Who owns curriculum in your public school district?

<p>In our district, when a teacher leaves–for retirement or greener pastures or sick leave/disability–their curriculum disappears with them. The substitutes get no lesson plans. Midyear hires had better bring their own curriculum and then try to allign it with whatever kids have learned so far in that course. The teachers’ attitude is that they developed their courses, so curriculum is their property. As a result, kids are often left untaught when a teacher’s departure happens any time other than than at the end of the school year, or when they are frequently absent. Note, teachers are unionized and tenured after a few short years in our state. Also, few courses here use texts anymore–teachers copy everything and hand out packets of worksheets and selected readings from books (probably violating copyright laws…). I suspect this happens because our district does not budget adequately for books…Is this typical? Is it good educational practice? What happens in your district, and are there ways to better protect the learning experience?</p>

<p>Looks like a dysfunctional workplace where employees (teachers) appear to be deliberately sabotaging each other and the organization as a whole, or behaving in ways that indicate fear of having employment terminated (even if they have tenure).</p>

<p>You can copy complete articles without violating copyright law.
<a href=“http://depts.washington.edu/uwcopy/Using_Copyright/Guidelines/Copying.php[/url]”>http://depts.washington.edu/uwcopy/Using_Copyright/Guidelines/Copying.php&lt;/a&gt;
However I do understand your point.
My D had a teacher who was gone for most of the year, didn’t leave detailed lesson plans, and since she refused to take a leave of absence, the school couldn’t hire a permanent substitute.
( this was for 5th gd, so major impact on school year)
Kids really missed out.
Our district would prefer every school offer same classes with identical curriculum, so enriching curriculum is discouraged and really depends on teacher.</p>

<p>ucba, I agree there is a job protection component that motivates what goes on, but what baffles is that the admin/BOE appears to be going along with this, which does not make sense except that it saves budget regardless of lost learning opportunity (not an “expense” in the budget, unfortunately) There has to be a better way.</p>

<p>How can there not be an approved curriculum? I can see a teacher taking lesson plans, overheads, handouts, etc.–but that’s not the curriculum.</p>

<p>In the district where I teach the curriculum is developed by teachers and approved by a committee of parents, administrators and school board members. All teachers are given copy of the curriculum which provides a complete outline of what is to be taught. It even has activities, labs, etc. that a teacher could use. A brand new teacher could use the curriculum and fairly effectively prepare their students. I teach in a large suburban high school that is well funded. All teachers are pretty willing to share lessons, notes, tests, etc. I couldn’t imagine teaching in an environment like the one ProxyGC mentioned.</p>

<p>If teacher know about absences ahead of time in elementary school they always prepared lesson plans for the subs. I honestly don’t know how detailed the curriculum is that comes from the state and district is compared to individual lesson plans that get organized by the teachers. I’ve only looked at the outline for Regents Courses which are easy to find on line. I think there is lots of sharing of ideas from what I saw, but if you designed a handout, it’s yours, not the districts.</p>

<p>In NYS the State Education Department frame the curriculum for all public school districts. Individual districts then modify cuuriculum. In some districts this is the responsibility of curriculum specialists or assistant superintendents for curriculum. In others committees comprised of teachers, administrators and parents develop locally modified curriculum. How that curriculum is delivered is the responsibility of the individual teacher, who develops his or her own lesson plans.</p>

<p>Agree with nocashfored . In my district there is a set curriculum. But as a school we found that wasn’t enough, we have a very large folder on our network that clearly and carefully outlines the essential lessons for each term, the target objectives for each unit and the common assessments for each course. If someone leaves there is obviously change but it should be classroom management styles, not curriculum. </p>

<p>And ProxyGC I really don’t see the problem is with the teachers having tenure or being unionized, the administration of the district or at least school should be there to assure fidelity of curriculum no matter who teaches the course. Individual teachers should follow the curriculum prescribed by the district/state not have to invent it year in and year out. </p>

<p>And, in my opinion, textbook supply issues (money) is a problem but generally printing and doing an unending stream of worksheets is just lazy teaching.</p>

<p>The books belong to the district. But lesson plans belong to the teachers. The teachers do not owe anyone their personal work if they leave. HOWEVER, contracts are done by the year and cannot be terminated mid-year. This means, if there is a sub in the classroom, the regular teacher has to leave behind lesson plans and everything all written out for the sub to follow. The subs are paid a lot less and the teacher is still paid when she has a sub. So the classroom is her responsibility. IF a teacher left, as in, no longer paid/contract terminated, mid-year, then it is a pretty big deal. In that case, no one would expect her to leave behind anything of hers and she is not responsible for the classroom.</p>

