Writing a scope and sequence has been an interesting experience. As always, there is a lot to say, so let’s get started with interesting factor number one.
1. Foreign language standards in Tennessee closely resemble National standards. They are both based on “The 5 C’s”: communication, cultures, connections, comparisons and community. As a result, alignment between state and nation is not difficult. What is a little more difficult is that, in Tennessee, there are 5 standards and within them are 11 total learning objectives. Whereas some subjects may have their course mapped out for them by standards, the foreign language standards are a bit different. Communication, of course, will be used each and every day. The other 4 standards will be used, but not during any specific chunk of the semester. They are dispersed throughout the communication standard. (If any curriculum supervisors read this, I’m not suggesting that standards should map out the entire semester. Keeping them loose and malleable allows for teacher creativity (Oh my gosh! Did he say creativity?). I mean, we’ve been in school for 4-6 years now studying how to teach. Give us a chance to be professionals instead of cramming scripts down our throats.) Anyways, back to standards working within one another.
For example, connections and comparisons between one’s native language and the target language are made as language is learned. (Sometimes comparisons are actually detrimental because students often spend so much time trying to figure out why the target language isn’t exactly like English that they forget to just accept truth for what it is. I have witnessed many lengthy grammatical explanations that were completely unsuccessful and highly confusing. When I student taught, if a student asked “Why do they do it like that in Spanish?” I would respond in one of two ways: 1. I’d give a culture explanation of language differences (this option is more limited than people think), and 2. I’d just say “When the language gods sat in council creating Spanish, they thought it would be a good idea to do it that way.” Students would always laugh, understand that some things are just different and move on. In the end, my point is that the current standards are great. My daily lesson plans will meet multiple standards, not just one. It takes some effort, but hey, it’s my job (That’s how accountability should sound…)
2. Content pacing has been a little more difficult than I anticipated. For some help, I used a Spanish text book to see how much they taught within the first year. Honestly, it was a joke. The structure was not so conducive to actual language use, rather lists of vocabulary memorization. And when I divided up the chapters within a one year time period, there was too much too fast. So I’m currently planning my first grading period and it’s a bit taxing to think about how much is too much and how much is not enough. I can see how teachers are constantly revising their scope and sequence based on the success or failure of each lesson. I’m trying to be very realistic in my planning, asking myself “How much time is needed to really learn this?” The fact is, moving on without first mastering the present content will only hurt the students.
Currently the focus is to get all students to pass foreign language courses, but honestly there are a few who overachieve, a middle group that hangs in there and a final group who fails. In the end, many students walk out disliking the language. My experience shows me that dissatisfaction with a language, to an extent, affects one’s attitude towards those that speak that language. This is too overlooked and must be considered. The need for understanding is so great that we cannot afford to turn students off of a language and the people that speak it. Anyways, teaching foreign language according to a spiral curriculum design will make it so that all students have the chance to learn the target language easier. The success that it can provide will improve student perceptions and give more motivation to continue learning (Stolle, 2008, not yet published).
3. Last piece, I promise. The standards, being useful at times and a bother at others, did help bring to fruition an idea that I previously had. I figured it that I could teach numbers by using math. The students will already be familiar with the procedures, so all they have to do is learn how to express what they already know and understand (which is the essence of learning a foreign language). This technique of using another subject to teach my own is one of the standards, so my idea is justified. I can collaborate with math teachers within the school to see what the students may need more work on so that they get some extras practice in my class. Ohhhhh, integration. Of course, I will need to use simpler math to make sure that each student can do the problems I offer. Plus I need to teach them vocabulary which will be useful in areas other than math. I don’t imagine ‘parabola’ extends much beyond math, but “add”, “subtract”, “multiply”, divide” and “equals” are used in various other aspects of the language. Pretty cool, huh? (One of my teachers at BYU-Idaho called collaboration with other teachers “job security”. His reasoning: if you can show that you are meeting your own standards and those of others, and if others teachers know it, you’ll always have a spot somewhere at that school. Teachers will speak up for you if your program comes under fire for any reason.)
So now it’s once again time to say goodbye (since I promised). As always, I’ll give a recap of my thoughts, ideas and experiences with curriculum. So, lesson of the day for the foreign language curriculum:
Slow down. Take a deep breath. Let the creative juices start flowing. Be awesome.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Curriculum Creation, Evaluation and Salary Celebration
I’m hoping to touch on two different topics today. A little on instruction and curriculum design here, and a little on curriculum evaluation there. Okay, then I’ll add a third commentary on something that is cooler than all of the above. While I’m here, not into the meat of the discussion yet, I’ve got to say something that has been on my mind in the field of educational research and publishing. I was always taught growing up that when writing a paper one should not write an introduction that says something along the lines of “In this paper I will…” Now that I’ve read hundreds of published papers, I am shocked to see how common it is in the field of education to write that way. I’m not saying it’s wrong, but it’s completely against what I grew up learning. It’s interesting to see how something that has been so ingrained in my mind over the years is so hard to change. Anyways, back to curriculum and instruction.
When I was student teaching I had my first exposure to spiral teaching. I was lucky enough to be paired with a teacher that had many of the same beliefs concerning language learning as I have. The teacher, being the only Spanish/Foreign Language teacher in the school, had full control over the language curriculum. The first time I met with him, 2 months before actually working with him, he explained how he ran his classes. I was excited that someone was willing to slow the pace of information down and teach more for understanding. Not only that, but he had designed the whole first year in such a way as to teach concepts and then revisit them a few units later, building on the information that they had previously constructed. I’ll admit there were a few things that even had me, a proponent of his teaching style, wondering how he could deviate markedly from the classic language learning curriculum. As I taught according to his plan, however, I was able to see how his plan benefitted learning. For instance, when beginning to conjugate verbs, he did not swamp his students with singular and plural conjugations. He taught a normal semesters worth of work using just the singular form, then went back and added plural conjugations. The students, already being familiar with conjugations by this time, were able to easily adapt two new rules and a few more vocabulary words were added to the ones previously used. While it is true that in a traditional foreign language classrooms there are always a handful of students who thrive and are able to continue learning year after year, there are also a majority who are lost and hanging in by the skin of their teeth (which is a really weird phrase). In his class, the majority of the students had a grasp on the language and they were confident moving on to Spanish 2. Their ability to communicate in Spanish was also superior to other classrooms I had observed up to that point, which ironically is a highly overlooked objective in languages courses. So what am I trying to say with all of that? Spiral teaching/curriculum in foreign language courses, in my experience, is better for overall learning and transfer.
