Critical Perspectives in Curriculum Leadership

Introduction

Recent curriculum discourses and policies portray a profound shift towards a certain set of conservative ideologies. The conservative restoration that incorporates neo-liberal, neo-conservative and increasingly neo-nationalist perspective has been successful in the circulation of defined discourses that impose ideologies to create a new common sense about pedagogy and curriculum in schools. This discourse is linked with standardized curriculum; accountability and competition permeate schools and community including curriculum leadership. Curriculum leadership is broad beyond teaching practice to political and social-cultural aspects of educational content resolutions: what is taught, by whom and to whom. Curriculum leaders are grounded in the understanding of cultural politics while the curriculum theory recognizes curriculum decisions as political acts and curriculum as a complicated conversation. For those pursuing advanced studies in this field, obtaining education dissertation help can be crucial in navigating these complex topics.

Today’s curriculum leaders are obliged to have such understandings to navigate within a boarder and heightening conservative political sphere. Although diverse curriculum or instructional leadership educational administration studies guide principles and other members of schools with in-depth understanding on the improvement of school practice and promote positive inclusive learning cultures that affect student learning, they also provide the recent social models that are justice-oriented. The purpose of this discussion is to unfold the impact of state or national initiative in the curriculum, implications of educational leader's initiative, current and future consequences and offer some recommendations on critical perspectives in curriculum leadership.

Impact of National initiative in curriculum

The curriculum is broadly defined as the studies involving a path of acquiring knowledge in any learning environment. Australia has a curriculum which offers learners, parents, facilitators, and the local community with explicit instruction of what learners should learn no matter what school they attend or wherever they live in (Australian Government, DoE). "Curriculum as a ‘social fact' (Durkheim, 1938) is never reducible to the acts, beliefs or motivation of individuals, it is a structure that constrains not only the activities of those involved- primarily teachers and students but also those design curricula or attempt to achieve specific goals with them" ( Young, 2014, p.1).“From the outset, It is important to note that under the Australian constitution, education is retained as a responsibility of the state" (Marsh, 1994, p2). For a few decades now, national and state government are taking further initiatives and involving in education to protect their states' right and enhancing the education system. The proposal by the government plays a crucial role in building a fairer and equal opportunity for all. It gives the standardization in the state and removes inequalities in the system. Supporting a new initiative is not easy to be embedded in the educational system; therefore maintaining the curriculum that fulfills the learners' progress and success is paramount. These stakeholders are responsible for operating the education department and accordingly play a significant role in the national curriculum of a country for a purpose. As noted, "initiative that appears to be imposing a federal policy initiative or ignoring the expressed needs of the states rarely rate much chance of success" (Kennedy, 1989, p.55). As a result, national interest has to redesign so that they cover the needs and purposes of the state, federal government and the territory.

In the United States of America, the common Core state Standard was initiated by the Council of Chief School Officer, and the goal was to establish a national set of standards for School and Careers. This impact the professional development had on educational leaders how well they incorporate this standard in their school in Tennessee (West, Singleton, 2015). According to Rothman, America embarked on a "de facto national education strategy of reforming schools around standards for student performance "(Rothman, 2004, p.96). All states receive the federal funds as per the law, and they have to publish a report for their accountability and to meet the educational standards which include academic standards, performance standards, facilitators and learner's assessment report for all the grades. Similarly, other nations produce the annual accountability progress report to present their performances of schools and their educational system. The statement was released by the California Department of Education regarding the education and environment initiative Curriculum (EEI). It says the curriculum assessment method is designed to make sure all institutions materials are accurate, free from prejudice and supported with our world-class educational standards (Nash, 1987). The involvement of state and or a national government, district leaders, administration, facilitators and should work closely to achieve the common goal. Under No Child Left behind act 2001, failure to make adequate yearly report result in sanctions and degrading school status to suspended status as well as associated fines for monitoring the school curriculum, standard and educational system.

However, the role of educational leaders and their involvement has increased in recent years to manage the curriculum and to perform leadership responsibilities. They are facing challenges to build, adapt and maintain the curriculum as per the need of the state and implement it accordingly to satisfy the requirements and quality standards of the relevant country. It also shows how these leaders work closely with the state to develop curriculum, to adapt the management style and make it achievable and effective to deliver in the classroom. It also shows how state work with the educational leaders to make classroom curriculum operational and work-oriented. This initiative gives the success to educational leaders and establishments to achieve their academic standard, student's satisfaction and welfare. Educational leaders face criticism in maintaining standards and call for a national standard, underperformance in public schools and colleges will put pressure on the stakeholders to review their policies and governance to maintain standards. Teachers control at the curriculum what should be taught and relevant changes from time to time put greater achievement compare to limited control and power. Necessary resources need to be provided to the local and national level to meet the Curriculum development and standard to achieve student satisfaction and result. Several experts have noted problems with the states' standard-setting in the curriculum (Fuhrman, 1994). In reality, standards are set by the government officials who are not accountable for their performance, but the teachers and other leaders to implement and execute the education system. Moreover, many cases state do not provide enough resources to implement the standard at the local level. On the other hand, national representatives demand to increase the standards and a further improvement in the education system are also encountered by these education leaders to manage the curriculum and maintain the educational standard. (Glatthorn, Jailall, 2009).

