Do we usually forget about the objective we pursue, and what it is worse, do we inform our students of these aims?
Undoubtedly, many teachers commit this serious crime regardless of the level they teach: primary, secondary or higher education. The emphasis is put on content rather than on the desired results. From my point of view, this habit cannot be easily changed.
As Wiggins say, "we remain focused on textbooks and favored lessons ..." instead of deriving these resources from desired objectives. This malpractice may be catastrophic for our students. Wiggins describes very clearly this situation when he claims that some teachers "throw some content and activities against the wall and hope some of it sticks”. In other words, only hope or a mere academic accident helps students achieve understanding. In most cases, the lack of purposes inevitably leads to confusion or frustration in students. Even teachers may face confusion or dilemmas. Naturally, we ask ourselves later: why do my students do not learn anything? Why do they forget about everything?
Quite simply, the absence of planned results and the failure to inform students of these results are responsible for the misunderstanding in our students.
By adhering to Backward Design, we can sort out this curriculum malpractice. In fact, I have put into practice this backward design in my Cultural studies lessons. Clearly, students seem more oriented towards results. More importantly, they have a more positive outlook on the course.
Therefore, if you ask me, it is worth taking a chance on backward design.
domingo, 22 de noviembre de 2009
Hands-on without being Mnds-on
strong>Do we usually forget about the objetive we persue, and what it is worse, do we inform our students of these aims?
Undoubtedly, many teachers commit this serious crime regardless of the level they teach: primary, secondary or higher education. The emphasis is put on content rather than on the desired results. From my point of view, this habit cannot be easily changed.
As Wiggins say, "we remain focused on textbooks and favored lessons ..." instead of derived these resources from desired objectives. This malpractice may be catastrophic for our students. Wiggins describes very clearly this situation when he claims that some teachers "throw some content and activities against the wall and hope some of it sticks.". In other words, only hope or a mere academic accident helps students achieve understanding. In most cases, the lack of purposes inevitably leads to confusion or frustration in students. Even teachers may face confusion or dilemmas. Naturally, we ask ourselves later: why do my students do not learn anything? Why do they forget about everything?
Quite simply, the absence of planned results and the failure to inform students of these results are responsible for the misunderstanding in our students.
By adhering to Backward Design, we can sort out this curriculum malpractice. In fact , I have put into practice this backward design in my Cultural studies lessons . Clearly, students seem more oriented towards results. More importantly, they have a more positive outlook on the course.
Therefore, if you ask me, it is worth taking a chance on backward design.
Undoubtedly, many teachers commit this serious crime regardless of the level they teach: primary, secondary or higher education. The emphasis is put on content rather than on the desired results. From my point of view, this habit cannot be easily changed.
As Wiggins say, "we remain focused on textbooks and favored lessons ..." instead of derived these resources from desired objectives. This malpractice may be catastrophic for our students. Wiggins describes very clearly this situation when he claims that some teachers "throw some content and activities against the wall and hope some of it sticks.". In other words, only hope or a mere academic accident helps students achieve understanding. In most cases, the lack of purposes inevitably leads to confusion or frustration in students. Even teachers may face confusion or dilemmas. Naturally, we ask ourselves later: why do my students do not learn anything? Why do they forget about everything?
Quite simply, the absence of planned results and the failure to inform students of these results are responsible for the misunderstanding in our students.
By adhering to Backward Design, we can sort out this curriculum malpractice. In fact , I have put into practice this backward design in my Cultural studies lessons . Clearly, students seem more oriented towards results. More importantly, they have a more positive outlook on the course.
Therefore, if you ask me, it is worth taking a chance on backward design.
domingo, 8 de noviembre de 2009
Rubrics and Assessment
Could a student perform well on the test without understanding?
This question posed by Wiggins made me reflect on the countless occasions I have designed or have answered tests which do not show real understanding. The so-called objective tests in which students choose the best alternative or answer true or false cannot demonstrate by any means the successful students’ understanding in any subject.
Why then we insist on this type of evaluation when we teach history, reading or writing in English as a first or second language? Quite simply because we do not have the time to put into a practice a complex evaluation system which involves the gathering of several samples so as to get a clear idea of students’ performance. To make things worse, we focus more attention on the design of activities and assessment that are interesting and engaging for students, all of which to the detriment of real and reliable samples of understanding.
Rubrics in this respect can help us a lot. They are certainly the best assessment method to evaluate oral or written production. Holistic rubrics can be used when an overall impression is required. They yield the same score for product or performance. The products are judged differently in an analytic rubric. Traits can be scored distinctively. Wiggins recommends the use of the analytic rubric renders better quality of feedback.
