Presentation on theme: "Maria Bacigalupo Curry College. AA (Northern Essex Community College) BA (Special and Secondary Ed, Curry College) MS (Counselor Education, Suffolk University."— Presentation transcript:
AA (Northern Essex Community College) BA (Special and Secondary Ed, Curry College) MS (Counselor Education, Suffolk University MA and EdD (Administration, Harvard University) 30 years at Curry College in PAL program Graduate: Teach teachers in Curry’s MEd program Undergraduate: Teach Developing Community Circles for Education Department Consulted with many approved private schools in MA to develop an articulated curriculum which encourages access to the general curriculum Co-founded and ran the Learning Disabilities Network in MA (18 years) Union President
This session is NOT a bunch of great ideas on how to universally design instruction in a classroom It is about how to articulate those great ideas in a way that will maximize accountability and communication for departments and colleges ◦ It shares a framework for expressing universally designed curriculum that can be understood and shared: a framework helps – now we can have a place to locate and a common way to share what and how we teach, department wide and/or College wide
Normally, professors are not taught about curriculum design nor instructional strategies Some do their very best to gather and implement effective strategies and try to reach more learners We know that Colleges are doing a better job describing “outcomes” – good start We need to move from articulating outcomes to articulating curriculum and then to UDI
Yet, We know that the “content” – what we teach – is only part of a college education It’s also about the students’ personal experience and the milieu at college– and we have a growing diverse population of traditional and adult students with: disabilities bi-lingual challenges diverse SES backgrounds minority backgrounds varying learning styles
Until professors have a common language about curriculum Until professors have a structure or framework for well articulated curriculum They will not have streamlined ways to address student diversity in colleges today, and The strategies they learn from time-to-time in workshops and the like will be ◦ less meaningful ◦ less employable ◦ less able to be articulated and shared ◦ Short-lived
Let’s face it ◦ Part-time professors cannot take the time to do this, so full-time faculty in departments will have to design and articulate a curriculum and inclusion strategies ◦ Even full-time professors do not have enough time to discuss amongst themselves how their curriculum is aligned within and across departments ◦ This requires release-time ◦ The benefits will be substantial Teaching aligned with standards, mission, outcomes Inclusive curriculum Better teaching, better learning
Prong 1 – FIRST – we must express a well-written curriculum ◦ Build a transparent curriculum template which includes aspects of well- written curriculum (Handout 1 – the C&I Organizer, Page 1 and 2) ◦ Alignment with standards of the discipline (A) ◦ Alignment with the mission of the College (B) ◦ Alignment with departmental course outcomes (C) ◦ Articulation of level at which the course concepts are taught (D) Introduced Reinforced Mastered ◦ Articulation of process used to teach the course (E) ◦ Articulation of formative assessment that the professor will use to check student learning (F) ◦ Articulation of summative assessments used (G)
What we teach ◦ Content ◦ Books ◦ Lecture notes ◦ Films ◦ Overarching goals ◦ Explicit curriculum ◦ Implicit curriculum (hidden curriculum) Values Collateral skills
Often left out of higher education classrooms Time to process understandings Embedded assessment Time to determine if they learned what you thought you taught! Biology professor Whistling cartoon
I TAUGHT STRIPE HOW TO WHISTLE Two boys and a dog. One boy is pointing to his dog and saying, “I taught Stripe how to whistle.”
I DON’T HEAR HIM WHISTLING While staring at dog, second boy says, “I don’t hear him whistling.”
I SAID I TAUGHT HIM. I DIDN’T SAY HE LEARNED IT From Checking for Understanding, King Features Syndicate. First boy, whilst pointing to dog says, “I said I taught him, I didn’t say he learned! The implication is, is this TRUE learning?
There is nothing more unfair to students to be treated “equally” when they are not designed that way! For a fair selection cartoon…
In this cartoon, 7 animals are lined up – a bird; a monkey; a penguin; an elephant; a goldfish (in a bowl, placed atop a tree stump); a seal; and a dog. They stand in front of a desk where a professor is seated. Behind the animals is a tree. The professor says, “For a fair selection everybody has to take the same exam: please climb that tree”. Only the monkey is smiling.
