Here goes nothing...
Probably an incredibly huge question but I thought it might be interesting: One of the readings for Tori's class this week focuses on designing curriculum by working backwards. First we should decided what we want the children to learn, what skills they should come away with, etc. and then create activities that coincide with those goals. Think of the desired end goal first and then ask ourselves what steps will get us their most effectively. Soooo...
What if we thought of designed schools using the same bakwards technique? If we started by identifying what our main objectives are for students' education and then created a system that most effectively accomplishes those goals, what would schools look like? Do the schools that are currently in place fit our objectives for student learning?
What if we thought of designed schools using the same bakwards technique? If we started by identifying what our main objectives are for students' education and then created a system that most effectively accomplishes those goals, what would schools look like? Do the schools that are currently in place fit our objectives for student learning?
posted by kris at 10:39 PM
4 Comments:
Incredibly huge question is right, and probably the reason people are reluctant to respond. Your question is very intriguing, however, so I'll give it a go.
I think the space to design such schools is already available in the idea of charter schools. One of my professors in undergrad opened and was principal of a charter school she designed using the theory that to really teach children well in any one subject requires an expert of that particular subject. I think she designed her school using a type of backwards planning. She wanted her children to have a profound understanding of several different subject areas and she wanted them to come away with the ability to think and act like an expert in that subject. In order to accomplish these goals, she hired experts in several fields to serve as resources within the school. For example, the art teacher was a professional artist who (if I remember correctly) worked in pottery and the science teacher was a scientist who used the school lab to conduct her own research problems, within which she found ways to have the students help her. In this way, students learned the strategies a "real scientist/artist" thought was important and how to think like them when solving problems. One potential difficulty with this idea, which my professor was wise enough to recognize, is that the selection of "experts" has to be very carefully done. They need to be able to work well with kids and tolerate them in their working environment. They also need a lot of help selecting activities where students can help in their workspace in creative, thought-provoking ways, not waste their time with meanial labor like clean-up. With this in mind, my professor was very careful in her teacher selection process and provided a great deal of support to these teachers in the form of extensive weekly staff meetings in addition to personal meetings weekly with each teacher.
So I think people are already applying backwards problem solving to school design, it just tends to remain in the private or charter sector of education.
One large problem with the idea of designing schools using backwards planning, in my opinion, is that so many individuals have their own opinion on what our main objectives are for student education and how to most effectively accomplish them. For example, while I admire and respect my professor, I'm not sure that I personally agree that an expert in the field is the best person to teach students about each field. I think they are definitely excellent resources, but being in the education career myself and not having a different professional expertise, I'd like to believe that I will be able to effectively teach my students too, despite my lack of other professional expertise.
That was a really interesting question. I think the big thought about what each school's objective is with the students must enter my mind at least once a day. Do the schools that are currently in place fit our objectives for student learning? I guess to answer that we also need to think about what our objectives are, and how we could best evaluate whether or not these objectives are being met. In this state in seems the objectives are best spelled out with the NYS learning standards, and standardized tests are in place to make sure every school is meeting these standards. Although I can see a lot of ways in which this is beneficial, being in a school whose main focus appears to be to meet state standards, I find my students are missing out on a lot of important learning.
I am teaching in a public school in Brooklyn, and the scores my fourth graders receive in math and English determine a lot for the school itself. I suppose in some ways they are using the technique of backwards planning, as we teaching for the test 100 percent. The main objectives for the students’ education are fluency in math and reading, and as long as the students are passing these tests, it is evident that they have met the learning objectives. Every lesson I teach is supposed to have a “Teaching Point” (what we consider the objective in most lesson plans) posted, and the teaching point must in some way lead to better test taking. In fact, for the two months prior to the ELA exam, the students spent an eighty minutes a day learning test taking techniques. On the downside (in my opinion), being so focused on meeting these objectives took away from our capability to meet the individual needs of each student or creating well rounded students. Because social studies aren’t tested in fourth grade, my students do not receive any social studies education. It’s simply not one of the objectives for this year. Although it seems it would be up to me to fit that in, my flow of the day is created for me, and aside from choosing literature rich in history (which is possible from time to time when the genre isn’t pre-selected), I don’t have that option. As for science, my class receives science lessons once a week during my prep, but this is not true for all of the fourth grade classes. It’s shocking when I discover how much they have missed out on and don’t know that I took for granted every child would have learned by fourth grade.
