Alignment, of Curriculum

Alignment refers to the match or congruence of the written curriculum, in whatever form it may exist, and the testing or assessment program(s) in use. Earlier terms for the idea were instructional alignment or curriculum overlap. Research in the 1980s revealed that achievement scores were greater when the curriculum in use “overlapped” the “test content.” The key idea is that children do better on tests if they are familiar with or have practiced or been exposed to the content and format of the test(s) in use. Nearly all of the test prep courses available to students utilize the concept of alignment to enhance test performance. The idea of “no surprises for children” captures this idea. Children should be familiar not only with test content but also test context or format. How a student comes to be familiar with test content and format has been the subject of debate and contention. It lies at the heart of whether students, teachers, or administrators have “cheated” in preparing students for tests, especially [Page 42]high-stakes testing where students, teachers, and administrators may suffer some form of punishment for poor test scores.

One may begin aligning by writing curriculum first by securing a set of validated curricular objectives, and then moving to match the curriculum with a test or battery of tests. This approach is called a frontload. The problem with this approach is that unless objectives are quite specific, the range of potential test items is so broad as not to be very helpful in improving test performance. In cases where curricular objectives are ambiguous or excessive, front-loading is not a very productive way to go about establishing alignment. It is too time-consuming and slippery to provide solid alignment data. This is a problem in using the national standards: There are so many as to not provide a realistic instructional focus. Many state departments of education curricular frameworks are also not very helpful as tools of alignment. Nonetheless, frontloading is the traditional method of engaging in alignment.

The second approach to curriculum alignment is to begin with publicly released test items and deconstruct them (break into smaller, analytical pieces) to discern the level of cognitive difficulty, the format, and the type of content. The purpose of test item deconstruction is not to copy and teach the item to students. This would be of very little value, especially as nearly all tests are being changed. The purpose is to provide for aligned teaching so that students are fully prepared to engage in high-stakes assessment. This practice has been called backloading, and it can produce dramatic results on a short-term basis.

The concept of deep curriculum alignment refers to the practice of teaching beyond any particular test, at higher levels of cognition than any specific test, so that students are prepared not only for the current battery of tests but also alternative tests and different formats. Deep alignment retains the idea of curricular-test congruence but does not confine levels of learning to only tested knowledge, skills, or applications. It transcends any immediate test prep situation but retains the initial congruence between any specific curriculum and any specific test. The matter of curriculum alignment has been found to be of singular importance in studying urban school systems that have been able to make progress on closing the achievement gap.

...