Elementary Curricular Reform

Reform means changing for the better and removing defects. Elementary school curriculum remains in a state of reform because a significant number of children across all regions of the United States continue to perform below expected national academic standards in reading, mathematics, and science. At the start of the new millennium, when similar alarming statistics were revealed, a national response in the form of No Child Left Behind legislation was enacted to deal with underachieve–ment across academic areas by examining curricular, instruction, and assessment practices. This legislation was among the first in recent times that held schools accountable for student learning. State departments of education were charged with establishing performance–based outcome standards and evaluating school districts on the basis of meeting those standards. Removal of federal and state funding and the possibility of closing schools were among the consequences for schools not meeting federal and state standards. When several schools nationwide were not meeting standards, administrators and educators working in those schools needed to demonstrate how they were going to resolve the problem by closely examining and vigorously revising their existing curriculum across academic domains (e.g., reading, math, science) as well as evaluating their methods of delivering instruction.

Many learned societies also weighed in on elementary curricular reform by assembling panels of experts to synthesize research findings on effective instruction. In 2000, for instance, the National Reading Panel revealed the longitudinal effects that explicit teaching of basic prereading and reading skills have on children's achievement in reading, which in part has influenced the inclusion of early literacy skills, particularly phonemic awareness, the alphabetic principle (letter–sound correspondences), and oral reading fluency in elementary curriculum. These findings prompted veteran educators to revisit phonics instruction and cued new teachers to seek phonics instruction training opportunities if phonics instruction was not part of their teacher–training program. Higher education departments of teacher education were also required to include a course that involved training pre–service elementary educators on the critical components of reading and how to deliver phonics instruction to children.

Similar to the National Reading Panel's evaluation of reading curricular and instructional practices, the National Mathematics Panel closely examined mathematics education due to significant numbers of American students not meeting national mathematical performance standards. Critical components of early mathematics curriculum that are predictive of later math achievement consist of number sense, math vocabulary and discourse, as well as math fluency. When these components are taught systematically (i.e., in a logical sequence spanning from skill development to conceptual understanding) rather than episodically (students' environmental experiences and interests), the majority of students including those who are at risk are likely to achieve critical foundational mathematics skills to build on.

While elementary curricular reform efforts in reading and math have increased substantially over recent years, many believe that science education has been slighted in elementary schools due to little allocation of instructional time, lack of resources, insufficient teacher training, and minimal interest in the subject matter. In order to sustain pupil interest in science at the secondary [Page 341]school level, high–quality science instruction in the elementary grades needs to be cultivated. This has prompted experts in science education to explore what constitutes critical components of elementary school science content and pedagogy.

...