Some students are definitely benefiting from the method we are using, while others are suffering. In early October the students took the 2006 exam as a practice and to see how much work they would need to pass… The majority of my students received failing grades below 20%. In December, when the students took a second practice examination, many of the students improved drastically. This was evidence that their reading comprehension had improved. When looked at from that side, the rigid program that I was to enforce had pushed students more than I probably would have, being that there was a definite deadline.
On the other hand, there are students who need something that we might not have predicted when creating a curriculum or choosing an objective, but don’t receive extra services because according to the test scores, they meet all of the objectives. I have a student who is constantly acting out in strange ways… To name a few of his common actions, he can’t carry on a normal conversation with any of the other students, and during my lessons I’ll find him crawling under the desks or singing love songs. In the middle of a test he’s gotten up and danced, and when asked to read aloud, he can barely get through a first grade level text. Somehow, he received the highest test score in my class on the ELA interim assessment. His reading comprehension is very high. His parents came for parent teacher conferences and told me they thought there was something wrong before I even mentioned my observations. When I put in a request for this student to receive special services, he was put at the bottom of the list, because he is not at risk for failing the exams. His practiced test scores were reviewed, and as long as he’s getting these high scores, the school doesn’t see him as a priority for needing extra help.
I realize as I scroll up that was a really long winded response with probably more personal connections than necessary, but I guess my main opinion could be summed up like this- I think the idea of creating a school that works backwards would be extremely beneficial. The charter school that Elissa wrote about seems ideal in many ways. However, I think it is also necessary (as with probably every lesson itself) that the objectives be flexible, or maybe broader than those of the state examinations, so that there is also room for differentiated instructions, and teachers are able to take a teachable moment and embrace it rather than rushing through an explanation and then getting back to the planned curriculum. I think if each school or even each grade was able to create itself by setting objectives and then working backwards it could possibly have amazing outcomes, as long as the system was flexible and stayed focused on putting the students’ needs first, not keeping up with an idea thought up by a team of educators.
*I did not receive the email to join this blog, so I hope registering on my own through Google will still allow everyone to view my comments :)
-Regina Lorentz
This has been a very interesting thread. The first thing that comes to my mind is that schools must be designed with some goals in mind; whose goals, I have no idea.
My experience teaching in a private Catholic school in Mexico relates to both Elissa's and Katie's responses. The principal and owner of the school were planning to build on a new site for the school (currently K-6 but aspiring to go all the way through secondary school). The architects they consulted came up with designs that I suppose are standard for schools. My principal asked me to find some examples of schools from all over the world, and so I found a web site about award-winning school designs. I learned that a popular trend, for some reason I'm sure, is to have pre-K and elementary schools designed as a cluster of classroom buildings surrounding a courtyard with a tree or other plaza-like meeting area in the center of the courtyard. (I can't remember the site; maybe I'll let you all know later.)
Of course, as Elissa mentioned, probably only private and charter schools have the luxury of choosing the design of a school. I imagine that within the public school systems in the U.S. there is a lot of bureacracy surrounding the issue of school design, and if the current trend towards standardized testing and corporate sponsorship affects school design, then I would be very afraid. What kind of school would that look like? Would there be rooms designed specifically for testing? Would meeting and recreational spaces be reduced? Science labs and music rooms omitted? Would it become less like a community and more like a sterile institution (even more than it is now)?
Yeah, was I asleep or something when I read that question? I think my comment was TOTALLY off the mark. Oh well!
Post a Comment
<< Home