Curriculum Audit

A curriculum audit is a form of a management audit. There are three types of audits: functional, operational, and programmatic. A functional audit is concerned with reviewing some aspect in a line-item budget, such as personnel, transportation, or instruction. An operational audit is focused on an activity within a function, for example, staff development within the personnel function. A programmatic audit closely follows activities within the subject content disciplines, such as mathematics, social studies, or language arts. Those who perform the actual audit, the auditors, can be internal or external to the school or school system. The scope of the audit may be only a compliance review, that is, determining if the operations adhere to required policies or laws. Or the scope of the audit may be performed from the perspective of whether the area being reviewed has optimized the resources provided compared to the outcomes or results obtained.

The curriculum audit was originally the brainchild of Leon Lessinger, who wrote a best-selling book in 1970, titled Every Kid a Winner. In this text, Dr. Lessinger described a process called an “educational performance audit” (EPA), which was modeled after a financial audit. The rationale proffered by Dr. Lessinger was that public confidence could be restored to education only if people knew that those examining the operations had no interest in its outcome and the complete audit was made public. Accreditation, as a process, had become tainted because conflicts of interests existed and the public never got to read the accreditation report itself so as to be able to form an independent judgment about the content and scope of the accreditation process.

The first EPA or curriculum audit was performed in the Columbus Public Schools, Ohio, in 1979. Thereafter, more audits were performed in New Jersey, California, and Michigan. Today, dozens of school systems from coast-to-coast and in several foreign countries have undergone curriculum audits. From 1988 through 1996, curriculum audits were coordinated through the American Association of School Administrators (the AASA), in Arlington, Virginia. After that, audits were coordinated through Phi Delta Kappa, in Bloomington, Indiana. Some of the nation's largest and most-troubled school systems have been audited, such as Baltimore, Maryland; Oakland, California; Anchorage, Alaska; Montgomery County, Maryland; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Audit reports have become the content of some heated battles in state and federal courts, mostly involving documentation of desegregation and management practices.

The curriculum audit uses five standards against which to judge school system operations. Each standard is cited with aspects of what an auditor would expect to find if the standard were met.

Standard 1: A school system is able to demonstrate its control of resources, programs, and personnel.

Expected indicators:

• A curriculum that is centrally defined and adopted by the board of education
• A clear set of policies that establishes an operational framework for management that permits accountability, and reflects state requirements and local program goals and the necessity to use achievement data to improve school system operations
• A functional administrative structure that facilitates the design and delivery of the district's curriculum
• A direct, uninterrupted line of authority from school board/superintendent and other central office officials to principals and classroom teachers
• Organizational development efforts that are focused on improving system effectiveness
• Documentation of school board and central office planning for the attainment of goals, objectives, and mission over time
• A clear mechanism to define and direct change and innovation within the school system to permit maximization of its resource on priority goals, objectives, and mission

Standard 2: A school system has established clear and valid objectives for students.

...