student weakness, then seek absolute clarity on the
nature of these problems" (Schmoker & Marzano, 1999, p. 5).

Page 10 of 20
Validating alignment is also a responsibility of district and building administrators. By reviewing
curriculum maps within grade levels, departments, and across the school, principals identify
instructional innovation and excellence, diagnose any problems with scope and sequence, review
instructional design for match with standards, and assess developmental appropriateness of
instruction. Because most schools have curriculum committees, members of the committee or lead
teachers may work with the principal to validate alignment, identify needed adjustments, and help
teachers make curricular adjustments to ensure alignment. Principals and teachers also should review
achievement test data annually to identify instructional strengths and areas within the classroom,
grade, or school that need improvement. District curriculum leaders are similarly responsible for
validating the big picture of alignment across the district by reviewing curriculum maps and test
data.

After making revisions, designing instructional units, and developing standards-based assessments,
some districts choose to bring the district curriculum committee together at the end of the second
year of mapping to validate alignment. Using their previous recommendations, committee members
should note the unintended gaps and repetitions that have been eliminated. They may also validate
correlation between standardized tests and the grade or the course exit tests developed by teachers.
Student performance on teacher-developed exit tests should indicate alignment among curriculum,
instruction, assessment, and standards. If teachers identify problems with students' performance, they
communicate these problems to the school principals, who facilitate additional review and revision
of the curriculum by teachers. Some districts employ a consultant to audit the curriculum and
validate alignment.

A useful tool for validating curriculum alignment and planning for continuous curricular
improvement is a series of benchmarks, or indicators, that identify the outcomes and results of
curriculum mapping. A continuum of factors, or a rubric, should describe each indicator so
individual schools and the district can see where they are successful and where they may need
additional work. A district may wish to develop or purchase such an instrument prior to beginning
mapping and use it as both a diagnostic and an evaluative tool. Ceperley and Squires (2000), for
example, identify six indicators of standards-based implementation. In their instrument, each
indicator is measured by several factors that are evident in teacher and administrator behaviors or in
written documents.

? The written curriculum aligns with content and assessments standards.

? The curriculum is rigorous, balanced, and aligned.
? Classroom assessments check mastery and predict success on standardized tests.
? The taught curriculum matches written and tested versions.
? Data are used to improve teaching and learning.
? District policies and resources support the implementation of standards.

If district policies that support continuous curricular improvement are not already in place, they
should be written and implemented. Ceperley and Squires (2000) suggest guidelines for such
policies:

? The school district should have a written curriculum development and revision policy that the
superintendent and board review annually.

Page 11 of 20
 ? A written job description should clearly delineate who in the school district or in the schools
is responsible for coordinating and reporting curriculum development activities. Personnel
evaluations should confirm that the work is carried out.
? The district's written policies and procedures should call for yearly review of curriculum to
generate school and district improvement plans. The board should review timely reports on
student performance that indicate the plan's effectiveness.
? The board should receive frequent reports that describe curriculum development progress and
resulting student performance.
? Resources— time and money— should be planned and budgeted annually so curriculum
development and revision can take place.

Roles in Curriculum Mapping

A district facilitator and school mapping leaders are essential to the success of curriculum mapping.
Because curriculum mapping is done most effectively in a K–12 setting, a district facilitator should
be appointed to oversee the process and provide leadership for its success. All mapping leaders
should receive training in curriculum mapping leadership before implementing the process in the
district. The district may also employ a consultant. At the school level, the principal's leadership is
extremely important, but it is also necessary for the principal to share leadership of the process with
teachers. Principals have so many responsibilities that they are often limited in the time they can
spend on any one project. At the same time, teachers' ownership and leadership of curriculum is vital
to the success of any curricular improvement process. Therefore, the principals and at least two
teacher leaders in each school should serve as school mapping leaders. Figure 2 features guidelines
for selecting district and school leaders (Burns, 2001).

