The chapter pays particular attention to the fact that most teachers start curriculum planning using textbooks instead of identifying what the learning goals will be. Backward design proposes a change in the starting point, i.e. Teachers should start with the learning outcomes and then plan the curriculum by choosing activities and materials that help students to achieve the learning goals.
Although most of us know that is -a must- to have a clear idea of what our students have to accomplish, it’s also true that time constraints prevent us from dedicating the required time to what has been presented in this chapter as Backward Design. This leads to the question of whether educational institutions are willing to give us the necessary time to plan following the suggested three- stage design, as well as teaming up with our colleagues.
In the suggested model, my concerns are: the fact that it seems quite rigid and the effectiveness of assessment evidence. The former relies upon my teaching, where I have learned that flexibility is a key component to succeed in fostering the desired results. The latter reveals some weaknesses, especially the needed time you have to devote to create the material and the assessment of students’ achievement. This is quite relevant at undergraduate level where each term only lasts 4 months.
All in all, this chapter has aroused my interest of the importance in changing our content-focus design to a more results- focus one.
One of the biggest mistakes teachers do is taking the text as a sort of "Bible" to teach. A teacher must be flexible with the contents which are presented over there. The problem is presented when teachers are extremely controlled by their bosses and flexibility is not possible.
ReplyDeleteAnother important point you mentioned is the willingness that institutions have for giving the enough (and correct) time for Bakward Design... I insist.. It's a strong matter of policy, not just education.
I agree with you on the fact that Back Design can become time-consuming.I think this is one of the weaknesses of this design that makes it inapplicable, as it is, in our Chilean classrooms.I also want to point out that no matter what significant changes we make in our lesson plannings if we do not have the support of the educational institutions, we will not be able to succeed.This fact is an issue we have experienced for many years and it is far from being solved in a short-term..
ReplyDeleteI agree with Edith and also think of the different reality we have as university teachers. Lesson plans are already done for us and it is very difficult to change activities or other things. However, we need to do it according to our students' needs.
ReplyDeleteFlexibility is a huge word. It is close to tolerance. How much experience we need in order to develop understanding. What do students and teachers have to undetorstand ? Contents ?, theories, rules ? Is there anything beyond that ? Likely we need more questions than answers.
ReplyDelete