Implications of National initiative in curriculum

Leadership is a pivotal source behind all organizations (Bennis & Nanus, 2003). Leadership is the central, all-encompassing nexus between the organizational goals and individual goals, between personal needs, processes and functions and group needs, processes and functions. If the appearance is mindful of a magnet, the allusion is deliberate. Leadership is seen as a force, invisible, yet real, permeating the whole environment. It not only attracts adherents, but it also unites the disparate, often conflicting elements of the organization on one pole and the individual on the other. It forms a central core in which personal needs can be met in co-ordination with group needs whole using these processes and functions towards achieving organizational goals. Just as the magnet lends its force to its adherents, so too does leadership empower those associated with similar properties. Like the magnet, its energy is not static. It can be converted into other more potent forms of energy. It can light up the world" (Carey, 1988, p.28). Leadership is vital to the effectiveness of a school (Marzano, Waters, McNulty, 2005).

Conceptual Framework, the concept map in Figure 1 below, demonstrates how instructional leadership practices were interpreted in this study within a 21st-century learning context. Instructional leaders may influence their schools through guiding curriculum implementation and instruction (Hord & Hall, 1987; May & Supovtiz, 2011), driving professional development and teacher learning (Terosky, 2014), as well as impacting assessment and evaluation (Robinson, Lloyd, & Rowe, 2008; Robinson & Timperley, 2007). The efficacy of instructional leadership will change how organizational learning occurs within a school building and will impact how problems, solutions, and actions play out within the organization (Argyris, 1982; Argyris, 1999).

It is all about the educational leaders like teachers to take the ownership of all relevant changes with trust and position they hold to deliver the curriculum and standard. If they get the freedom to deliver the teaching, then naturally they get new ideas and encouragement to adapt or suggest changes in the initiatives administered by the stakeholders. Sharing the initiative with the facilitators gives confidence in what we are trying to achieve in common. Some of the implications of the above initiatives for the educational leaders are the importance of positive communication and building trust with the facilitators and local community, to integrate the implementation, maintaining the balance between the state and school current goals, customizing individual solutions and evaluating learners growth with implementations and changes ( Mitchell, Smith, Pamas &Samaras, 2018).

Consequences in current and future context

The consequences for us to adapt the change in the curriculum and accordingly, we will acquire the knowledge and skills to integrate into the community and economy. Curriculum development should be composed with the involvement of the relevant group of people who directly deal with the curricula, for example, teachers, parents, and state education departments. If the curriculum is designed by the group out of touch with the practical aspects, then it will not have a positive impact on the learners, facilitators and educational leaders. It is because different people have different ideas about the curriculum, and it needs to be student-focused to have a productive outcome, and this is the aim of all the stakeholders. The educational leaders facilitate the implementation of 21st Century learning and teaching initiatives through instructional leadership within their power, and this will empower the learners to be equipped with essential skills and experience needed for the future workforce (Mitchell, Smith, Pamas, Samaras, 2018).

The objective of the curriculum should be practical with the need, interest and the abilities of the learners who can understand it. Which builds the Critical thinking skills in the minds of the learners and for the teachers to educate them accordingly would be the positive outcome, and this should be the real returns of the rich curriculum. The overall aim ought to be creating intellectuals amongst the learners and building a stronger education system which will produce successful professionals in all fields. If the curriculum is not productive and future-oriented, then learners cannot cope up with the future technology and challenges ahead of us in the fast-changing world. Innovations and concepts coming every day with the fast developments in the world remind us of the structure which has to be practical, real and technology-oriented to cope up the demand of the future.

The author has said to resolve the curriculum issues are to integrate the concept of studying the consequence of skills and content. To learn the relevant applications and skills which builds critical thinking and creativity? The objective of learning the particular skills or subject topics because it relates to the past, present, and future together in school, college and in real-world situations. The curriculum consequences stemmed from utilizing and exercising a proficiency set or subject areas. The differentiated curriculum allows the students to develop many skills and mechanism that empower them to practise from learning with their abilities.