In sum, whether we choose the holistic or analytic rubric, we need to opt for a rubric; otherwise, we will never have a chance to see real understanding in students. It can be hard work, but it is worth the effort in the long run.
This question posed by Wiggins made me reflect on the countless occasions I have designed or have answered tests which do not show real understanding. The so-called objective tests in which students choose the best alternative or answer true or false cannot demonstrate by any means the successful students’ understanding in any subject.
Why then we insist on this type of evaluation when we teach history, reading or writing in English as a first or second language? Quite simply because we do not have the time to put into a practice a complex evaluation system which involves the gathering of several samples so as to get a clear idea of students’ performance. To make things worse, we focus more attention on the design of activities and assessment that are interesting and engaging for students, all of which to the detriment of real and reliable samples of understanding.
Rubrics in this respect can help us a lot. They are certainly the best assessment method to evaluate oral or written production. Holistic rubrics can be used when an overall impression is required. They yield the same score for product or performance. The products are judged differently in an analytic rubric. Traits can be scored distinctively. Wiggins recommends the use of the analytic rubric renders better quality of feedback.
In sum, whether we choose the holistic or analytic rubric, we need to opt for a rubric; otherwise, we will never have a chance to see real understanding in students. It can be hard work, but it is worth the effort in the long run.
domingo, 25 de octubre de 2009
Thinking like an assessor
What if only happenstance could lead students to understanding?
This is probably one of the most worrying problems we might have in our yearly planning. In fact, we tend to think more as designers of activities rather than as asssors as pointed out by Wiggins in Chapter 7.
This teaching habit has been caused by our urge and external pressure to motivate students. From my point of view, this intention should be regarded as something positive. We have become aware of the importance of students’ centered learning. Addittionaly, we have faced over last decades discipline problems in our students which have encouraged us to come up with highly interesting and amusing lessons. Unfortunately though, assessment has been overlooked. Wiggins explains that by just mere coincidence, happenstance in his own words, students can reach actual understanding.
We, as teachers of English, are likely to fall into the temptation of disregarding assessment. For instance, we might design a very resourceful unit about American culture and history but only design a test including only true and false and multiple choice ítems as an easy way to finísh up a unit. By contrast, if we end up this unit including questions aimed at contrasting, comparing and summarizing the most important ideas, we could guarantee successful understanding.
Wiggins says that “Selective response formats: multiple choice, matching pairs, true or false- in general provide insufficient (and sometimos misleading) evidence about understanding or its absence” (pag. 161). Instead, he proposes oral assessment, concept webs or portafolios which allow students to show their work and reveal their understanding.
In sum, to put it bluntly, shame on us if we, TEFL teachers, keep on thinking just as mere designers and not start viewing things as assesors, as well. We truly sacrifice understanding if we fail to use the backward design. In other words, we should ask ourselves what performances or products we would like to have by end of a unit so as to obtain solid understanding and not depend exclusively on happenstance for achieving successful understanding.
This is probably one of the most worrying problems we might have in our yearly planning. In fact, we tend to think more as designers of activities rather than as asssors as pointed out by Wiggins in Chapter 7.
This teaching habit has been caused by our urge and external pressure to motivate students. From my point of view, this intention should be regarded as something positive. We have become aware of the importance of students’ centered learning. Addittionaly, we have faced over last decades discipline problems in our students which have encouraged us to come up with highly interesting and amusing lessons. Unfortunately though, assessment has been overlooked. Wiggins explains that by just mere coincidence, happenstance in his own words, students can reach actual understanding.
We, as teachers of English, are likely to fall into the temptation of disregarding assessment. For instance, we might design a very resourceful unit about American culture and history but only design a test including only true and false and multiple choice ítems as an easy way to finísh up a unit. By contrast, if we end up this unit including questions aimed at contrasting, comparing and summarizing the most important ideas, we could guarantee successful understanding.
Wiggins says that “Selective response formats: multiple choice, matching pairs, true or false- in general provide insufficient (and sometimos misleading) evidence about understanding or its absence” (pag. 161). Instead, he proposes oral assessment, concept webs or portafolios which allow students to show their work and reveal their understanding.
In sum, to put it bluntly, shame on us if we, TEFL teachers, keep on thinking just as mere designers and not start viewing things as assesors, as well. We truly sacrifice understanding if we fail to use the backward design. In other words, we should ask ourselves what performances or products we would like to have by end of a unit so as to obtain solid understanding and not depend exclusively on happenstance for achieving successful understanding.
domingo, 11 de octubre de 2009
Backward Vs. Forward Planning
This kind of planning could be regarded as revolutionary by many teachers. As opposed to having a forward planning, the authors Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe propose a backward planning in which there is a dramatic shift towards thinking about the desired results. In other words, we carry out our planning with the aim in mind.
