Definition Of School Based Curriculum Development

DEFINITION OF SCHOOL BASED CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT. 
Before determining the terms of SBCD, it is necessary to examine the notion of SBCD, which is the central of our discussion. The word “school-based” literally implies that all curricular decision are made at the school level. When combining with the word “curriculum development”, it connotes that all activities associated with the creation of curriculum materials, such as planning, designing, producing, implementing, and evaluating must be conducted at school level. 

School Based Curriculum Development

(Read KTSP as a Form of SBCD)

(Read SBCD and Action Research)

School Based Curriculum Development may be taught of a set of interrelated ideas about, or proposals for, how whole curriculum are to be designed and how the related teaching and learning are to be planned and organized according to the context of societies and environments’ need. A literal definition of "school-based” might imply that all educational decisions are made at the school level. Apart from independent and "alternative" schools operating as separate entities, it is highly unlikely that this situation pertains to systemic schools (for example, government schools, and schools operating within a school district).

The terms of school based curriculum is defined in a range of different ways in the literature. According to Bezzina (as referenced in Rachel Bolstad, 2004:6). The school based curriculum development is defined as bellow: 

'[SBCD is] a process in which some or all of the members of a school community plan, implement and/or evaluate an aspect or aspects of the curriculum offering of the school. This may involve adapting an existing curriculum, adopting it unchanged, or creating a new curriculum. SBCD is a collaborative effort which should not be confused with the individual efforts of teachers or administrators operating outside the boundaries of a collaboratively accepted framework' (Curriculum Development: principles, Processes and Practices, 2004:5)

So from the above statements we may understand that school based curriculum is the schools needing to be responsive to their environment, and requiring the freedom, opportunity, responsibility and resources to determine and direct their affairs, it’s mean that SBCD provides chance to region  for shaping curriculum to suit unique local needs and resource of students and communities. The curriculum in school based curriculum development is internal and organic to the institution, not an extrinsic imposition. The institution is also has a network of relationship with another institutions, groups and bodies, as for example a school is part of local education authority and  national education system and it releases to community bodies.  

Hence, other writes try to map the infinitive varieties of SBCD in their attempt to explain what it is. For example, Brady as referenced in Rachel Bolstad (2004:24), he postulates twelve variations of SBCD using a classification system based upon type  of activity (creation, adaptation, selection of curriculum materials), on one axis people involved (individual teachers, pair of teachers, groups, and whole staff), on the other axis 

One single of definition of SBCD is can not to justify the SBCD, because SBCD is move dynamically based on the context of environment and social need. We see that the type of SBCD in America and Australia even in Hongkong are not the same in all aspects, however the main purposes of this curriculum is the same in developing the curriculum in grass level. 

As already mentioned in earlier, School based curriculum as the planning, design, implementation, and Evaluation of a programme of students’ learning by the educational institution of which of those students are member Skillbeck (1984:2). The implication of this definition is that curriculum development and curriculum research are inseparable and that, since teachers are center agents, curriculum development about teacher self-development and curriculum research is about how to make curriculum more efficient and how to solve the problem in education. 

SBCD can involve creating new products or processes, but that can also involve selecting from available commercial materials and making various adaptations. The latter two processes, of course, require less time and funds and a lower level of commitment from participants. Yet, it can be argued, that SBCD tasks should be embark upon only if they are manageable and can be achieved within a reasonable time frame. 

Other writers argue that SBCD is an amalgam of ideas, which can be interpreted as an educational philosophy. Skilbeck (1990:241-244), puts together such terms as "teacher and learner working together to produce a curriculum", "freedom for both teacher and pupil", and the "school's responsiveness to its environment" to produce a theoretical position about SBCD. He argues at length for structures and policies to be developed at the school - level and for there to be shared decision - making by all participants, especially teachers and students. Fullan (2002:16-20) supports teacher involvement in change at the school level, and he has produced various factors and strategies, which could be viewed as a model for SBCD. Other writers have commented on educational philosophies that are closely linked to SBCD. For example, A.V. Kelly (2009:268) argues for a democratic underpinning to curriculum planning and development. He states that democracy is a moral system-the major elements of this moral framework are equality, freedom and respect for the rights of the individual. “In a genuinely democratic society, the government’s policies must accord with these elements.

SBCD can be seen as a product of discontent with externally or centrally based curriculum development. Many SBCD advocates reject any curriculum development activities which are not located at the school level. They argue that centrally based curriculum developers fail to take into account the diverse needs of students and teachers in a particular school. “Top-down” modes of curriculum development, they contend, ignore classroom teachers and provide them with little incentive, involvement, and job satisfaction Collin J. Marsh & George Willis, (1990). 

So as the conclusion we may describe that SBCD can be viewed as the opposite of centrally based curriculum development, and as a “rallying cry” for the active involvement of teachers in designing, planning, implementing, and evaluating curriculum materials within a particular school Collin J. Marsh & George Willis, (1990:46). Then SBCD could be described as the various curriculum processes of planning, designing and producing, associated with the completion of a particular set of materials. It can also include teaching activities associated with the implementation and evaluation of a set of materials. One might ascribe such elaborate activities to a well- funded curriculum project team, but the scale and range of these activities could well be beyond the scope of individual school communities. As a result, the term "curriculum - making" is preferred, because it signifies a less grandiose range of activities for school personnel. 

In fact, the early notion of SBCD has a strong relationship to action research. As John Elliot (1997) points out, in the 1960s, action research emerged as a tool for school-based curriculum change, which was tied to the goal of creating curriculum that was more meaningful and relevant to students.

Through conducting action research, teachers emancipate themselves and become the creators of curriculum for themselves and students. Advocates of action research and SBCD declare that having the responsibility to develop and implement curriculum is crucial to the professional identity of teachers. SBCD is thus principally a way to develop teachers’ professional competence and empower them. 

In reality the School Based Curriculum Development is really good strategy in managing school curriculum, where this form of curriculum involving all elements in managing curriculum such as teacher, community, education scientist, education stake holder, education division, agent of education, companies, and so forth. this statements based on what skilbeck said, (as referenced in A.V Kelly, 1999:116) he states that there are several major principles are reflected in this notion of School Based Curriculum Development, First it acknowledges that a large measure of freedom from both teachers and students are a necessary condition for curricula provision, which is fully education. Second, it views the school as human social institution which must be responsive to its’ own environment, and which must, therefore, be permitted to develop in its’ own way to fit that environment. Lastly, it regards as a vital to this development that the individual teacher or at least the staff individual should, should accept a research and development role in the respect of curriculum.