Recommendations

Future Learning requires educational establishments and states to utilize instructional leaders, including faculty and teacher leaders to readdress curriculum implementation, evaluation and development to facilitate organizational learning processes with the school.

Educational leaders should have a higher authority to integrate, evaluate, authorize curriculum as per the need of the education system and they are the leaders who lead and make an impact in curriculum and build a reliable, transparent and successful education system for the learners. If the direct team is enthusiastic and proactive in their role, that will be positive for the student's success. Government officials are not directly linked with the learners and also out of touch of the real requirement and changes. Learning facilitators are the leading force to make the foundation and support system for the learners to be successful in their educational goals.

The trend is changing, and there is a shift of responsibility for curriculum decision making from the central government representatives to the educators with the hope curriculum should be made by the people who can implement it practically (Brady, 1983). School-based curriculum development has been designed to give higher authority to teachers to make the curriculum (Brady, 1983).

"School-based curriculum has been developed in all Australian states throughout the 1970s, and it has also been endorsed at the federal level" (Brady, 1983, p.14).

The accountability movement the effects on curriculum initiatives of the perceived greater accountability of schools (Brady, 1983, p.15).

The support structures the administrative provision for its implementation, both within and outside the school (Brady, 1983, p.15).

Conclusion

Drawing on the literature above and the findings, a new field of curriculum leadership intersecting curriculum studies, educational leadership and critical educational studies is fundamental in full preparation of leaders for curriculum work in a conservative era and beyond. Notably, each field has a specific structure of knowledge that contributes to curriculum leadership understanding. The curriculum field is highly committed to a deep understanding of the self-formation process, curriculum subjects and social transformation. Additionally, the cultural politics that tags along social foundations critical education studies facilitate engagement in critical reflection of social-cultural, historical and political realities that shape leadership lives, narratives and ultimately context of curriculum education. To this end, Schools in America have recognized that their learners are not only for the test score, so they are more practical and innovative in developing their learning objectives. It takes the curriculum leaders to fully implement the initiatives, including the teachers, to facilitate the changes in the school to achieve their goals. This valuable learning experience benefits all school and colleges. The impact on learners and faculty of a collaborative project designed to infuse content about the inclusion of young learners with disabilities into the main courses in community colleges and training centers. Both students and teachers have increased their knowledge related to early childhood inclusion. This implementation of the project was introduced across many institutions, and training centers and needs for future research were also identified to work with families of learner with difficulties.

Reference List

• Bodisch Lynch, K., Uhl, M., Reece, J., Mcguire Buck, D., & Gilles, D. (2016). Impact of a statewide early childhood curriculum enhancement initiative on community college faculty and paraprofessional students. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 37(3), 245-259.
• Brady, L. (1983). Curriculum development in Australia: presage, process, product. Prentice-Hall of Australia.
• Carey, J. F. (1988). Leadership in Curriculum: The Instructional Leader. Armidale College of Advanced Education.
• Glatthorn, A., & Jailall, Jerry M. S. (2009). The principal as curriculum leader: Shaping what is taught and tested (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
• Kaplan, S. (2008). Curriculum Consequences: If You Learn This, Then. Gifted Child Today, 31(1), 41-42.
• Marsh, Colin, J. (1994). Producing a national curriculum: plans and paranoia. St. Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
• Michael Young (2014) What is a curriculum and what can it do?, The Curriculum Journal, 25:1, 7-13, DOI: 10.1080/09585176.2014.902526
• Mitchell, M., Smith, Robert G., Pamas, Roberto, & Samaras, Anastasia. (2018). Instructional Leadership for a 21st Century Learning Initiative: How Principals and Teacher Leaders Facilitate Organizational Learning, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
• Nash, J., Queensland. Dept. of Education. Curriculum Services Branch, & Participation Equity Program. (1987). Curriculum initiatives under PEP in State secondary schools, 1984-85. Brisbane: Dept. of Education, Queensland, Curriculum Services Branch.
• Print, Murray (1993). Curriculum development and design (2nd ed). Allen & Unwin, St. Leonards, N.S.W.
• Stanier, J. (2018). Keeping change on track - even when others try to derail you. Times Educational Supplement (5288), 54-55.
• STATE SCHOOLS CHIEF TOM TORLAKSON COMMENTS ON EDUCATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE CURRICULUM. (2011). States News Service, p. States News Service, August 19, 2011.
• Styron, R. (2008). School Leadership that Works. School Administrator, 65(9), 56.
• West, D., & Singleton, Ann. (2015). Educators' Perceptions on Implementing the Common Core State Standards, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.