Alright, now a bit on evaluation. As I sat thinking about what I had just read about curriculum design and evaluation I thought about what it would be like to be a new curriculum supervisor in a struggling district. That’s got to be a tough job to walk into a new place and start telling people what is wrong with their program. I began to wonder how well liked and appreciated curriculum specialists are. So I thought about all of the possibilities of things that might need fixing: course alignment, alignment to standards, professional development, curriculum budget, extracurricular activities, testing/assessment, etc. What is the priority? Are there some issues that, when fixed, will naturally fix others? I guess my biggest question is, “Where does one start?” Do you work on things one at a time or is it everything at once? What sort of support system is there for a curriculum specialist? I know this isn’t really a commentary directly on evaluation, but these questions come with evaluation. Another question that just came to my mind is concerning the ability to make changes. How much red tape and politics are there? Are changes made relatively quickly, or do changes/enhancements take time like a bill in Congress? These are some things I would love to hear a little more about because they can be answered by the experience of others and not so much by published theories.
The last little bit is a happy note. After reading about curriculum for awhile yesterday, I decided to cruise the World Wide Web and look for open Curriculum positions around the good ole’ U.S. of A. Although not everyone posted it, I was happy to see the salary of Curriculum Directors. Wow! I had no idea that they were paid so much. I honestly assumed it was a position that got paid similar to what a teacher gets paid, but oh how wrong I was. Again being honest, if I had to go and fix a district’s curriculum problems and I was only paid what a starting teacher was paid, I’d turn and run away. A common thread that I noticed was that Curriculum Directors are usually required to have 3-5 years teaching experience and/or/preferable to have curriculum writing experience. Where does one get curriculum writing experience? Do the powers that be accept curriculum writing for one’s own classroom, or are they all looking for a more formal position somewhere? Anyways, these are questions I’d love to have answered so that I know how to plan my next few years after graduation.
We’ve spent a long time together just now, and I’m a bit winded from all of this typing. So, as Truman said as he walked off the “reality” set: Good morning, and in case I don't see ya, good afternoon, good evening, and good night!
When I was student teaching I had my first exposure to spiral teaching. I was lucky enough to be paired with a teacher that had many of the same beliefs concerning language learning as I have. The teacher, being the only Spanish/Foreign Language teacher in the school, had full control over the language curriculum. The first time I met with him, 2 months before actually working with him, he explained how he ran his classes. I was excited that someone was willing to slow the pace of information down and teach more for understanding. Not only that, but he had designed the whole first year in such a way as to teach concepts and then revisit them a few units later, building on the information that they had previously constructed. I’ll admit there were a few things that even had me, a proponent of his teaching style, wondering how he could deviate markedly from the classic language learning curriculum. As I taught according to his plan, however, I was able to see how his plan benefitted learning. For instance, when beginning to conjugate verbs, he did not swamp his students with singular and plural conjugations. He taught a normal semesters worth of work using just the singular form, then went back and added plural conjugations. The students, already being familiar with conjugations by this time, were able to easily adapt two new rules and a few more vocabulary words were added to the ones previously used. While it is true that in a traditional foreign language classrooms there are always a handful of students who thrive and are able to continue learning year after year, there are also a majority who are lost and hanging in by the skin of their teeth (which is a really weird phrase). In his class, the majority of the students had a grasp on the language and they were confident moving on to Spanish 2. Their ability to communicate in Spanish was also superior to other classrooms I had observed up to that point, which ironically is a highly overlooked objective in languages courses. So what am I trying to say with all of that? Spiral teaching/curriculum in foreign language courses, in my experience, is better for overall learning and transfer.
Alright, now a bit on evaluation. As I sat thinking about what I had just read about curriculum design and evaluation I thought about what it would be like to be a new curriculum supervisor in a struggling district. That’s got to be a tough job to walk into a new place and start telling people what is wrong with their program. I began to wonder how well liked and appreciated curriculum specialists are. So I thought about all of the possibilities of things that might need fixing: course alignment, alignment to standards, professional development, curriculum budget, extracurricular activities, testing/assessment, etc. What is the priority? Are there some issues that, when fixed, will naturally fix others? I guess my biggest question is, “Where does one start?” Do you work on things one at a time or is it everything at once? What sort of support system is there for a curriculum specialist? I know this isn’t really a commentary directly on evaluation, but these questions come with evaluation. Another question that just came to my mind is concerning the ability to make changes. How much red tape and politics are there? Are changes made relatively quickly, or do changes/enhancements take time like a bill in Congress? These are some things I would love to hear a little more about because they can be answered by the experience of others and not so much by published theories.
The last little bit is a happy note. After reading about curriculum for awhile yesterday, I decided to cruise the World Wide Web and look for open Curriculum positions around the good ole’ U.S. of A. Although not everyone posted it, I was happy to see the salary of Curriculum Directors. Wow! I had no idea that they were paid so much. I honestly assumed it was a position that got paid similar to what a teacher gets paid, but oh how wrong I was. Again being honest, if I had to go and fix a district’s curriculum problems and I was only paid what a starting teacher was paid, I’d turn and run away. A common thread that I noticed was that Curriculum Directors are usually required to have 3-5 years teaching experience and/or/preferable to have curriculum writing experience. Where does one get curriculum writing experience? Do the powers that be accept curriculum writing for one’s own classroom, or are they all looking for a more formal position somewhere? Anyways, these are questions I’d love to have answered so that I know how to plan my next few years after graduation.
We’ve spent a long time together just now, and I’m a bit winded from all of this typing. So, as Truman said as he walked off the “reality” set: Good morning, and in case I don't see ya, good afternoon, good evening, and good night!
Friday, March 14, 2008
Curriculum Mapping
Ready for this one? Take a deep breath and hold on. Okay, it won't be that bad. Curriculum mapping is a good idea. Its a great idea. It forces scatter-brained people like me, who are geniouses I might add, to make sense to other people. Its hard for me to map out my thought and plans because i don't always see things in a well-planned and sorted way. I usually have a million ideas zooming through my head at once that are all related but not in any specific order. I guess I have just gotten used to the craziness over the years and learned how to use it all to my advantage. By what about for other people you ask? Thats where concept/curriculum mapping comes in. I'm all for it, even though it scares me for the above mentioned reasons. Its hard for me to organize it all the way that most humanoids do.