Figure 2. Guidelines for Selecting District and School Leaders

District Curriculum Mapping Facilitator

Criteria and Qualifications

? Member of district administrative staff or a consultant who has extensive knowledge of

curriculum, instruction, and assessment and skill in facilitating adult learning.
? At least 25 percent of time assigned to curriculum mapping implementation over a
two-year period.
? Critical friend to schools in their continuous improvement efforts.
? Knowledge of data-based decision making.
? Belief in collaboration and culture of inquiry.

Responsibilities

? Facilitate design of curriculum mapping plan.

? Provide intensive and sustained technical assistance to schools and community when
implementing curriculum mapping.
? Maintain current documentation of all curriculum mapping activities,
accomplishments, and issues at each school site.
? Participate in reflection, planning, training, and evaluation activities to assess progress
with curriculum mapping and refine action plans.
? Assist schools with aligning their curriculum, instruction, and assessment with
standards.

Page 12 of 20
 ? Deliver technical assistance and training to schools as appropriate.
? Provide mentoring, monitoring, and coaching to school staff and school mapping
leaders.

School Mapping Leaders (minimum of two per school, plus principal)

Criteria and Qualifications

? Exemplary administrator or teacher skillful in or willing to learn techniques for

facilitating adult learning.
? At least 25 percent of time assigned to facilitation of curriculum mapping over two
years.
? Highly respected by fellow staff members.
? Belief in the importance of team and collaborative strategies.
? Participation in the positive development of the school and fellow staff.
? Belief in high expectations for every child and educator.

Responsibilities

? Set up support structure among administrators and staff.

? Provide scheduling system that allows for grade and content area planning.
? Supply materials, facilitation, and technology needed to complete curriculum mapping.
? Serve as liaison between district facilitator and school staff.
? Participate in reflection, planning, training, and evaluation activities.
? Work with district facilitator to coordinate curriculum mapping implementation and
evaluation.
? Work with grade or content teams to facilitate all mapping activities at the school.
? Facilitate or assist in developing School Improvement Plan.

Of course, each teacher plays an important role in mapping the curriculum. The only one who knows
what actually happens in a classroom is the teacher, so it is her responsibility to record authentic data
about the processes and skills emphasized, the content or topics taught, the products and
performances used to assess learning, and the teaching strategies used to deliver instruction (Burns,
2001; Jacobs, 1997).

Teachers of self-contained special education classes map their curriculum in the same manner as
regular education teachers. Their teaching activities reflect student needs identified in Individual
Education Plans. In an inclusive model, special education teachers collaborate with regular education
teachers to develop curriculum maps and lesson plans that include modifications needed to meet
special student needs. Special education maps may differ from other maps in two ways: (1) they may
have more skills and activities in the affective domain, and (2) their instructional intervention (e.g.,
teacher, psychologist, group work) should be written down (Weinstein, 1986).

Library media specialists can play a pivotal role in map development. Because they have access to
supporting resources for the curriculum, a generally high comfort level with technology, and
connections to all faculty members, they can help reluctant colleagues with computer use and
resources for developing curriculum (Jacobs, 1997).

Benefits of Mapping at Classroom, School, and District Levels

Page 13 of 20
Because curriculum mapping is a time-consuming process and one that, when done comprehensively
and systematically, may require changes in the culture of school and practice of teaching, teachers
and administrators should understand its benefits before beginning the journey. Quotations from
written questionnaire responses and personal interviews with teachers and administrators who have
worked with the author in curriculum mapping have been incorporated into the following discussion
of benefits.

Benefits for the Teacher

All of us are more likely to accomplish desired goals if we know where to begin, where we are
going, and how we will get there. Curriculum mapping provides a road map to help teachers develop
a clear direction for what, when, and how to teach to ensure student mastery of essential concepts
and skills. In Hancock County, Tenn., during the district committee's workshop after the first year of
mapping, teachers offered observations about their progress with curriculum mapping.

"Curriculum mapping allows students to get the most out of instructional time."

"Curriculum mapping promotes more effective and cohesive instruction."

"Curriculum mapping allows for the progression of learning. In the development of a map, each teacher has a means of
checking to see if a progression into higher-order thinking occurs."

And in Lunenburg County, Va., teachers said

"Curriculum mapping is a way to see where you've been and where you are going."