<p>Our curriculum IS framed by the state. But the local curricular administrator positions have for the most part been eliminated over the years. Every 4 years or so a very small committee of teachers and parents reviews existing curricula, mainly to check for internal allignment and redundancy between grade levels, and allignment with state frameworks. Beyond that, teachers’ lesson plans seem to be treated as if proprietary. </p>

<p>For example, when I asked to see a teacher’s curriculum when a scheduling conflict could only be handled by taking that level of a world language at a community college, and I was attempting to determine what level of CC course would best allign with this HS course, the teacher resisted sharing the list of readings, saying, “that would be giving you the course.” </p>

<p>In other instances, substitute teachers (both short and long-term) were not provided with lesson plans or books and had to make up their own plans, their own handouts, etc. Some who did not do this essentially just babysat the class. </p>

<p>Maybe I am out of touch with how public education works, but if there were textbooks, wouldn’t some issues of continuity through teacher transitions be resolved? I don’t understand why our district doesn’t have textbooks for some of our HS STEM courses, for example. Or even those state manuals for drivers ed…Is there a rule of thumb about what percent of budget or $/student amount that should be planned for books? Is this district an anomaly, or am I expecting too much? </p>

<p>And shouldn’t lesson plans be on file in case a teacher has to go out unexpectedly? </p>

<p>I am not sure I understand the basis for teachers’ ownership of lesson plans if they were developed while on the district’s payroll. </p>

<p>Could districts pay teachers extra to develop lesson plans on their own time, that the district can then keep if they leave?</p>

<p>In my old public school district the curriculum is “owned” by the administratiuon while developed and executed collaboratively byt the teachers and curriculum specialists. There is in general a high degree of coordination and vertical integration to assure that there are easy transitions from one classroom to the next. First class school district rated highly by every possible measure.</p>

<p>In the district I live in now the curriculum is owned by the teachers. There is little oversight and accountability beyond meeting minimum state standards. There are only small pockets of collaboration and coordination between classrooms. The result is a highly unpredictable and variable education. Kids with activist parents get a good education because the parents make sure their child gets the “right” teachers, and take the “right” classes, and fill in any educational gaps with Kumon, tutoring and summer programs. Everyone else muddles through with very mediocre results. I gave up and sent my kids to private school instead.</p>

<p>1012mom, my district sounds like the latter of your two. I think the custom re curricular and lesson ownership determines much about how teachers interact with everyone in the learning community, and can explain some variability in student performance. </p>

<p>I also can’t help but think that consistent, shared course materials would alleviate some of the variability. But strangely, our district hasn’t prioritized spending on texts or other course materials. </p>

<p>Were both districts you described in the same state?</p>

<p>Everyone in my company signs a waiver which attests to the fact that everything we create at work- everything-- is the property of the company. You figure out a new and different way of doing something- great. That’s why you get paid. You don’t get to take your work product with you when you leave (except what’s in your head); people quit or get fired all the time and it’s not the responsibility of the new employee to reinvent the wheel every time- they inherit the playbook of the person who was in the job before them. All documents- letters, powerpoints, creative material, analyses- belong to the company. That’s one of the reasons that when an employee is terminated they usually get a few hours to clean out their desk and grab the photos of their kids, but they no longer have computer access to their work product.</p>

<p>I don’t like to bash teachers. (Most members of my family are teachers.) But there is nobody working in the private sector who thinks that their work product belongs to them. Everyone getting a paycheck in the private sector knows that their intellectual property and any big creative ideas they have are “owned” by their employer.</p>

<p>There would be less hostility to teachers and teachers unions (in my opinion) if everyone played by the same rules. A firefighter figures out a faster and safer way to unload the truck-- doesn’t that instantly get communicated to every firefighter in that city as a new and better protocol? The firefighter doesn’t get to keep it a secret.</p>

<p>Sheesh.</p>

<p>blossom, I worked in the private sector, and have experience with “work for hire” as an independent. That is why I am asking all of these questions here–I am struggling to understand what governs ownership in education. The rules seem to vary, from the responses so far. Why doesn’t the public good prevail everywhere? I don’t know whether teachers’ unions promote the position of ownership. Maybe some teachers out there know more about this and can enlighten the rest of us.</p>

<p>I think it is entirely possible that our admin refuses to budget enough for curricular/lesson plan development and materials, and in response, teachers withhold what they develop or dig up on their own. New teachers alway get the least prep time and the heaviest course schedules.</p>