There are two key points in my readings about curriculum mapping that I think are essential to the success fo the program. First, it cannot be just another program. Anytime we see something that needs fixing in education we hear, "Oh, lets create a program!" Well if the current program at work has potential, let's just fix it and be on our merry way. Its a lot less work and a lot less complicated to do it that way. The key, however is to make sure everyone is onboard. I think that it is important get input and reactions from each teacher who will be affected by an implementation of curriculum mapping because if even one hinge is facing the wrong way, the door won't open. Teachers should have curriculum mapping presented to them in such a way that they not only know what it is, but they understand its purpose and function (see Bloom's taxonomy). It will be harder to get teachers to buy into something that they don't have ownership of. Implementation without owership could possibly cause discord among faculty and has the potential to frighten away teachers from the school or the profession. That may be part of the reason that new teachers do not last long in the profession (in conjunction with a few other factors that will not be discussed right now).
The second consideration for the adoption of curriculum mapping is the fact that it takes time to work. In a time when Taco Bell has a timer up so that drive-thru customers can see how fast they are being served, we might loose sight of the fact that things that are worth it may take time to achieve (with the exception of the Grilled Stuffed Burrito which is yours in under 80 seconds). Honestly, going back to the "we need a program" thought process, sometimes efficiency and productivity take time to develop. Once the car starts rolling, however, the effort and wait are worth it.
Recap of the main points:
1) Make sure that everyone buys into curriculum mapping before implementing it. Buying on credit won't work, the account owner won't pay up when its time because he/she didn't agree to the terms.
2) Just like novacaine, just give a program time and it always works - maybe differently than planned, that that may be a good thing. Even the Leaning Tower of Pisa was a success despite the fact that its, well, leaning.
3) Grilled Stuffed Burritos are awesome.
There are two key points in my readings about curriculum mapping that I think are essential to the success fo the program. First, it cannot be just another program. Anytime we see something that needs fixing in education we hear, "Oh, lets create a program!" Well if the current program at work has potential, let's just fix it and be on our merry way. Its a lot less work and a lot less complicated to do it that way. The key, however is to make sure everyone is onboard. I think that it is important get input and reactions from each teacher who will be affected by an implementation of curriculum mapping because if even one hinge is facing the wrong way, the door won't open. Teachers should have curriculum mapping presented to them in such a way that they not only know what it is, but they understand its purpose and function (see Bloom's taxonomy). It will be harder to get teachers to buy into something that they don't have ownership of. Implementation without owership could possibly cause discord among faculty and has the potential to frighten away teachers from the school or the profession. That may be part of the reason that new teachers do not last long in the profession (in conjunction with a few other factors that will not be discussed right now).
The second consideration for the adoption of curriculum mapping is the fact that it takes time to work. In a time when Taco Bell has a timer up so that drive-thru customers can see how fast they are being served, we might loose sight of the fact that things that are worth it may take time to achieve (with the exception of the Grilled Stuffed Burrito which is yours in under 80 seconds). Honestly, going back to the "we need a program" thought process, sometimes efficiency and productivity take time to develop. Once the car starts rolling, however, the effort and wait are worth it.
Recap of the main points:
1) Make sure that everyone buys into curriculum mapping before implementing it. Buying on credit won't work, the account owner won't pay up when its time because he/she didn't agree to the terms.
2) Just like novacaine, just give a program time and it always works - maybe differently than planned, that that may be a good thing. Even the Leaning Tower of Pisa was a success despite the fact that its, well, leaning.
3) Grilled Stuffed Burritos are awesome.
Technology
I will always remember growing up in an age when computers began to enter every aspect of life. My first job was a position as a cashier in the concession stands at the local baseball and soccer parks. Back then cashiers actually dealt with cash and only cash. I remember doing all of the math in my head becasue we didn't even have cash registers. I remember when we got cash registers for the first time and how confusing it was to figure them out. I could do the math in my head much faster than I could find the right buttons to push. Now everyone has a register (and as Dr. Yates pointed out, we no longer call them "cash" registers).
I remember my friends at school getting into computers in middle school and always talking about the newest games, etc. I had no idea what megahertz or bytes were, but I heard about them all of the time. In my house we had an Apple IIe with a nice back and green screen. This of course didn't appeal to me, so computers were never my thing.
Getting into school, I remember being taught to type in 4th grade but typewriters were still in use then. it wasn't until 8th grade that I had my first computer course and it was pretty cool. Well, class was boring. We did a lot of data entry and essay writing. Finishing early and playing The Oregon trail made the class worth it. In high school, computers were just there. othing seemed new or special. Microsoft Word was about the only thing we used. That and a little thing called the Internet. (By the way, I remember my first encounter with the Internet. My dad showed it to me at his work one day and told me that you could find anything on it. I asked him to look up the NBA and sure enough they had a website. It took forever to download the site, but it had everything. You could even watch videos on it. I asked my dad to play a video and he tried, but 20 minutes of downloading didn't even have half of the video loaded. Now I can go to Youtube and watch videos that start playing with the click of the mouse... no more double clicking either...why did we ever double-click in the first place?)
College is the first time I really used a computer for all of its capabilities. Internet, word processing, spreadsheets, and e-mail. Okay, so computers could do a lot more, but I didn't need it for any more than just that. By the end of my undergraduate work I was always on the computer, writing a paper here and creating a presentation there.
Now to the meat of the matter. Part of the reason that I never got into computer technology is it didn't seem to have much relevence to me. Then when it did, I used it sparingly because I thought it was boring (yes, PowerPoints are awesome but can kill a class). I was fortune enough to have had technology class at BYU-Idaho with a professor who understood the need to match technology to the assignment at hand. He taught us all sorts of neat tricks of the trade, but would always question our judgement of using certain tools. "Don't use technology just to use it. Use it to meet the needs of the class or the assignment. Sometimes the only technology you need is a #2 pencil and a spiral notebook." I will for ever and always appreciate how he taught us to use technology to enhance learning instead of enhancing the "cool" factor. (Having never seen a Smartboard until 3 semesters before I graduated from college, I thought it was just technology for technology's sake. Now that I know what they can do I think they are great tools. Plus, I hate chalk. Give me a whiteboard any day ... or a Smartboard if you have an extra.)