"Curriculum mapping is very important in improving the knowledge of our students and ourselves."

Karen Husted, a high school theater teacher, describes curriculum mapping as "a tool to help you
track what you teach" (2000, p. 10). Figure 3 is a sample map Husted created for an introductory
theater course. In addition to identifying content and skills taught, clarifying connections with other
disciplines, and explaining assessments employed, mapping's other unique benefits, according to
Husted, include its ability to indicate the need and direction a curricular program needs to be built or
expanded on, describe the strengths of a program, and prove that theater education is as important as
any subject in the school curriculum. Husted also encourages teachers to use curriculum maps at
professional content area conferences to help define a common body of knowledge and to identify
gaps in the existing curriculum.

Figure 3. Sample Curriculum Map for an Introductory Theater Class

Time Skills/Thinking
Concepts Assessment
Frame Processes
September Theater games Concentrate Groups checklist*

Basic stage terms Imagine Teacher checklist*

Story elements Observe Self-checklist*

Page 14 of 20
 Improvisation techniques Create ensemble Grade outline of story (CL)*

Introduce evaluation and criticism Compare Evaluate goal setting (R) *

of self and others— goal setting performances

Basic stage movement study Recall details and

information
Origins of theater (history)
Take risks

Identify needs and

characteristics
October Formal mime technique Set goals Evaluate mime technique (CL)*

History of mime and major mime Represent ideas Story for mime (CL)*
theorists
Summarize ideas Introduction/mime sign (R)*
Mime performance on video
Think creatively Mime performance (R)*
Overview roles of jobs in theater
Make decisions Self-evaluation of mime from
Preparation for a performance viewing video (R)*
Think analytically
Script analysis Test of basic terms and concepts
Do research (drawn from earlier quizzes: stage
The design team concept terms, story elements, origins, mime,
Identify main idea skills, etc.)
Elements of the space/floor plan
Analyze and score The Glass
Identify
Menagerie scene (R)*
relationships
Floor plan for The Glass Menagerie
Identify symbols
(CL)*
Compare characters

Infer meaning and

ideas

Use scale (math)

November The character analysis
The actor as interpreter
Voice/body vocal production and
exercises
Techniques of oral interpretation
Overview historical changes in
Formulate questions
Identify obstacles Select and write a character analysis
for The Glass Menagerie (R)*
Elaborate on ideas
Perform five vocal exercises
Select key elements demonstrating voice characteristics
Use voice control Peer and teacher evaluation of voice
characteristics (CL)*
Use body control

Page 15 of 20
 theater critique Record one radio commercial

Research a historical figure, Evaluate Peer, self, and teacher evaluation of

concept, or period and identify how performance commercial (R)*
that person or con- cept contributed
to theater Encode Performance from The Glass
Menagerie: a scene or oral
Decode interpretation

Synthesize Videotape performance: self,peer,

and teacher evaluation (CL/R) *

Presentation of person or concept

that has changed theater (CL/R) *
(Student may choose the method of
presentation)

* Possible portfolio entry

(R) Scored by rubric
(CL) Scored by checklist
Source: From "Curriculum Mapping: A Tool to Help You Track What You Teach," by K. Husted, Teaching Theatre, 11(2),
p. 10. Reprinted with permission.

Although Husted expresses positive views on curriculum mapping, in the beginning of the mapping
process, other teachers have expressed concerns about losing their creativity and individual
uniqueness. This is by no means the intention of curriculum mapping. Curriculum mapping, by the
definitions provided in this chapter, records the actual taught curriculum and builds on what teachers
are already doing well. It facilitates communication, collaboration, and sharing of effective practices
across schools and districts. It also helps teachers recognize where there may be unintended gaps or
repetitions in the curriculum that may impede student success. Without the visual and accurate
perspective of individual, school, and district curriculum maps, teachers do not know what and how
others are teaching, nor can they be aware of adjustments needed to close the gaps, eliminate the
repetitions, and ultimately see their students' achievement improve. Every stage of curriculum
mapping uses teachers' strengths and creativity. Indeed, the success of curriculum mapping in
improving student learning depends on the uniqueness and creativity of every teacher in the school
district.