Summative assessment ◦ Exams ◦ Papers ◦ Projects Rubrics – help with communication about teaching and learning (handout, p 4 ) ◦ Students (Ex: what is Master’s level writing) ◦ Professors (Ex: what is good group instruction)
Both Tomlinson and UConn models emphasize this ◦ Instructional environment ◦ Building Classroom Culture ◦ EX: Tribes: a way of learning and being together Ex: What’s in your wallet? (Introductions, inclusive) Ex: Partner introductions (Introductions, inclusive Ex: Eliot Aronson – jigsaw (Group instruction method)
I yam what I yam (Popeye) Start me where I yam Give me access to the curriculum (where possible) ◦ Literary tea party ◦ A choice of content books ◦ A choice of articles ◦ A choice of submitting drafts of papers Challenge me! ◦ Bloom ◦ Objectives
This is a representation of Benjamin Bloom’s conception of the six levels of thinking. It is in the shape of a two dimensional pyramid.
5/99Maria T. Bacigalupo, Ed.D. Should be at the Generic Thinking and Mastery levels not at the ◦ Coverage ◦ Activity ◦ Involvement levels A stick figure is juggling a pad of paper, a telephone and envelopes, the implication being that teachers juggle many objectives and outcomes of learning.
5/99Maria T. Bacigalupo, Ed.D. Met when the topic is “covered” Note: Coverage is important and necessary BUT make sure the relationship is with concepts too Questions: ◦ When coverage is complete, are objectives complete? ◦ How do we know that the students have learned what we thought we taught? Use embedded assessment A stick figure is scratching its head. A question mark hovers above its head. Implied is the notion that teachers need to question their goals for learning.
5/99Maria T. Bacigalupo, Ed.D. When work is given for a concept that was taught We need to provide activities for students to master concepts ◦ But “activities completed” does not equal mission accomplished ◦ Students should have to demonstrate that they can apply the activity to a higher level concept A stick figure is very actively running with its hands in the air. Implied is the question about whether activity alone is an adequate and laudable goal for learning.
5/99Maria T. Bacigalupo, Ed.D. When we get students involved in an activity! ◦ Is the objective met if the students are absorbed? ◦ Fun does not necessarily equal learning! ◦ May not be productive learning! A stick figure is jumping up and clicking its heels. Its hands are up in the air. The question whether this sort of “involvement” in learning is an adequate goal for student learning.
5/99Maria T. Bacigalupo, Ed.D. Objectives to develop thinking skills apart from the particular content knowledge ◦ Habits of Mind (Perseverance, Striving for Accuracy) ◦ Collateral Learning (Researching, Writing) ◦ Complex Thinking Skills (Thinking interdependently) Questions ◦ Is this an explicit or implicit part of my curriculum? ◦ Am I grading on these skills? A stick figure with one hand on its hip and one pointing to the sky has a light bulb above its head. Implied is the notion that teachers need to include habits of mind, collateral learning and complex thinking skills in their curriculum, and consider whether these skills are an implicit or explicit part of their teaching and how much emphasis they should place on them in terms of grading.
5/99Maria T. Bacigalupo, Ed.D. For students to know and/or understand and be able to do something specific at some level of performance (introductory, reinforced, mastered level): Benefits: ◦ This is a challenging curriculum for all. Coverage, activity and involvement objectives are met simply by being there when something is “covered,” by being involved in the activity. Mastery at a particular level speaks to OUTCOMES! Two stick figures are hand in hand reaching for the sky. Implied is that objectives which seek mastery are the most fruitful for learning.