Much like activities planned for the classroom, I believe that technology must meet the needs of the class. The class should not meet the needs of technology or an assignment. Smartboards, Smartpens, PowerPoint and Internet = awesome. Sometime, however, a book and a pen are even awesomer. Yes , thats right. Awesomer. What people used to say before spell check warped our minds...
I remember my friends at school getting into computers in middle school and always talking about the newest games, etc. I had no idea what megahertz or bytes were, but I heard about them all of the time. In my house we had an Apple IIe with a nice back and green screen. This of course didn't appeal to me, so computers were never my thing.
Getting into school, I remember being taught to type in 4th grade but typewriters were still in use then. it wasn't until 8th grade that I had my first computer course and it was pretty cool. Well, class was boring. We did a lot of data entry and essay writing. Finishing early and playing The Oregon trail made the class worth it. In high school, computers were just there. othing seemed new or special. Microsoft Word was about the only thing we used. That and a little thing called the Internet. (By the way, I remember my first encounter with the Internet. My dad showed it to me at his work one day and told me that you could find anything on it. I asked him to look up the NBA and sure enough they had a website. It took forever to download the site, but it had everything. You could even watch videos on it. I asked my dad to play a video and he tried, but 20 minutes of downloading didn't even have half of the video loaded. Now I can go to Youtube and watch videos that start playing with the click of the mouse... no more double clicking either...why did we ever double-click in the first place?)
College is the first time I really used a computer for all of its capabilities. Internet, word processing, spreadsheets, and e-mail. Okay, so computers could do a lot more, but I didn't need it for any more than just that. By the end of my undergraduate work I was always on the computer, writing a paper here and creating a presentation there.
Now to the meat of the matter. Part of the reason that I never got into computer technology is it didn't seem to have much relevence to me. Then when it did, I used it sparingly because I thought it was boring (yes, PowerPoints are awesome but can kill a class). I was fortune enough to have had technology class at BYU-Idaho with a professor who understood the need to match technology to the assignment at hand. He taught us all sorts of neat tricks of the trade, but would always question our judgement of using certain tools. "Don't use technology just to use it. Use it to meet the needs of the class or the assignment. Sometimes the only technology you need is a #2 pencil and a spiral notebook." I will for ever and always appreciate how he taught us to use technology to enhance learning instead of enhancing the "cool" factor. (Having never seen a Smartboard until 3 semesters before I graduated from college, I thought it was just technology for technology's sake. Now that I know what they can do I think they are great tools. Plus, I hate chalk. Give me a whiteboard any day ... or a Smartboard if you have an extra.)
Much like activities planned for the classroom, I believe that technology must meet the needs of the class. The class should not meet the needs of technology or an assignment. Smartboards, Smartpens, PowerPoint and Internet = awesome. Sometime, however, a book and a pen are even awesomer. Yes , thats right. Awesomer. What people used to say before spell check warped our minds...
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Flexibility
Some time ago a friend of mine wanted to start a business. Not having majored in Business I did not know much of the terminology he was using. He broke certain things down for me which was beneficial to our conversation. At one point he mentioned how we would need to declare what sort of business we were: LLC, Corporation, etc. He gave me a break down of how each type of business was organized and I was reluctant to accept any of the plans. I told him how I thought the business should look but I was quickly informed that companies can’t look like what I had proposed. We would have to fit the previously created mold. I had issues with this but soon realized that my reasoning was not going to change anything. All I could think during that time was that I love educational curriculum and instructional planning because there isn’t one set and defined mode.
Flexibility in how things look and are presented is a wonderful thing, even though there can be some drawbacks. The text chapter mentioned how interchangeable certain terms are (e.g. course of study, syllabi, scope and sequence, etc). Even when things are understood there may be differences (additions or omissions to the outline of the program) which need further explanation, but it isn’t difficult to catch on to. Once the terms are defined by the user, however, clarity is restored. Imagination and creativity are given the leading role in deciding the structure of educational design.
Flexibility in how things look and are presented is a wonderful thing, even though there can be some drawbacks. The text chapter mentioned how interchangeable certain terms are (e.g. course of study, syllabi, scope and sequence, etc). Even when things are understood there may be differences (additions or omissions to the outline of the program) which need further explanation, but it isn’t difficult to catch on to. Once the terms are defined by the user, however, clarity is restored. Imagination and creativity are given the leading role in deciding the structure of educational design.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Assessment - the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
As I read the article and chapter on assessment types and purpose, I reflected back on the assessments I used as a Student Teacher. I tried to be careful and make sure that my assessments matched my instructional techniques. If we focused on oral speech, I administered an oral test. If the focus was writing, I offered a written test. I learned a lot from my cooperating teacher about making sure I was assessing how well students were meeting the course objectives, test design having a lot to do with it all. Our tests were always open-ended. I felt they were too open ended, so much to the dismay of the co-op, I would work in a tiny bit more structure. I felt that as an outsider I could contribute well to his instruction and assessment techniques. After all, he had been using the same method for 20 years. There were bound to be a few bad habits that he had become numb to. Regardless, I felt that our assessment strategy was successful. He chose to focus more on writing, so the majority of our tests involved lengthy writing assignments which were based on student knowledge and creativity. I would have preferred more oral assessments, although we were able to build an atmosphere in which students daily worked with each other offering formative assessments of each other. A solid learning community was built around students assessing each other and offering constructive feedback. Formative assessment interests me the most because I believe we are always learning. I feel that the mindset that accompanies summative assessment is that we are being graded as if all chances for learning that particular set of material is done once the test arrives. Formative assessment, however, offers the opportunity to solidify confidence in what one is learning or redirect learning as needed.
This next blip is related to assessment, but not totally. I have seen in plenty of mission statements and learning goals the word “ensure” or the phrase “not an option”. They are often used referring to student achievement. I have a problem with “ensuring” success and the thought that failure is “not an option”. These phrases either take away accountability from the learner or stupidly assume that all students will do 100% of their part to master every subject. I agree that our goal should be success fir all, but lets not take away a child’s agency. We seem to have done that and instead of penalizing the student we fire the teacher and send the student to the next grade.