Many teachers and administrators use curriculum maps as a tool for communication. Administrators,
for example, may use maps printed by month or year to provide new teachers and substitutes with an
orientation to the curriculum. Beginning teachers or teachers new to a particular grade or course find
curriculum maps especially helpful. Teachers may provide monthly or yearly maps to parents to
keep them abreast of what students are studying and what assignments are expected. Curriculum
maps are also sometimes used to verify that teachers and schools are meeting district or state
curricular requirements.

Can curriculum maps improve student performance? Husted believes that they can do just that "by
helping you, the teacher, define the strengths and weaknesses of your program so you can revise
your instruction and assessment to meet the needs reflected in such a document" (2000, p. 12). Two
Hancock County, Tenn., teachers, agree. Robin Carpenter says, "Curriculum mapping is an ongoing
process that is beneficial to teachers and students alike. It is the key to present and future learning."
And Charles Johnson adds, "Curriculum mapping puts the focus on what is expected of the students.

Page 16 of 20
By having a developed yearlong plan, the students immediately and continuously know what is
expected and required in each course. Curriculum mapping has enabled teachers to instruct their
students in a more effective way."

Research indicates that by focusing on student learning, aligning what is taught with learning goals
they will be assessing, and using instructional strategies that promote learning for all students,
teachers can improve performance on standardized tests (See Mitchell, 1998; Schmoker & Marzano,
1999; Wishnick, 1989). Furthermore, teachers who have extended or developed new strategies
during curriculum mapping report improved performance in the classroom.

When Lunenburg County, Va., teachers began assessing their students' learning strengths and
designing activities to address the diversity during the first year of mapping, they reported increased
student engagement in learning, better understanding of concepts and skills, and fewer discipline
problems. One Central High School English teacher explained that she capitalized on her students'
strong interpersonal intelligence by restructuring the classroom environment to include more
cooperative activities; as a result, student engagement increased. Another Lunenburg teacher
reported that using multiple intelligences in the classroom led to a special education student winning
a science fair. Obviously, in these classrooms student interest and creativity were sparked as a result
of curriculum mapping.

Benefits for the School

Traditionally, teaching has been an isolated profession. Although teachers may work together in the
same building for years, they may have little knowledge of what others are teaching outside their
own classroom, department, or team. In this context, curriculum decisions are made in isolation.
However, in successful schools, the curriculum is based on clear and shared learning goals, and the
faculty conducts periodic review of the curriculum documents (Cawelti, 1997; Cotton, 1995;
Fitzpatrick, 1998; Hallinger & Heck, 1996; Reeves, 1998; Sammons, Hillman, & Mortimore, 1995).
There is clear documentation of the relationship of the goals to specific objectives, instructional
activities, and student assessments.

Mapping can help schools become successful. It promotes communication and collaboration across
and between grades and can help teachers make curriculum decisions within a much larger context.
Communication and collaboration lead to shared goals for student learning; a focus on student work;
and connected, reinforced, and spiraled learning experiences in the school curriculum.

Teachers at Hancock Central Elementary School in Tennessee shared their perspectives on how
curriculum mapping has benefited their school:

"By using curriculum mapping, teachers from different grade levels come together to make sure that all
standards are being covered."

"If curriculum mapping is carried out by all teachers within a school, then a foundation for learning occurs.
Teachers become aware of the areas where curriculum taught from year to year has not spiraled to include
higher-order thinking skills."

"Teachers from all levels meet together to share, to attempt consensus on what should be taught, and to
integrate activities. Teachers across grades levels meet to discuss foundational growth-building steps."

"Curriculum mapping organizes your entire school and creates a valuable schoolwide curriculum."

