Conflicts in Curriculum

In education, we so often focus on the promotion of learning that the actual way in which the curriculum operates to encourage knowledge is overlooked. While there are many different ways to encourage learning, some of which were explored in my last blog, the curriculum ultimately drives the way in which students have their learning delivered to them, as well as the incorporation of various learning styles. Rather than seeing the way in which these items are broken down for educators, students are only ever exposed to the manner in which the teacher chooses to incorporate their personal beliefs on learning styles into the classroom. In my opinion, this needs to change. Transparency allows for a better mutual understanding of how knowledge is presented in the classroom and how learning styles are incorporated into the student’s daily lives. This would allow students to realize they’re the product of a unique system and that their learning is both individualized as well as personalized, with the teacher and student both interacting with and exerting control over the way in which individuals learn.

In many ways, Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment: Engaging the 21st-Century Learner breaks down the way in which students learn, step by step demonstrating the way in which the curriculum is built and exactly what is included in its creation. From the use of “big ideas” and “enduring understandings”, to the way different learning styles and types of knowledge are considered, this book makes it very clear that the curriculum is created to serve the students, combining both what they need to learn with the various ways in which they learn. However, it becomes clear that, while all of the needs are satisfied in the curriculum, rarely are all of them applied by teaching staff.

Although the hierarchy of knowledge is fascinating and the overarching idea of a unifying framework would ideally suggest that all of these elements work in tandem, I have never seen a classroom that unites all of the aspects of the hierarchy of knowledge and how it “connects to the do” with the “Do” being partially represented in Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy of Thinking Skills. Often in high school, a teacher would focus on only remembering and analyzing, the steps attached to facts and big ideas/concepts respectively. While the other factors (creating/evaluating and understanding, respectively connected to enduring understandings and topics) were occasionally touched on, none were as important as fact recall or analysis. Most tests were based upon multiple choice, short answer and occasional essay questions, all of which relied predominantly on a combination of fact recall and analytical questions. While this calls into account the problematic nature of tests and the way they limit the ability of teachers to incorporate various learning styles it also becomes clear that tests do not allow for items like triarchic intelligence to be properly considered, as they do not cater to analytical, practical AND creative students on a regular basis. This is superbly limiting to students, with learning becoming the result of a blanket curriculum rather than the individual elements that create the curriculum.

The curriculum was clearly created with the knowledge that these intelligences exist as well as the way in which they are perceived to function as a unifying framework. So why then is it so hard in practice to combine all of these factors? This indicates, at least to me, that perhaps we are more unwilling to move on from the old story model of teaching than we first appeared. In an idyllic, new story teaching approach, tests would be shaped to the hierarchy of knowledge and the learning styles but also offer the sort of integrative thinking as discussed in Chapter One of Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment: Engaging the 21st-Century Learner  in order to create the best overarching framework to propel new story teaching. Instead, we are presented with old story tests and class structures, suggesting that a new teaching method must be applied to tests. Perhaps different tests could be given out throughout the year to benefit each type of learner, or more choices could be incorporated into the tests such as the different assignment options as discussed last week. If we are going to truly commit to new story teaching, we have to work harder to integrate it throughout the classroom, not just the curriculum.

I leave you with this graphic about Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy and the verbs that can be used in association with each step. Think about how many times you’re seen at least one verb from each section on a high school test and feel free to discuss in the comments whether inclusion of multiple categories on tests is a thing of the future or an ideal of the past for you!

Source: http://www.pinterest.com/pin/81909286947483033/

Until next time,

A. Gallacher

Navigating the Blogging Abyss

(Credit to http://www.pinterest.com/pin/73324300155312471/)

An admission: I don’t know much about blogging. I never felt a need to record my personal life or my experiences in an online forum before, but I’m very excited to get to share my outlooks and opinions on Education with whoever might be reading this. In many ways, blogging might very well have been designed by people like me, people who enjoy debates and sharing their perspectives. However, the goal of this specific blog is to review and consider the items presented both in the lecture section and the textbook readings of EDUC 4P19, a university Education course. I am also bringing my experiences as  fourth year University student with a background in history and literature, interests which very much effect the way in which I view the world and particularly, how I view the evolution of education that we discussed in lecture this week. 

As presented by our professor, there is currently a clear shift from what is considered “old story” teaching, to “new story teaching”. Although there is a clear push currently towards “new story” teaching, using integrated and multidisciplinary studies. This aims to create a learning environment to include a wider assortment of learners than the traditional lecture style of the classroom, which required a certain amount of apathy for the student, transforming it to an engaging global classroom, where students are encouraged to interact with their surroundings in a variety of ways.

Having personally witnessed the transition to something closely resembling “new story” teaching in various classes during my high school career, it was fascinating to see which teachers, usually those who were younger, bringing in group work aspects, a global sense of learning (classes which began examining different cultures on a weekly basis were one such example). The use of new and emerging technologies in the classroom was also advocated by our librarian, who constantly worked to innovate and elevate presentations from plain Microsoft Powerpoint to Prezi presentations, allowing students to present information in a way that suited them and was not so traditional. The video below illustrates the mind mapping possible within Prezi which works to create a more engaging presentation format than the traditional, in many ways a solid comparison to the difference between “new story” and “old story” teaching.

The “new story” also began seeping into various aspects of the curriculum, but not in the way that one might think. Many teachers still used the standard lecture format and the idea of a singular knowledge, but it became less ubiquitous. Although classes were still predominantly traditionalist, there was the way in which assignments began changing, allowing students to express a wide variety of creative expression. Within this changing landscape, classes began offering multiple forms for assignment submission, building soundtracks for old gangster movies in Film classes OR writing newspaper reviews of a film, with these being but a couple of the possibilities for a single assignment. Personally, I worked on a soundtrack, working to connect the songs to the film and, although write-ups were still a required part of the assignment, I focused on a more creative way to present them, creating a booklet for the front of the CD’s jewel case with descriptions for suggested scene placement and the logic behind my song selections. As a result of the unique form of the assignment, it became one of the most memorable and enjoyable I completed throughout high school and, as the “new story” methods rose in popularity, it will be far from the only assignment to bred high levels of enthusiasm in students.

It is through the ability of the evolution of education to contain both elements of the “old story” teaching along with that of the “new story” that further struck me while studying the first chapter of Interweaving Curriculum and Classroom Assessment: Engaging the 21st-Century Learner as it became clear that these are not mutually exclusive ideologies. As a student of history, I’m used to hanging onto bits and pieces of the past, allowing them to remain active to a certain extent, examining their influences, while building upon them, improving myself and my global outlook by considering the mistakes, as well as the accomplishments of the past. The realization that, at various points in my schooling, I have been exposed to the theories of personalization, differentiation and individualization discussed in the chapter, drives home the point that this is a changing world which is focused on altering the “old story” teaching to be more inclusive. 

The end of this first chapter also suggests that the teacher is a “change agent” and nothing could be more true to me. It was this ability of teachers to create change that inspired me to work towards becoming one, and I am excited to combine this with the new theories that are emerging from the “new story” learning, as the curriculum works to become empathetic towards the specific needs of students and catering to them in a wide variety of ways.

Until next time,
A Gallacher