Assessments, as I mentioned earlier, must match what students have learned to the situations in which the information may be used. I love the example of the DMV giving strictly written assessments in order to get a driver’s license. It seems foolish, but I remember testing for my license. I drove around in a lot with no cars, only orange cones, and had to pass a computerized test about road rules. The more I think about it (especially when I reflect on some of my friends and their driving habits) it seems that the instruction and assessment weren’t properly aligned. I feel the same about much of my high school experience. I was an A student, but that only means I am an A test-taker/crammer. If I had been placed in positions to use what I “knew” then I would not have skated through school with my eyes closed.
One last thought I had on assessments refers specifically to me as a Spanish teacher. I was thinking about the criteria for oral language assessments when I read a sentence about efficiency and effectiveness. It occurred to me that when assessing language ability there are two key concepts to watch for: Could the person communicate (effectiveness) and how well could they communicate (efficiency)? Usually efficiency is graded in the form of correct grammar, but points are not usually given for overall ability to communicate, which is a big deal.
Much more can and will be said for assessments and testing.
Last Weeks Blog Entry - Oops!
Curriculum development and reform requires an understanding of current unmet needs in the school. The task of designing curriculum becomes more complicated as the needs of various educational stakeholders are assessed (a group consisting of students, society and subject matter). The needs of each stakeholder vary and are multifaceted, and each stakeholder wants priority over another. I question whether the problems in education might stem from one of the following two possibilities: 1) we are trying to accommodate too many “needs” of too many stakeholders, or 2) we are not addressing enough of the “needs” of each stakeholder. (I put quotes around needs because I believe that we live in a day and age when needs are often confused with wants. The types of needs may be real – such as physical, sociopsychological, educational- but the degree to which they are to be met may be unrealistic). The debate of balance in the curriculum is an interest debate: Do societies needs have priority of individual needs? Will individual needs naturally address societal needs? How are subject matter needs discovered and determined? Is it possible to address each type of need equally?
After determining the needs to be met comes the responsibility of determining how to meet and address those needs. The organization and implementation of the curriculum is a whole new battle. (By the way, when we speak we often say “a whole nother”. I mentioned that to someone a few weeks ago, how even the smartest and best educated people say that even though it is wrong. Sure enough, I was told that I was wrong and that “nother is a real word. After convincing them that it is not a real word, I was told that I must misunderstand people because nobody would say “a whole nother”. Within a few minutes the person arguing against me used the phrase naturally and I won the debate. Sorry, that had nothing to do with what I was writing about… but it’s pretty interesting!) Anyways, the issue of coverage creeps up over and over when discussing curriculum. When should content be taught in general terms and when must we dive deep? Can we really separate it out and say that elementary schools are to be taught a mile wide and an inch deep and middle and high schools will deepen our knowledge? Is it possible to have both breadth and deepness in the same course during the same year? In arguments of coverage, I tend to side with the theory of going deep. The question I have had as of late is “What do we consider “deep learning”?” “How deep is too deep?” We can receive the same results from spreading ourselves too wide as we can from diving too deep if we are not careful and mindful of the overall learning experience.
I look forward to the day when I can work with others to address the complications of forming the basis of a curriculum and organizing it. I do wonder, however, how much of the complications could be avoided by a willingness to clarify our needs, distinguish them from wants, and discard that which is not necessary for the overall purposes of student achievement.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Culture
This entry shall hitherto be known as Scene II. Scene I was a wonderful one-way discussion on standards ... and alignment and accountabiltity and economic issues concerning formal education and training. This entry will be so much simpler. All I have to do is talk about culture. That can't possibly be driven in multiple directions, right? On we go-
First I would like to bring up the issue of teacher preparation, as mentioned in Villegas's piece. The reading said that "students can complete their teacher education programs without receiving any preparation whatsoever in issues of diversity". How true, how true. In my undergraduate work I took one course that addresses diversity. "Exceptional Students", the name of the course, discussed the needs of students from all walkes of life. It was in this class the we learned about handicapped, gifted and racially diverse students (with priority given in that order). Let's face it, I did my student teaching in Southeastern Idaho. My first interview for a teaching position was in downtown Boston. What was the difference between the schools? Everything. You might not be able to find more polar opposites than the school I Student Taught in and the school I interviewed at. I can honestly say that my teacher preparation skipped over a few essential elements for jobs in Boston, New York, Miami or L.A. Okay, more than a few. Having grown up in Houston, I sought diversity. I chose to go to Boston and look for schools. What happens to the students who has diversity thrust upon him or her? Is it possible to be culturally responsive while in a state of culture shock?
Duiring my brief 25 years of life I have lived in Texas, Idaho, Mexico and Tennessee. I have travelled to many more places and find joy in what diversity has to offer in each place. I have read captivating historical and informational books that preach the need for cultural awareness. I enjoy it enough that I am considering pursuing Multicultural Ed in my future doctoral studies. Needless to say, I feel stongly that Multcult Ed should play a bigger part in teacher preparation than what I received.
I agree with Villegas in that diverse cultural views should not be limited to seminars or Black History month. Diverse views should be an integral part of each class as we seek to learn from texts and from each other. Public education is supposed to serve the public good, meeting the needs of the rich and the poor alike. I can see how some parents might fear that their child is not being let ahead because of the focus of not letting other fall behind. If someone realy wants a more rigorous content-area curriculum, I would suggest private schools. They will assuredly miss out on certain educational opportunities which almost only happen in diverse settings (not private schools), but they will also gain ground in some areas. For those who stay in public schools, we must remember that the goal is to help each student to succeed. Success may come in different forms, different languages and different ideas, but it must be the driver.
When I consider the effort that teachers must put in to becoming culturally responsive, it seems amazing that there is still time to teach, grade papers, etc. Yet teachers are still not given their due respect. Do others outside the field of education understand what is required to be a successful teacher? Perhaps the lack of respect comes from lack of understanding the job and duty of a professional teacher.
My thoughts on Multicultural Education and responsiveness to cultural differences could fill a book. I don't want ot say much more than this: Teachers must be culturally responsive. Teachers will not be without sufficient training. On-the-job training is more likely to run teachers from the profession than cement their conviction to the cause. When the time for action is here, the time for preparation is gone.