Despite the little time teachers have so as to implement a rather complex planning such as the Ubd template by Wiggins, it could enormously helpful to do it. It grants us the guidance and orientation to avoid the pointless coverage of contents and disconnected and isolated activities which frankly do not lead us to any satisfactory results.
Additionally, Wiggins points out the importance of the big ideas which I find extremely relevant to the planning teachers carry out every year. When planning a course, for example, we might stick to a text-based approach in the sense that decisions may be made based on the selections of readings. We might even end up very satisfied because we were able to cover all the skills required for the course in question. However, we have to pose ourselves the following questions:
Is this selection of texts going to be memorable for my students?
Does it include enduring understandings capable of causing knowledge transfer in them?
It called my attention, as well, the situation labeled by Wiggins as Goldilocks Problem. Inevitably, if the goals are too broad and ambitious, at some point, understandings and assessment will be confusing for students and even for the teacher. To illustrate this, let me give you an example taken from my professional experience. Once I expected my students to be able to recognize and discuss the key aspects from the English Dynasties as from the Anglo-Saxons to the Victorians. Consequently, at the end of the year this objective turned out to be overwhelming for both students and teacher, and worst of all, the historical review ended up being forgettable.
Luckily, by using the Ubd template by Grant Wiggins teachers can incorporate essential questions, transferable big ideas, established goals, key knowledge and skills as far as the desired results are concerned.
It could be intellectually challenging to start working with a planning model like this one. But it is high time we adhered to it.
Despite the little time teachers have so as to implement a rather complex planning such as the Ubd template by Wiggins, it could enormously helpful to do it. It grants us the guidance and orientation to avoid the pointless coverage of contents and disconnected and isolated activities which frankly do not lead us to any satisfactory results.
Additionally, Wiggins points out the importance of the big ideas which I find extremely relevant to the planning teachers carry out every year. When planning a course, for example, we might stick to a text-based approach in the sense that decisions may be made based on the selections of readings. We might even end up very satisfied because we were able to cover all the skills required for the course in question. However, we have to pose ourselves the following questions:
Is this selection of texts going to be memorable for my students?
Does it include enduring understandings capable of causing knowledge transfer in them?
It called my attention, as well, the situation labeled by Wiggins as Goldilocks Problem. Inevitably, if the goals are too broad and ambitious, at some point, understandings and assessment will be confusing for students and even for the teacher. To illustrate this, let me give you an example taken from my professional experience. Once I expected my students to be able to recognize and discuss the key aspects from the English Dynasties as from the Anglo-Saxons to the Victorians. Consequently, at the end of the year this objective turned out to be overwhelming for both students and teacher, and worst of all, the historical review ended up being forgettable.
Luckily, by using the Ubd template by Grant Wiggins teachers can incorporate essential questions, transferable big ideas, established goals, key knowledge and skills as far as the desired results are concerned.
It could be intellectually challenging to start working with a planning model like this one. But it is high time we adhered to it.
domingo, 27 de septiembre de 2009
Essential Questions for a TEFL Curriculum
Essential questions towards understanding
How can we avoid activity-based and coverage-based design?
The question above posed by Wiggins is of a great significance. He even regards these sorts of activities as curriculum sins. I could also refer to them as unavoidable temptations for teachers. In fact, many teachers and curriculum designers frame units on the basis of content rather than a desired understanding that goes beyond simple facts and knowledge which are easily forgotten. The author points out the vital need of asking our students essential questions which foster inquiry and curiosity. As far as our TEFL area is concerned, we, teachers of English, always start our lessons with a few questions to activate cognition and generate enthusiasm. However, the distinction made by Wiggins between topical essential questions and overarching essential questions is extremely enriching. Sadly, I would say, TEFL teachers might just include yes / no questions aimed at just informing students about the lesson’s objective. By including essential questions in the teaching of foreign languages we could help our students gain a more lasting and long-term learning.
Essential questions for a TEFL curriculum
Wiggins warns us about the danger of asking only topical questions or just overarching ones. He suggests the balance of using both types of questions. Additionally, he insists on the idea of being consistent with the follow-up planning. In other words, if we asked a topical question which is not later sought or covered by an activity, it would be pointless. What is finally highly recommended is the idea of framing our final syllabus on the basis of essential questions. This last idea has turned out to be quite revealing for me. Although most TEFL teachers are not curriculum designers, we could innovate by framing it with such questions. Interestingly enough, TEFL teachers would collaborate and greatly improve the TEFL curriculum avoiding other sins such as too much grammar or only teacher talk.