Page 17 of 20
Findings from a recent study conducted by the Virginia Department of Education Governor's Best
Practice Centers (2000) confirm these perspectives and point to the effectiveness of curriculum
mapping in improving student achievement. Twenty-six schools were randomly selected from a
statewide pool of schools where specified percentages of students were identified for free and
reduced lunch and where schoolwide student performance on SOL tests increased significantly from
the 1997–98 to 1998–99 school year. Of 16 effective practices identified by researchers, 71 percent
of teachers, principals, and district administrators in 23 of 26 schools identified curriculum mapping
and alignment as most important in their improvement. Curriculum mapping has helped a number of
Va. schools reach full accreditation, which means that 70 percent or more of their students are
reaching proficient status on SOL tests.

Some educators view the standards movement as a threat to integration and thoughtful teaching. This
need not be the case if teachers make natural connections across content standards and place those
standards within an integrated design that focuses on real-life problems and concerns. For example, a
team of health science, biology, and social studies teachers at Auburn High School in Montgomery
County, Va., found natural connections in content standards and designed a unit on world health and
communicable diseases. For student assessments, which received grades in two or more courses,
students designed informational brochures on various diseases and participated in a mock World
Health Organization meeting. Using shared goals and an integrated approach to learning offers
schools greater curricular and pedagogical efficiency and enhances student engagement and learning
(Burns, in press).

The standards movement and curriculum alignment may actually facilitate curriculum integration
within schools. Teams of teachers are beginning to focus curriculum design on essential knowledge
and skills in each discipline and to find more natural connections for integrated studies. Many
teachers are using a results-oriented approach to instruction— placing emphasis on learning— as they
evaluate student progress through a variety of assessments, including performance on standardized
tests (Burns, in press). In some schools, teachers describe a more collaborative, reflective, student-
centered environment.

"The conscious efforts to look at what we are doing, its impact on students, how we use resources,
how we enhance and reinforce content and process development, how we connect what is in school
to the larger global environment are a few of the changes we have made. The success of students
will assure that our movement toward a fully integrated program continues" (Jervis, Bull, Sauter, &
Turner, 1997, p. 5).

Benefits for the School District

The proliferation of school-based reform models and other improvement strategies is a problem in
many school districts today. This not only presents difficulties for districts in monitoring and
evaluating the effectiveness of various models and strategies, but also makes districtwide
improvement efforts difficult to initiate and maintain.

"We had a number of different improvement efforts underway in our schools, but curriculum
mapping has brought it all together," says Yvonne Johnson, assistant superintendent in Nottoway
County, Va. Nancy Chappell, director of instruction in Lunenburg County, Va., states, "Curriculum
mapping has helped us realize our district improvement goals, align our curriculum, and improve
teaching and learning." These statements attest to some of the benefits of curriculum mapping for

Page 18 of 20
school districts. What works best is simultaneous codevelopment between the school and district,
reflecting both top-down and bottom-up initiatives (Fullan, 1994).

Curriculum mapping is a process that can reflect both the school and district perspectives. Through
curriculum mapping, teachers and administrators can monitor the degree of individual program
implementation and evaluate their connectedness to improved student performance. For example,
Lunenburg County was offering a reading strategies course for elementary teachers and a technology
course for other teachers. Until they initiated curriculum mapping, there was no tool in place for
monitoring the effect of teacher professional development on student learning. During mapping,
teachers and administrators began looking for examples of reading strategies and technology use in
teachers' curriculum maps. In team meetings, teachers discussed specific uses of these strategies and
their effects on student performance. Curriculum mapping helped integrate, monitor, and evaluate
various programs underway in this district.

Although individual schools may have special improvement needs that may be addressed by
specifically focused programs such as literacy improvement, it is the district that bears the
responsibility for facilitating standards-based reform across all schools, aligning the K–12
curriculum with standards, and monitoring student progress toward achieving the standards.
LaRocque and Coleman concluded that "effective districts have an active and evolving
accountability ethos that combines interactive monitoring with a respect for school autonomy"
(LaRocque & Coleman, 1989, p. 190). Curriculum mapping embodies this ethos as it allows teachers
to identify the taught curriculum in each classroom and school, extends teachers' creativity and
innovation, enables them to compare their curriculum with what others are teaching and with
standards, and encourages them to adjust their instruction to ensure consistency within grade and
course as well as continuity across all grade levels. As educators undertake mapping and review in
their individual schools and classrooms, however, they should remember the bigger picture— the
district's evolving curriculum. Mapping allows a district to articulate a written curriculum that is
aligned with the state's tested curriculum, thus allowing the district to meet state accountability
requirements.