First I would like to bring up the issue of teacher preparation, as mentioned in Villegas's piece. The reading said that "students can complete their teacher education programs without receiving any preparation whatsoever in issues of diversity". How true, how true. In my undergraduate work I took one course that addresses diversity. "Exceptional Students", the name of the course, discussed the needs of students from all walkes of life. It was in this class the we learned about handicapped, gifted and racially diverse students (with priority given in that order). Let's face it, I did my student teaching in Southeastern Idaho. My first interview for a teaching position was in downtown Boston. What was the difference between the schools? Everything. You might not be able to find more polar opposites than the school I Student Taught in and the school I interviewed at. I can honestly say that my teacher preparation skipped over a few essential elements for jobs in Boston, New York, Miami or L.A. Okay, more than a few. Having grown up in Houston, I sought diversity. I chose to go to Boston and look for schools. What happens to the students who has diversity thrust upon him or her? Is it possible to be culturally responsive while in a state of culture shock?
Duiring my brief 25 years of life I have lived in Texas, Idaho, Mexico and Tennessee. I have travelled to many more places and find joy in what diversity has to offer in each place. I have read captivating historical and informational books that preach the need for cultural awareness. I enjoy it enough that I am considering pursuing Multicultural Ed in my future doctoral studies. Needless to say, I feel stongly that Multcult Ed should play a bigger part in teacher preparation than what I received.
I agree with Villegas in that diverse cultural views should not be limited to seminars or Black History month. Diverse views should be an integral part of each class as we seek to learn from texts and from each other. Public education is supposed to serve the public good, meeting the needs of the rich and the poor alike. I can see how some parents might fear that their child is not being let ahead because of the focus of not letting other fall behind. If someone realy wants a more rigorous content-area curriculum, I would suggest private schools. They will assuredly miss out on certain educational opportunities which almost only happen in diverse settings (not private schools), but they will also gain ground in some areas. For those who stay in public schools, we must remember that the goal is to help each student to succeed. Success may come in different forms, different languages and different ideas, but it must be the driver.
When I consider the effort that teachers must put in to becoming culturally responsive, it seems amazing that there is still time to teach, grade papers, etc. Yet teachers are still not given their due respect. Do others outside the field of education understand what is required to be a successful teacher? Perhaps the lack of respect comes from lack of understanding the job and duty of a professional teacher.
My thoughts on Multicultural Education and responsiveness to cultural differences could fill a book. I don't want ot say much more than this: Teachers must be culturally responsive. Teachers will not be without sufficient training. On-the-job training is more likely to run teachers from the profession than cement their conviction to the cause. When the time for action is here, the time for preparation is gone.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Standards
I loved reading Carnavale because he touched on topics that I have previously (beginning of undergrad) misjudged. I was one of those know-it-all, speak-my-mind kids about standards and NCLB when I really didn't know much about either. Luckily, I had a fewe teachers who were nice enough to respect my opinions and share their insights. They were not always in favor of all standards or NCLS, but they could understand the reasoning behind them. it is from them that I try and stay open-minded. I don't agree 100% with the direction of NCLB, but who agrees 100% with any program? There are pros and cons, but more importantly we are doing something. Through the years I am sure that objectives will be reshaped, standards adjusted, and that holes will be patched. We all use Microsoft don't we? Its never perfect off the shelf, but we trust that Microsoft will work out the bugs in due time.
Enough of that. The initial comparison of standard-based reform to a 3 Act play is interesting, but there was a flaw. They mention that Act I is finished and we are now focusing on Act II (Alignment). The also mention the curtain is partially risen for Act III (Accountability). Can two Acts occur at once outside of a Monty Python-type production? How can anyone be held accountable while there is confusion among issues of alignment? When all is said and done, how much accountability will be on teachers and administrators? How much will be on the student? My personal belief is that the most should be on the student. Perhaps the biggest reason that I want to end up teaching in a university is so that I do not feel forced to walk students through my courses. when I was student teaching in SE Idaho I witnessed situations in which students had no right passing classes, but teachers passed them anyways. For example, can a student really miss half of the semester (literally half) and still get a B? The law in Idaho was that during Spud Harvest students could work the fields and miss school. They could not be penalized for the days they missed and were supposed to make up all their work. Some students did just that. Others not so much. The fear of accountability (and job security) on the heads of the teachers pushed them to just pass the kids that didn't do their work. It made me sick. Again I ask, who is truly responsible for educational success?
Questions
The article says those not equipped with necessary knowledge and skills to keep good jobs are denied social inclusion and tend to dropout of the mainstreram culture. What is a "good job" and what is meant here by "mainstream culture"? I could come up with various explanation of each, but I am more interested in what Carnavale thinks in this situation.
The article talks about how in times of recession people with higher educational attainment will bump out those with a lower level of formal education. Is this only in certain markets? It would seem to me that in a recession businesses might like to hire cheaper. I could see a school highering a novice as opposed to a more seasoned and educated professional in an attempt to save money. I guess its a matter of being willing to accept what you can get in those times.
Okay, no more questions ... for now. "The only decision more expensieve than going to college is not going to college". Very true. My buddy and I started school at the same time in 2000. We each left the country for 2 years, but came back and resumed out education. I am a year away from my M.Ed and he still has one semester left for his B.S. His thought was that he would get jobs during his time in school that didn't require a degree. He was, and still is convinced that he doesn't need a degree to succeed in the business world. He is still working for peanuts and I will shortly become a full-time teacher ... making peanuts. I will, however, be more marketable with the skills I have acquired in school and I'll make more peanuts than he will. I guess thats a good thing.
It was very interesting and enlightening to read about "The Changing Structure of Employment and thr Role of Education". If we were to look back just a few short decades ago, my degree in Spanish would be nice but not necessarily sought after by many. Globalization has given me the opportunity to focus on my interest and be in a position where my skills are in demand around the country. I don't forsee a time in the future when foreign language will not be needed, so I feel stable in my position. The concept of changing economies and schools opened my eyes, however, to the struggles that many have with current changes and trends. Steel workers who were trained specially for their jobs now have a hard time finding meaningful employment elsewhere since their factories are shutting down. In the future, what currently thriving occupations will be outsourced or outdated? How are circumstances like that prevented? Education.
