a history of curriculum services canada
a history of curriculum services canada
a history of curriculum services canada
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
intended to work with boards and stakeholders (among whom most <strong>of</strong> the development and<br />
sharing expertise resided) to develop these <strong>curriculum</strong> supports. MET asked how OCC could<br />
help with this.<br />
The first <strong>services</strong> identified were a gap analysis to determine what materials teachers needed<br />
(this was already in progress) and an overview to learn what materials were currently being<br />
developed. OCC was cited as the agency best positioned to co-ordinate <strong>curriculum</strong> development,<br />
especially as many boards were pulling back from this activity. Real concern focused on the<br />
ability to meet teachers' needs with materials <strong>of</strong> high quality, given the timeframe and the<br />
decrease in <strong>curriculum</strong> activity in boards.<br />
At the very least, the need for an evaluation process was deemed essential to establishing longterm<br />
credibility. OCC indicated that while it had not conducted in-depth evaluations <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Transition Years Catalogue materials, it had established basic criteria and was providing teachers<br />
with the opportunity to comment on materials they had used. The OCC was also prepared to<br />
develop more extensive criteria. Inclusivity and absence <strong>of</strong> bias were cited as especially<br />
important issues for new materials. Also at this meeting, OCC members strongly suggested that<br />
they be given a clear mandate and a manifest role in the <strong>curriculum</strong> process to help maintain<br />
teacher confidence and ensure success.<br />
An indication that OCC had succeeded in asserting its demonstrated and potential value came<br />
with news that $500,000 would likely be approved for their second year <strong>of</strong> operation. With this<br />
support, the Executive Director continued to explore partnership models and opportunities and to<br />
develop guidelines for partnerships and/or sponsorships that would help OCC achieve partial<br />
self-sustainability. Work also proceeded on the CD-ROM version <strong>of</strong> the catalogue and on an<br />
update to the existing version. Third party evaluation proposals were considered, too, and were<br />
deemed valuable even if OCC was not able to sustain operations into the future.<br />
In light <strong>of</strong> the Royal Commission’s Report, many potential roles for OCC were considered;<br />
however, it was recognized that until the Ministry declared its intent on a number <strong>of</strong> issues,<br />
defining OCC’s future would be difficult.<br />
Thus, at the end <strong>of</strong> almost a full year <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial operation, the future role <strong>of</strong> OCC was still<br />
unclear. 11 What was clear was that the way in which <strong>curriculum</strong> was managed in Ontario was<br />
changing. The Ministry was moving toward a consistently implemented provincial <strong>curriculum</strong><br />
with standards for all aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>curriculum</strong> development, implementation, and assessment.<br />
Curriculum was becoming less teacher centred and content based and more learner centred and<br />
results based. With the move to this “outcomes-based ‘<strong>curriculum</strong>, in which learning was<br />
defined in terms <strong>of</strong> teacher design and student performance, learning resources would be critical.<br />
The Ministry wanted high-quality learning materials and partnerships among teachers, students,<br />
parents, and the community that would result in savings across the system.<br />
1995<br />
©2008 Curriculum Services Canada 19