Do you believe that districts should construct a scope and sequence for curriculum K-12 OR.......should teachers at each grade level meet to determine what their curriculum will be for the year? What is your rationale for the position that you are taking? Should there be a structured curriculum at all or should each teacher teach the subjects with which he/she is most comfortable? Your thoughts?
I believe that teachers at each grade level should meet to determine what their curriculum will be for the year. I feel this way because the grade level teachers will be able to work together to create the curriculum based on what their incoming students already know. Grade level teachers can also work together to sequence their curriculum based on how long they spent on different content the year before. I do think that there should be a structured curriculum. This helps teachers to plan lessons for the year and to stay on track.
ReplyDeleteHi Veronica. Teachers meeting regularly and working collaboratively to discuss curriculum is such a vital part of what we do. So often this quality time isn't built into our schedules. Making it a priority not only accomplishes what you discuss in your post, which is so critical, but it also fosters teamwork. Every year is different. We may have students that don't understand fractions one year...the next, it's decimals, percents, etc. Therefore, the curriculum has to be flexible so that students understand, really understand the material. Excellent post.
DeleteI believe that districts should construct a scope and sequence for curriculum K-12. However, teachers should have time to digest and breakdown this structured curriculum at each grade level because each teacher may interpret learning goals, objectives, and performance tasks on assessments differently. To do this, teachers should be able to have input at (PLC) Professional Learning Communities for each grade level so they can interpret and plan their units of study effectively. These PLC meetings should focus on the Socratic Method. This method focuses on dialogue and helps to generate questions that seek inquiry-based learning [1, p. 19]. For example, teachers might ask the following questions, "How well did your lesson go?" or "Did your students understand the PBA assessment?" These questions can further spark more dialogue and new ideas to use in their lessons. PLC’s can also help teachers self-reflect on how they approach their teaching styles. Colleague collaboration can also bring more rigor to their learning objectives and give ideas for differentiation.
ReplyDeleteStudents always question, “Why do I have to learn this?” I believe it is critical for teachers to incorporate other subject areas in their lessons because students will be able to deepen their understanding of the subject matter. By incorporating various subject areas into lessons, students will able to understand their connection to each other.
References:
[1] Johnson, Tony W., and Ronald F. Reed, eds. 2012. Philosophical Documents in
Education. 4th ed. Boston: Prentice Hall.
Good evening, William. I am a fan of PLCs. I have been fortunate to work at schools where we have multiple teachers teaching the same course. In those situations, it was so beneficial to meet each week to plan our curriculum, discuss how each lesson went, and see where we needed to focus our efforts. As you mentioned above that type of dialogue sparked new ideas to use in our lessons. Working at a smaller school, we often have only one class for each grade, sometimes two. In those situations, I have found that my relationship with the teachers who feed into my grades are incredibly insightful, informative, and invaluable to the development and ultimate success of my curriculum. I love the "Why do I have to learn this?" question, by the way. It comes up every year. Excellent insight and great post.
DeleteTeaching is a very client centered business, with students and their families being our clients. The curriculum question posed is an interesting one. I believe there needs to be both horizontal and vertical alignment and that students should be able to move from one district or state and know that the Algebra course, for example, being presented will be consistent. There must be state standards that we all follow, whether private or public school employed. Layered on top of that there must be vertical alignment so that the curriculum is threaded together from one year to the next. As a math educator, it is important that vocabulary used is consistent throughout the grades, even throughout different disciplines. Where one grade leaves off, the next must pick up. While the curriculum standards are set, there must be flexibility as the client base changes, and we have to meet their needs. The standards certainly shape our curriculum and lessons; however, teachers need to communicate with each other so they can tailor the curriculum to meet the needs of their students. Throughout the year and then at the end of each year, we meet "one up and one down" to discuss what was covered and what should be reinforced the next year. I believe this allows teachers to work collaboratively with each other while giving them the data they need to shape their curriculum. We have constraints. We cannot teach anything we want, when we want it, using language inconsistent with the discipline. "Standards provide a useful framework to help us identify teaching and learning priorities and guide our design of curriculum and assessment."
ReplyDeleteReferences:
Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J., 2005. Understanding by Design. 2nd ed. ASCD.