<p>ProxyGC, this sounds very bizarre to me. Sounds like there is no one at the helm? I am wondering if your state has a superintendant of education, and if your district does, etc. [edit - ah, I see your post #11 above.]</p>

<p>The idea that a teacher would “own” the curriculum in a PUBLIC institution, funded by citizens, perhaps in a misguided attempt to be irreplaceable and save their job, is unbelievable. Yet, you say they are unionized, so why?</p>

<p>My kids have been in public schools in CA for most of their education, and in my experience, the curriculum is completely standardized. Often a teacher will have a special program that they have developed, and part of the hiring process requires showing lesson plans - but there are standards for what must be taught at each grade level, and books and other curriculum materials pretty much seem to be provided.</p>

<p>(Downside is that textbook companies get sweet deals with the state, and in my opinion, the books sometimes reflect this complacency and intellectual laziness - all at a large cost to the state. But that’s another story, I guess.)</p>

<p>I do curriculum design as a portion of my job. I work in a charter school that functions as it’s own LEA. Essentially this means that we work like a small town that has a board of education, and one school at each level (elementary/middle/high school). Any decision, including curricular decisions that would be made at the district level we make for ourselves. I would consider our school’s “curricula” to consist of 4 levels.</p>

<p>1) State/National Standards for each subject: Obviously no one owns these in the sense that they are freely available to whoever cares to look them up.</p>

<p>2) Purchased resources: For example, a school might use the “Singapore Math” as a resource. For the most part, these resources are owned by a school. Occasionally, a teacher might purchase a curricular material to supplement their classroom, usually something like a book of file folder games for children to play, or a book of songs to sing with your preschool class. If a teacher buys it, then yes, they can take it with them if they leave, but usually the only things that are bought by individual teachers are things that are supplemental, not the core curriculum.</p>

<p>3) Long term plans and unit plans: These are created by teams that usually include both teachers and members of leaderships. They are posted on a website with limited access. They are definitely owned by the school, not by the teachers, and while we encourage the sharing of practices, and would not mind a teacher taking copies with him/her, they still can’t take them all.</p>

<p>4) Daily plans: I think this is where it gets tricky. In some of our grades we have multiple teachers teaching the same unit plan (e.g. 2 first grade teachers), and they usually divvy up so that one teacher writes math plans for both, and one writes reading etc . . . In other grades we might have one teacher only teaching a subject (e.g. there’s only one 6th grade math teacher who sees all the kids in rotation) and they create all their own plans. These plans also live on the website. Generally people leave these plans when they go, and the new teacher uses them as a resource when they create their own plans. Teachers who return rewrite their plans each year, so I would expect the same from a new teacher to rewrite the plans too. As to whether they could legally pull off the plans when they leave, I don’t know. I don’t think anyone has tried.</p>

<p>I hate it when people start a post by saying I hate to bash… I think its obvious the bashing is about to begin. </p>

<p>Also most comparisions between so called private sector and teaching is ridiculous, part of the problem with todays education is the desire people have to treat a school like a business. I don’t want my kids treated like an ipod rolling off an assembly line, I don’t think you do either. Unfortunately most of the really successful businesses don’t play by any rule but one, the dollar is king. I’m hoping most school districts and teachers are more worried about kids educations and well being than the almighty dollar.</p>

<p>All that said there is no doubt that being in the right district with good administrators and teachers that are aware that the viabilty and continuity of curriculum is a major key to kids getting a good education. It is the districts job to provide guidance and curriculum and the teacher to teach the prescribed curriculum.</p>

<p>In the end teachers come and go the only thing we really have control over is how we raise our kids. If we raise them to value their education and model that we value it too, our kids will do well in school.</p>

<p>Teachers mostly come up with lesson plans on their own time. It’s no wonder they feel like they own them. I don’t understand not having textbooks.</p>

<p>hudsonvalley51 pretty much summed it up for NYS/NYC.</p>

<p>As it trickles down to the school level this falls back to your AP/Administration/department APs and Principal. They are responsible for grading plans, insuring that there are syllabi on file for every course being taught be every teacher for each term. In addition it is their responsibility to ensure that lesson plans from every teacher are on file at school in the event of absences. </p>

<p>They are responsible for setting the policies in the school, making sure the policies are adhered to by the staff and tacking corrective action/performance improvement steps if this is not done. In NYC, if your principal is not doing it at the school level it should be addressed using the following chain of command; the academic officer in your network leader or the chief academic officer in your cluster or the cluster leader.</p>