Works Cited
Beane, J. A. (Ed). (1995). Toward a coherent curriculum: The 1995 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Burns, R. C. (1995). Dissolving the boundaries: Planning for curriculum integration in middle and secondary schools.
Charleston, WV: AEL, Inc.
Burns, R. C. (2001). A leader's guide to curriculum mapping and alignment. Charleston, WV: AEL, Inc.
Burns, R. C. (In press). Interdisciplinary teamed instruction. In J. Klein (Ed.), Interdisciplinary education in K–12 and
college: A foundation for K–16 dialogue. New York: The College Entrance Examination Board.
Cawelti, G. (1997). Effects of high school restructuring: Ten schools at work. (ERS Concerns in Education Series).
Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 406 730)
Ceperley, P. E., & Squires, D. A. (2000). Standards implementation indicators: Charting your course to high
achievement. Charleston, WV: AEL, Inc.
Chadwick, K. L., Burns, R. C., & Howley, C. W. (2001). Report on the field test of the teaching/learning mapping
strategy. Charleston, WV: AEL, Inc.
Cotton, K. (1995). Effective school practices: A research synthesis 1995 update. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional
Educational Laboratory.
Drake, S. (1993). Planning integrated curriculum: The call to adventure. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Drake, S. (2000). Integrated curriculum: A chapter of the Curriculum Handbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Fitzpatrick, K. (1998). Indicators of school quality. Schaumburg, IL: National Study of School Evaluation.

Page 19 of 20
Fullan, M. G. (1994). Coordinating top-down and bottom-up strategies for educational reform. In R. F. Elmore & S. H.
Fuhrman (Eds.), The governance of curriculum: The 1994 yearbook of the Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development (pp. 186–202). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 32(1), 39–42.
Hoyle, J. R., English, F. W., & Steffy, B. E. (1994). Skills for successful school leaders (2nd ed.). Arlington, VA:
American Association of School Administrators.
Husted, K. (2000). Curriculum mapping. Teaching Theatre, 11(2), 10–12.
Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jacobs, H. H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment K–12. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jervis, C., Bull, S., Sauter, G., & Turner, P. (1997). Perspectives on interdisciplinary teamed instruction as a tool for
change. Unpublished manuscript.
LaRocque, L., & Coleman, P. (1989). Quality control: School accountability and district ethos. In M. Holmes, K. A.
Leithwood, & D. F. Musella (Eds.), Educational policy for effective schools (pp.168–191). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Mitchell, F. M. (1998). The effects of curriculum alignment on the mathematics achievement of third-grade students as
measured by the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills: Implications for educational administrators. Unpublished
dissertation, Clark Atlanta University, Atlanta, GA.
Reeves, D. B. (1998). Making standards work. Denver, CO: Center for Performance Assessment.
Sammons, P., Hillman, J., & Mortimore, P. (1995). Key characteristics of effective schools: A review of school
effectiveness research. London: International School Effectiveness & Improvement Centre, University of
London. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 389 826)
Schmoker, M., & Marzano, R.J. (1999). Realizing the promise of standards-based education. Educational Leadership,
56(6), 17–21.
Tchudi, S., & Lafer, S. (1996). The interdisciplinary teacher's handbook: Integrating teaching across the curriculum.
Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
Virginia Department of Education Governor's Best Practice Centers. (2000). A study of effective practices in Virginia
schools: Educators' perspectives of practices leading to student success. Richmond, VA: Author.
Weinstein, D. F. (1986). Administrator's guide to curriculum mapping: A step-by-step manual. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Wishnick, T. K. (1989). Relative effects on achievement scores of SES, gender, teacher effect and instructional
alignment. A study of alignment's power in mastery learning. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51(04A),
1107. (University Microfilms No. 9019604)

Page 20 of 20