The remaining topics in Carnavale's piece are of importance, but I don't care much to discuss them. Discussions of financial status are pretty much boring. If I felt strongly about my financial status and how to get in the top tiers of income I wouldn't be in Education. I guess I should tie this back into standards, since originally that's what the article was about. We become educated in order to meet the demands of an ever-changing, dynamic economy. We create standards to make sure we are properly educated for the economy. We are currently in a stage in which we test our standard-making abilities and realign areas that are lacking direction and stability. I believe alignment is important, but I am not sure how much I feel alignment should focus on specifics. Is is crucial that every kid in America can define riboflavin, or is it crucual that every kid is exposed to certain aspects of biology? Is anyone checking to make sure out alignment goals are in alignment with our educational goals?
We'll call this entry Scene I.
Enough of that. The initial comparison of standard-based reform to a 3 Act play is interesting, but there was a flaw. They mention that Act I is finished and we are now focusing on Act II (Alignment). The also mention the curtain is partially risen for Act III (Accountability). Can two Acts occur at once outside of a Monty Python-type production? How can anyone be held accountable while there is confusion among issues of alignment? When all is said and done, how much accountability will be on teachers and administrators? How much will be on the student? My personal belief is that the most should be on the student. Perhaps the biggest reason that I want to end up teaching in a university is so that I do not feel forced to walk students through my courses. when I was student teaching in SE Idaho I witnessed situations in which students had no right passing classes, but teachers passed them anyways. For example, can a student really miss half of the semester (literally half) and still get a B? The law in Idaho was that during Spud Harvest students could work the fields and miss school. They could not be penalized for the days they missed and were supposed to make up all their work. Some students did just that. Others not so much. The fear of accountability (and job security) on the heads of the teachers pushed them to just pass the kids that didn't do their work. It made me sick. Again I ask, who is truly responsible for educational success?
Questions
The article says those not equipped with necessary knowledge and skills to keep good jobs are denied social inclusion and tend to dropout of the mainstreram culture. What is a "good job" and what is meant here by "mainstream culture"? I could come up with various explanation of each, but I am more interested in what Carnavale thinks in this situation.
The article talks about how in times of recession people with higher educational attainment will bump out those with a lower level of formal education. Is this only in certain markets? It would seem to me that in a recession businesses might like to hire cheaper. I could see a school highering a novice as opposed to a more seasoned and educated professional in an attempt to save money. I guess its a matter of being willing to accept what you can get in those times.
Okay, no more questions ... for now. "The only decision more expensieve than going to college is not going to college". Very true. My buddy and I started school at the same time in 2000. We each left the country for 2 years, but came back and resumed out education. I am a year away from my M.Ed and he still has one semester left for his B.S. His thought was that he would get jobs during his time in school that didn't require a degree. He was, and still is convinced that he doesn't need a degree to succeed in the business world. He is still working for peanuts and I will shortly become a full-time teacher ... making peanuts. I will, however, be more marketable with the skills I have acquired in school and I'll make more peanuts than he will. I guess thats a good thing.
It was very interesting and enlightening to read about "The Changing Structure of Employment and thr Role of Education". If we were to look back just a few short decades ago, my degree in Spanish would be nice but not necessarily sought after by many. Globalization has given me the opportunity to focus on my interest and be in a position where my skills are in demand around the country. I don't forsee a time in the future when foreign language will not be needed, so I feel stable in my position. The concept of changing economies and schools opened my eyes, however, to the struggles that many have with current changes and trends. Steel workers who were trained specially for their jobs now have a hard time finding meaningful employment elsewhere since their factories are shutting down. In the future, what currently thriving occupations will be outsourced or outdated? How are circumstances like that prevented? Education.
The remaining topics in Carnavale's piece are of importance, but I don't care much to discuss them. Discussions of financial status are pretty much boring. If I felt strongly about my financial status and how to get in the top tiers of income I wouldn't be in Education. I guess I should tie this back into standards, since originally that's what the article was about. We become educated in order to meet the demands of an ever-changing, dynamic economy. We create standards to make sure we are properly educated for the economy. We are currently in a stage in which we test our standard-making abilities and realign areas that are lacking direction and stability. I believe alignment is important, but I am not sure how much I feel alignment should focus on specifics. Is is crucial that every kid in America can define riboflavin, or is it crucual that every kid is exposed to certain aspects of biology? Is anyone checking to make sure out alignment goals are in alignment with our educational goals?
We'll call this entry Scene I.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Curriculum Goals and Objectives
As I sat in a meeting tonight I wondered why the conversation was so scattered. Comments from those in the meeting, although intelligent and well thought out, were often unrelated to one another. Intelligent as they were, I could not tell if some were even related to the topic at hand. I remembered what I had read in Developing the Curriculum: "there is undoubtedly a positive relationship between a teacher's clarity of instructional goals and the quality of his teaching". We were not necessarily being taught in this meeting, but a facilitator stood at the front of the room as we brought ideas together. The poor quality in communication amongst those contributing stemmed from the lack of initial direction. It was evident from the comments that people were unclear of our goal and objectives. In fact, it was unclear as to which we should be discussing: goals, objectives or both. It was very fitting that I was able to experience the confusion brought about by lack of direction during the same week that I read about the need for clear curricular orientation.
Oliva explained the difference between goals and objectives best when he wrote, "The curriculum objectives refine the curriculum goal". The more I think about the specifics required for writing curriculum objectives, the more I can see the need for validation. Although I may see the needs of the school curriculum one way, there are other involved parties who will certainly have beneficial insights (e.g. parents, teachers, administrators). I must say, I am often nervous around percentage goals because I fear that numbers neglect the individual circumstances that befall the individual student and the classroom. I can, however, see how they are an effective motivator.
On a completely different subject, I had to write my Philosophy of Education in an education course during my Freshman year of Undergrad work. I think I still have it saved on a disk somewhere, so I plan on pulling it out this week. It'll be interesting to see how much my perspectives have changed since then. I am already curious about what differences there may be. Why have I changed? Were the changes for the better? Have I become more cynical? More realistic? Then I must ask myself, "How much will I change over the next few years?" What will cause the change? Is change good, bad, or necessary to meet the needs of different situations? It'll definitely be interesting to read my previous Philosophy of Ed.
Oliva explained the difference between goals and objectives best when he wrote, "The curriculum objectives refine the curriculum goal". The more I think about the specifics required for writing curriculum objectives, the more I can see the need for validation. Although I may see the needs of the school curriculum one way, there are other involved parties who will certainly have beneficial insights (e.g. parents, teachers, administrators). I must say, I am often nervous around percentage goals because I fear that numbers neglect the individual circumstances that befall the individual student and the classroom. I can, however, see how they are an effective motivator.
