Factors+affecting+implementation

=Factors affecting implementation= All five faculty leaders involved in the implementation of common curriculum at Years 7 and 8 levels participated in a semi-structured interview. From these interviews a range of factors emerged as both assisting and blocking the successful implementation of common curriculum within faculties.


 * **Factors** || **Assisted in the Implementation of**
 * Common Curriculum** || **Blockers in the Implementation of**
 * Common Curriculum** ||
 * **Staff ownership** || Where faculty leaders worked with staff to either modify existing material or develop new materials, there was greater take up of the materials developed. One faculty leader identified seeking feedback from staff as vital, as that this ‘built ownership and assisted in getting common agreement from staff’. || There appeared to be a ‘direct correlation with those who have taken up tasks with those that have been at meetings’. Where staff was not present at faculty meetings due to being part time or assigned to different faculty teams, the uptake was considerably lower. Staff is some faculties resented the ‘cookie cutter’ approach to curriculum as they felt that it was curbing their ‘talent, ability and creativity’. ||
 * **Curriculum**
 * accessibility** || Where materials were easy to access (stored on school web-based interface-Scholaris), were at appropriate level for students and staff believed they were an improvement on pre-existing materials there was greater uptake. || In some instances curriculum materials were developed after some staff had taught the unit, which impacted on staff ability to trial material. Some faculties also lacked a common approach to storing curriculum materials, which led to confusion or excuses as to why they couldn’t access and trial materials. ||
 * **Capacity building** || Where staff were delivered faculty based professional learning to develop ‘staff understanding of change and skill up staff to develop new skills’, there was greater was greater acceptance of curriculum. || Where there was no or little professional development, staff that were unsure or lacked the skills to implement the new curriculum, reverted to the curriculum they had previously used. ||
 * **Leadership direction** || Where faculty leaders ensured that materials were ready for staff to trial and the materials followed a pre-existing approach to curriculum in their faculty was greater uptake. A ‘consistent approach’ was seen as important as setting the direction for implementation with staff. || Where faculty leaders were unable to provide staff with a clear rationale for change, staff actively resisted. The perception from faculty leaders was that staff felt that they were ‘reinventing the wheel’. ||