a history of curriculum services canada

Also discussed in initial meetings were key linkages to organizations such as ONTERIS,
CFORP, the OTF's "Creating a Culture of Change" initiative 3 , various provincial
organizations, and curriculum consortia. Many debates centred on the services that might
ultimately be provided to educators. Several were considered especially important:
• evaluating resources
• developing materials (as CFORP does)
First Steps
• providing electronic and on-line versions of the catalogue in addition to print
• accepting orders and packaging and distributing materials
• becoming a nexus for information related to learning materials
• establishing a role in identifying and addressing needs related to learning
materials (e.g., supporting the development of new resources) and,
• providing a feedback mechanism to ensure that needs were met effectively.
Many of the ideas discussed at this time were broad-based and far-reaching. Although some
were to prove too ambitious for the fledgling organization, many re-emerged in later years to
become fundamental components of the clearinghouse service.
A Framework Emerges
Before any of the initiatives developed by the work group could proceed, the mechanics of
establishing a formal structure had to be addressed. Several models were considered. Under
one, the clearinghouse would be a physical operation, warehousing materials and providing
full customer service. Another model called for a simple information service, while a third
placed the clearinghouse in the role of broker between developers and users. This was the
model eventually chosen.
Throughout the remainder of 1993, the work group dealt with issues ranging from the physical
location of the clearinghouse offices and its day-to-day operations, to scope and vision
statements, to consideration of how to develop the project into a long-term service to teachers.
(It was suggested that future funding might come directly from boards, which would develop
new curriculum co-operatively through the clearinghouse, rather than inhouse.)
The proposed operational structure that emerged included a not-for-profit Board of Directors
to manage the clearinghouse project. It was recommended that fifteen members be selected
from MET, OTF and its affiliates, and the supervisory officer and trustee associations. The
Board would be responsible for policy directions, operational issues (including staffing), and
funding decisions. One of its primary tasks would be to enter into a funding agreement with
MET. Also addressed was the need for an executive director, who would likely be a member
©2008 Curriculum Services Canada 5