On a completely different subject, I had to write my Philosophy of Education in an education course during my Freshman year of Undergrad work. I think I still have it saved on a disk somewhere, so I plan on pulling it out this week. It'll be interesting to see how much my perspectives have changed since then. I am already curious about what differences there may be. Why have I changed? Were the changes for the better? Have I become more cynical? More realistic? Then I must ask myself, "How much will I change over the next few years?" What will cause the change? Is change good, bad, or necessary to meet the needs of different situations? It'll definitely be interesting to read my previous Philosophy of Ed.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
School is life... kind of
In How People Learn, John Dewey is quoted as saying "Schools should be less about preparation for life and more like life itself." I was thrilled to hear this because I have been toying with ways to make the Foreign Language classroom more life-like. It all goes back to the idea of motivation. Let's face it, it is hard to be motivated to learn Spanish while attending an English-speaking school with all English-speaking classmates. The actual need to learn, which is among the greatest motivators, is non-existant. In turn, students are likely to put less time and effort into their studies, which negatively affects language acquisition. If real-life situations could be simulated, however, learners have more reason to study. By allowing students to struggle through language barrier situations, the need for understanding the language instead of memorizing it would shine through.
Perhaps most importantly, transfer would be at an all-time high. Why? Because the activities in the classroom would reflect the activities of real life. By taking into account the Spanish words and grammar that students are likely to use in their life, activities can be planned to help them experience and practice Spanish in those situations. Backwards planning, in short, would make the lessons more applicable and useful. Language textbooks are often filled with information that is interesting - kind of - but not useful. (For example, how many people really need to know that the Quetzal is the form of currency in Guatemala?) By putting students in situations where they can use their knowledge, the are more likely to retain their knowledge because they will understand the importance of it.
Connecting learning to life does something that is needed in education. It connects our individual past, present and future.
Perhaps most importantly, transfer would be at an all-time high. Why? Because the activities in the classroom would reflect the activities of real life. By taking into account the Spanish words and grammar that students are likely to use in their life, activities can be planned to help them experience and practice Spanish in those situations. Backwards planning, in short, would make the lessons more applicable and useful. Language textbooks are often filled with information that is interesting - kind of - but not useful. (For example, how many people really need to know that the Quetzal is the form of currency in Guatemala?) By putting students in situations where they can use their knowledge, the are more likely to retain their knowledge because they will understand the importance of it.
Connecting learning to life does something that is needed in education. It connects our individual past, present and future.
Curriculum
There was so much information in the readings that I think it will take me a few tries to hit on everything that stuck out to me. I'll start off by addressing some of what I found most helpful and interesting to me.
One of the elements of the reading that I feel is most important, and what I hope to focus on in my own classroom, is transfer. How do you get students to apply their knewly acquired knowledge from one content area to another, from one year to the next? How do we get that same information to transfer from the classroom to work, from work to home, and from home to the classroom? Whereas I used to believe (a long time go mind you) that there was some secret method to teaching that would work for every situation in every classroom to produce successful learning experience, the reading helped solidify my resolve that there is no one key method or technique. Instead, there is a time and place for all different methods.
The key to successful curriculum planning is keeping the end in mind. Instead of basing the knowledge to be presented on the activity, we should base the activity on the knowledge (backward planning). There were some guiding questions in the reading that I think will prove helpful in this effort: "What knowledge is worth knowing?" and "Why am I teaching what I am teaching?" The answers to these question will be different depending on each classroom's atmosphere. Curriculum, as stated in the readings, is not static but continually negotiated. This goes to show why teachers should be educated in curriculum development. It is the teacher, not the administrator or textbook publisher, who knows the needs and wants of the students. The teacher is responsible for organizing and prioritizing the content of the course. There is too much information in each content area to cover, therefore teachers must decide what is most important. This means that teachers may need to cut things out, add things, and carefully condsider how much time they will spend on certain topics.
What is important in any classroom is that teachers and students strive for understanding. Unfortunately, I spent most of my formative school years cramming for tests and then throwing the information out the window when the bell rang. Looking back, I can see what I would do different as a high school student. How do I get my students to catch the vision I have now? How do I promote retention of knowledge? What walls will keep me from doing what I think is right and best? When all is said and done, I hope that I am able to fully address the different purposes of education (academic, vocational, social, and personal) and I hope that my students leave my class with more knowledge that they brought into it. There are a lot of questions for know, and there are many answers, but I will wait to blog them until I am a little more confident that I understand them correctly.
One of the elements of the reading that I feel is most important, and what I hope to focus on in my own classroom, is transfer. How do you get students to apply their knewly acquired knowledge from one content area to another, from one year to the next? How do we get that same information to transfer from the classroom to work, from work to home, and from home to the classroom? Whereas I used to believe (a long time go mind you) that there was some secret method to teaching that would work for every situation in every classroom to produce successful learning experience, the reading helped solidify my resolve that there is no one key method or technique. Instead, there is a time and place for all different methods.
The key to successful curriculum planning is keeping the end in mind. Instead of basing the knowledge to be presented on the activity, we should base the activity on the knowledge (backward planning). There were some guiding questions in the reading that I think will prove helpful in this effort: "What knowledge is worth knowing?" and "Why am I teaching what I am teaching?" The answers to these question will be different depending on each classroom's atmosphere. Curriculum, as stated in the readings, is not static but continually negotiated. This goes to show why teachers should be educated in curriculum development. It is the teacher, not the administrator or textbook publisher, who knows the needs and wants of the students. The teacher is responsible for organizing and prioritizing the content of the course. There is too much information in each content area to cover, therefore teachers must decide what is most important. This means that teachers may need to cut things out, add things, and carefully condsider how much time they will spend on certain topics.
What is important in any classroom is that teachers and students strive for understanding. Unfortunately, I spent most of my formative school years cramming for tests and then throwing the information out the window when the bell rang. Looking back, I can see what I would do different as a high school student. How do I get my students to catch the vision I have now? How do I promote retention of knowledge? What walls will keep me from doing what I think is right and best? When all is said and done, I hope that I am able to fully address the different purposes of education (academic, vocational, social, and personal) and I hope that my students leave my class with more knowledge that they brought into it. There are a lot of questions for know, and there are many answers, but I will wait to blog them until I am a little more confident that I understand them correctly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)