2. Curriculum criticism
Eisner(1979) claims that curriculum criticism is
analogous to art criticism.
the task of art critic is to assist other in clarifying
their perception of the work of art.
the critic uses an approach that addresses the
qualities of the work and presents them in a language
that helps others to achieve deeper understanding of
the work.
3. This approach requires the data collected during an
evaluation be qualitative rather than quantitative in
nature.
The data collected for a curriculum criticism usually aren’t
revealed by standardized tests, interviews or checklists.
Proponents of curriculum criticism (Eisner,1979 ;
Mann,1968-69) don’t suggest that this approach be used to
replace the traditional quantitative approaches.
The two approaches are viewed as complementary. Both
qualitative and quantitative methods have particular
strengths to be used in specific curriculum evaluation
situation.
4. Phases of curriculum criticism
Descriptive phase : the critic describes qualities of
life in classroom.
This description attends not only to particular
factors (e.g. student activities), but to relationships
among the factors.
Interpretive phase : the critic interprets the events .
Explanation are provided for the actions, reactions,
and interaction observed.
For Eisner(1979) and Mann(1968-69), the prime
function of curriculum is the disclosure of meaning.
5. Mann suggests that the critic accomplishes this by
applying what he calls disclosure models to the
situation.
The models are to be regarded as grounded and
entailed in personal knowledge of ethical reality.
Evaluative phase : besides describing and
interpreting, the curriculum critic renders a
judgment,
For Eisner(1979), the point of educational criticism is
to improve the educational process.
Mann also indicates that the critic has an obligation
to assist in the decision-making processs.
7. Phase 1 : defining the
evaluation problem.
1.Record initial statement of the problem.
2.Identify other users of the results of the evaluation.
3.Identify potential decisions to be made.
4.Generate a list of rank-ordered decisions>
5.Develop general decision rules.
8. phase 2 : choosing an
appropriate methodology.
1. Identify the specific question.
2. Identify the best sources of information.
3. Identify the best ways of collecting information
from each source.
4. Identify the best design.
5. Choose the best type and size of sample for each
source of information.
6. Select the best forms of data and methods of
analysis for each question.
7. Prepare a methodological package.
9. Phase 3 : planning for data
collection, analysis, and
reporting.
1. Identify the major tasks.
2. Identify the subtasks.
3. Identify responsibilities.
4. Plot the subtasks in a chronological order.
10. Phase 4 : collecting and
compiling data
1. Establish relationships.
2. Select instruments.
3. Develop instruments.
4. Prepare instrument for use.
5. Select sample.
6. Schedule the data collection.
7. Collect the data.
8. Compile the data.
11. Phase 5 : analyzing and
reporting the data
1. Summarize the data.
2. Refine the decision.
3. Apply the decision rules.
4. Report the results.
