Content Prioritization for K-12

Content Prioritization for K-12
In contrast to the other methods of content prioritization presented here, some designers are not given latitude to disregard or eliminate content. Most often this is because the content is directly related to externally or internally imposed standards, such as OSHA-compliant safety awareness programs, or state and district academic standards required of primary and secondary schools.

Schools in particular are required to achieve a considerable number of standards, and the general consensus among administrators and teachers alike is that there are too many standards to cover uniformly and fully. Noted education consultant Dr. Robert Marzano notes that in order to cover all standards “You would have to change K-12 to K-22. The sheer number of standards is the biggest impediment to implementing standards.”

Yet state and local standards must be met. Content prioritization is essential in this case as well, though rather than discarding content altogether, the prioritization is of time and energy devoted to accomplishing each standard.

There are two main difficulties users will encounter when attempting to execute instructional design using prioritized standards:

1. Evaluating standards against the specific criteria of your school or organization. 2. Achieving consensus among the stakeholders regarding high, medium, and low priority standards.

Thus, the method needed will need to be adaptable and democratic. An adaptable nature will allow it to be tailored to the organization’s unique situation, and being democratic will ensure that the results are well rounded and - just as importantly – fair, meaning that teachers, trainers, and/or designers are more likely to buy into the decisions made based on the consensus.

The method detailed below is geared toward K-12 schools, but with little or no customization can be used for other organizations that use externally-implemented standards and/or high-stakes standardized testing. It is a combination of criteria introduced in Larry Ainsworth’s 2003 book Power Standards and criteria developed by decision makers using the Nominal Group Planning, a group brainstorming/decision-making model. These criteria are then used to evaluate and prioritize the externally-imposed standards.

Initial Criteria
Power Standards posits two sets of criteria by which teachers should evaluate an enforced education standard. The first set is:

The second group of three criteria are not exclusive to the first, and seek to determine how long lasting and useful the skills indicated by a standard may prove to be. They are:

While these six criteria are likely to be important to teachers and administrators, they are unlikely to be the only criteria used for evaluating the importance of mandated standards. Other criteria will need to be identified by those participating in the decision making process. One standard method for soliciting and ranking criteria is Nominal Group Planning model.

Nominal Group Planning
Nominal Group Planning allows participants to anonymously submit their ideas and rank the group results. Group discussion allows participants to debate the pros and cons for each criterion, and then anonymously revise their rankings.

Phonebein 15:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Okay, now what do I do? How do I get back to the previous page? The navigation needs much more work. Go see what the other groups are doing and borrow one of their navigation formats.