How can we avoid activity-based and coverage-based design?
The question above posed by Wiggins is of a great significance. He even regards these sorts of activities as curriculum sins. I could also refer to them as unavoidable temptations for teachers. In fact, many teachers and curriculum designers frame units on the basis of content rather than a desired understanding that goes beyond simple facts and knowledge which are easily forgotten. The author points out the vital need of asking our students essential questions which foster inquiry and curiosity. As far as our TEFL area is concerned, we, teachers of English, always start our lessons with a few questions to activate cognition and generate enthusiasm. However, the distinction made by Wiggins between topical essential questions and overarching essential questions is extremely enriching. Sadly, I would say, TEFL teachers might just include yes / no questions aimed at just informing students about the lesson’s objective. By including essential questions in the teaching of foreign languages we could help our students gain a more lasting and long-term learning.
Essential questions for a TEFL curriculum
Wiggins warns us about the danger of asking only topical questions or just overarching ones. He suggests the balance of using both types of questions. Additionally, he insists on the idea of being consistent with the follow-up planning. In other words, if we asked a topical question which is not later sought or covered by an activity, it would be pointless. What is finally highly recommended is the idea of framing our final syllabus on the basis of essential questions. This last idea has turned out to be quite revealing for me. Although most TEFL teachers are not curriculum designers, we could innovate by framing it with such questions. Interestingly enough, TEFL teachers would collaborate and greatly improve the TEFL curriculum avoiding other sins such as too much grammar or only teacher talk.
domingo, 6 de septiembre de 2009
Roberto Figueroa Sunday September 6th 17.00
Understanding Vs. Knowing and the disappointing phenomenon of misunderstanding
Most of teachers feel satisfied when their students answer correctly the questions in relation to the contents seen in class. However, are we assessing knowledge or understanding? This is the dilemma presented by Wiggins in the 2nd chapter of his book. Frankly speaking, we might find ourselves in academic situations in which we are merely evaluating the acquisition of knowledge. What is worse, we may not be aware of how harmful and tragical is to expect from our students only the knowledge of things rather than real understanding of them. Although at first students may happen to recall what they have learned, this knowledge will not be memorable if they have not truly understood its main ideas. Assessment plays a fundamental role in this respect. As a matter of fact, transfer of learning is what we should aim at; otherwise, the content previously learned will fail to be memorable in the long run. Ideally, teachers should design activities to make sure their students are able to apply the novel knowledge in a different context. Interestingly enough, the curriculum based on competences, so in fashion today at universities and schools, emphasizes objectives such as summarizing and discussing, among others, which calls for real understanding. Consequently, if we take into account this approach to education, more successful and long-lasting learning could be expected. Finally, misunderstanding could be avoided provided we carefully apply assessment focused on transfer. In practical words, for instance, if in our written tests we only include true and false and multiple choice items disregarding essay questions, which aim at evaluating students’ real understanding, students' learning is likely to fall into oblivion and potential misunderstanding.
Most of teachers feel satisfied when their students answer correctly the questions in relation to the contents seen in class. However, are we assessing knowledge or understanding? This is the dilemma presented by Wiggins in the 2nd chapter of his book. Frankly speaking, we might find ourselves in academic situations in which we are merely evaluating the acquisition of knowledge. What is worse, we may not be aware of how harmful and tragical is to expect from our students only the knowledge of things rather than real understanding of them. Although at first students may happen to recall what they have learned, this knowledge will not be memorable if they have not truly understood its main ideas. Assessment plays a fundamental role in this respect. As a matter of fact, transfer of learning is what we should aim at; otherwise, the content previously learned will fail to be memorable in the long run. Ideally, teachers should design activities to make sure their students are able to apply the novel knowledge in a different context. Interestingly enough, the curriculum based on competences, so in fashion today at universities and schools, emphasizes objectives such as summarizing and discussing, among others, which calls for real understanding. Consequently, if we take into account this approach to education, more successful and long-lasting learning could be expected. Finally, misunderstanding could be avoided provided we carefully apply assessment focused on transfer. In practical words, for instance, if in our written tests we only include true and false and multiple choice items disregarding essay questions, which aim at evaluating students’ real understanding, students' learning is likely to fall into oblivion and potential misunderstanding.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
