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.
