Introduction
Curriculum Planning History has several historical or political occurrences that have mostly influenced current curriculum design through various teaching styles and patterns. Educational communities shape and mold our society and society in turn impacts the curriculum. Majority of all stakeholders speak openly concerning their views today in hopes to persuade legislatures and school officials about decisions going forth or changing within school systems. In the last 10 years some of the most dramatically changes within curriculum in the schools has resulted due to the increasing number of US youth in school, the diversity of the US population, traditional classroom setting activities, increase in pre-kindergarten students beginning school, the likelihood of diminishing smaller schools, minimizing teacher/pupil ratios at a slow pace, technological future: and the future becoming technology, and who is left to teach becomes a critical question. The ELL laws and SIOP have impacted our educational communities’ curriculum development in both negative and positive ways. For example, some of the benefits of SIOP for non-ELL teachers are dramatic increase awareness in professional-development programs on how to teach English-language learners as a plus in the implementation of the law. Nevertheless, the No Child Left Behind Act could be thought of as a disadvantage more than a benefit to English-language learners, this belief is one of the few researchers who have studied the impact that the law has had on instruction. I personally believe in the NCLB Act and I was very much an advocate for the Act when it initially became effective. Also we must acknowledge the “gifted education” movement and how it identifies with the initial curriculum development both negatively and positively from its first implementations of similar development and
References: Ornstein, A. and Hunkins, F. Curriculum: Foundations, principle and issues. (1998). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Chapter 5: Social foundations of curriculum. Passow, A. H. (1986). Curriculum for the gifted and talented at the secondary level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 186-191. [See Vol. 4, p. 103.] Stevenson, K. R., (September 2010). Educational Trends Shaping School Planning, Design, Construction, Funding, and Operation., National Clearing House For Educational Facilities www.files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539457.pdf Topic 3: Social Foundations of Curriculum peoplelearn.homestead.com/beduc/module_3.social.history.doc VanTassel-Baska, J., Zuo, L., Avery, L. D., & Little, C. A. (2002). A curriculum study of gifted-student learning in the language arts. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(1), 30-44. [See Vol. 5.] VanTassel-Baska, J., (2003). Introduction to Curriculum for Gifted and Talented Students: A 25-Year Retrospective and Prospective. The College of William and Mary.