Self-explanatory ◦ Let Mgt majors do one project (where possible) ◦ Let Ed majors do another ◦ Let CJ majors do a third ◦ All relevant to the coursework and their field of study
Professors should choose a framework for differentiating using learning styles: ◦ Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (handout, p5) ◦ Bernice McCarthy (Why, what, how, what if) ◦ Gregorc concrete v abstract random v sequential ◦ Some like Meyers-Briggs – has limitations
Very important ◦ Might work on process one semester and increase number of embedded assessments ◦ Might work on offering differentiated products (assignments) another term ◦ Might work on building class culture another ◦ Might work on better array of content choices another
1.Equitable use 2.Flexibility in use 3.Simple and intuitive 4.Perceptible information 5.Tolerance for error 6.Low physical effort 7.Size and space for approach and use 8.A community of learners 9.Instructional climate
To multitude of ideas ◦ Take the Jigsaw strategy – ah! Principle 7, 8 and 9 (U Conn), and Content and Process by readiness and interests ◦ Take the Literary tea party strategy - Ah! Principle 1 Content by readiness and interests, maybe learning styles
Improves communication (across disciplines) about teaching and learning ◦ Inclusive and universal principles ◦ Classroom environment ◦ 3 elements of teaching and 3 elements of inclusion for ALL learners Content Process Product Readiness Interests Learning styles ◦ Challenges students to proficient and above level of performance
Instructional environment: faculty-student interaction ◦ Examples: Establishing a few democratically established agreements how to be in class Establishing management by 4 teams Jigsaw groups Instruction climate: welcoming and inclusive ◦ Examples: Partner introductions What’s in your wallet
Develop a community of inquiry amongst faculty and in/across departments ◦ Within departments and university-wide ◦ Share the same (similar) teaching and learning vocabulary ◦ Share the templates within the departments Amongst those who teach the same course Will inform those who teach other courses in the majors and minors ◦ Share across departments Articulates how courses inform one another
We have a community of inquiry started at Curry at this time ◦ Professors of Nursing Philosophy African American Studies History English Literature
Accountability ◦ Civil Engineers: Research to avoid accidents Intersections ◦ Health and Safety Committee: mishaps Focus on agreed-upon essential understandings, not detail after detail Efficient and Effective Curriculum Communication within and across departments Ways to share successful strategies under rubrics or headings: ex: community/climate
Once I thought teaching professors about how to accommodate all (as in each and every) student with a different disability made sense
ADD Reading Math Writing Language disorders Non-verbal LD Organizational/Executive Function Blind Deaf Physical disabilities etc Co-existing: Depression Substance abuse OCD
BUT: the teacher professors connect most primarily to their field of study Our field of study (disabilities) is not theirs This broader approach – writing a full curriculum and reaching out to all learners resonates better with professors
Too much to ask Too much to expect BUT ◦ What if we could design curriculum that accommodated a large range of learners? ◦ That could work! ◦ BUT ◦ We need a simple framework for understanding on which to hang ideas There are two: U Conn and Tomlinson
Start small Involve interested faculty Share Tie to “outcomes” assessment
Classroom Culture: ◦ Aronson, E. (2000). Nobody left to hate: Teaching compassion after columbine. NY: Worth Publishers. ◦ Gibbs, J. (1995). Tribes: A New Way of Learning and Being Together. Sausalito, CA: CenterSource Systems, LLC.
Blythe, T. & Associates (1998). Teaching for understanding guide. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Eisner, E. (1994). The Educational Imagination. NY: MacMillan. Ericson, L. (1998). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gregory, G. H. & Chapman, C. (2002). Differentiated Instructional Strategies: One Size Doesn’t Fit All. Place ? :Corwin Press. Heacox, D. (2001). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to reach and teach all learners, grades 3-12. Place ? :Free Spirit Publishing. Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The Differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Scott, S. S., McGuire, J.M. & Shaw, S.F. (2001). Principles of universal design for instruction. Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability, University of Connecticut.
Marzano, R. J., et al (1993). Assessing Student Outcomes. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Maki, Peggy (2004). Assessing for Learning: Building a Sustainable Commitment Across the Institution. Stylus Publishing.
What are 3 pearls of wisdom from this session? What from this session would or could you take to stakeholders on your campus? How does this session inform the 2-5 year outlook on your campus? How does technology play a role here?