Health Ahead/Heart Smart Revision Using the Curriculum Analysis Tool Teacher Guide and Curriculum Sample for additional information on the curriculum contact Sandra Owen at Georgia State University sowen2@gsu.edu.

    America's public education system responded to the national demand for accountability in 
student achievement and teacher performance by aligning curriculum with national standards of performance, updating content, regularly assessing students, and requiring continuing education 
for teachers. National standards in health education, science education (personal health) and
classroom application of technology continue to influence contemporary school-based health 
instruction.

    Revision of Health Ahead/Heart Smart K-6 Curriculum was conducted to align lessons with 
current health education, science and technology standards and to incorporate "in-home" 
applications and authentic student assessments. Tulane Center for Cardiovascular Health invited 
an outside evaluator to complete the analysis of Health Ahead/Heart Smart in an approved field 
test of the Curriculum Analysis Tool (CAT) developed by the Education Development Center, Inc. 
(while under contract with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).

    CAT was developed for state and local decision-makers to analyze existing health curricula and 
make necessary materials revision. The "state and local" criteria section of the CAT was omitted 
in the field test because Health Ahead/Heart Smart extends beyond a specific local or state 
boundary to include national and international school implementation. Each grade level analysis 
included raw scores, percentages, and means for all sections and sub-sections of the CAT. All items were weighted equally in then analysis. Specific recommendations. for revisions were 
made by grade level. 
    
    Three phases comprised the analysis/revision process.

• Phase I included the evaluator's careful reading of the CAT and several readings of the grade level being 
  assessed prior to administering each grade level analysis.
• Phase II involved the scoring of each grade level in all sections and sub-sections of the CAT. A written report 
  describing curriculum strengths and suggesting curriculum revision was submitted to the Tulane Center for 
  Cardiovascular Health.
• Phase III guided the final revision. Initial recommendations were reviewed; revisions made; and a second scoring 
  using sections and sub-sections of the CAT was conducted. A collaborative team of scientists, health education 
  specialists, practicing teachers and several principals guided the final revisions.

    Results of the initial analysis of Health Ahead/Heart Smart identified:    

• 82% of the curriculum met expected health education criteria outlined by CAT;
• 78% of the curriculum followed recommended CDC guidelines for nutrition, physical activity, and tobacco use 
  prevention; and 
• 75% of the curriculum adhered to curriculum fundamentals outlined by CAT.

    Results of the post-revision analysis demonstrated that the curriculum revision process brought 
all section and sub-section CAT scores for Health Ahead/Heart Smart to 100% compliance.

    Item scoring was a major limitation of the Curriculum Analysis Tool identified during the field 
test analysis of Health Ahead/Heart Smart. Items were classified in "grade segments" (K-4, 5-8, 
9-12) necessitating reclassification into specific grade level age/stage appropriate criteria. The 
Likert scale response format lacks operational definition for each rating on the scale. The evaluator self-imposed operational definitions to standardize scoring. The CAT developers might be advised 
to instruct users to score an item either present or absent rather than reporting degrees of inclusion. Assigning weights to items rather than weighting all items equally would also assist in the final scoring.

    The Curriculum Analysis Tool was effective in providing criteria for the assessment of a multi-grade, comprehensive health curriculum. The CAT also effectively guided the three-phase 
revision process for the Health Ahead/Heart Smart curriculum by identifying existing curriculum limitations requiring revision. Items in both the sections and sub-sections of the CAT were very complete. Overall format was easy to follow and section and sub-section language was clear and 
concise. The Tulane Center for Cardiovascular Health appreciated the opportunity to field test 
the Curriculum Analysis Tool and encourages its developers to make the tool easily accessible to 
school administrators and school-based health educators.