Yesterday, I met with Elba and Jen from the Lifespan Religious Education Committee to come up with a curriculum plan for next church year. We were all a little apprehensive, but it turned out to be a relatively painless process. Partly I think it was painless because we had done the hard work ahead of time. In the last meeting of the Lifespan Religious Education Committee, we spent an hour going over the learning goals for the coming year, and that was the hard work.
More and more, I am convinced that the right way to go about planning curriculum is to start with the overall goals for our learners. And recently, I have been reading “Understanding by Design” by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, a book donated by Audris G., one of our church school teachers. Wiggins and McTighe confirm what I’ve been thinking. They say to begin by identifying the desired results. Then they contend the next step is to determine what the acceptable evidence will be that learners have reached the desired results. Only after that should we plan learning experiences and instructional methods.
But the way we usually go about things in a church school is that we pick curriculum books or programs that we like, and use them. For example, the most recent conference of the Liberal Religious Educators Association, the professional association of Unitarian Universalist religious educators, presented four different ways you can plan learning experiences. In other words, they were starting with the learning experiences and instructional methods, and skipping right over setting goals and determining how we know learners have learned anything. The way I see it now, that’s really all backwards. But that’s the way we’ve always done it.
Here in our church, I think we’re moving towards a better approach. The Lifespan Religious Education Committee is working at further refining the learning goals for all ages. We have begun to figure out good ways to determine if anyone is actually learning anything. We’re slowly breaking the old habits of planning things backwards. And it’s starting to pay off for us — curriculum planning was much easier than we had expected this year.
For more about “Understanding by Design,” visit the Web site of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum design at:
http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/menuitem.b66696ac45f924addeb3ffdb62108a0c/
Comment transferred from old blog
I think UBD is a great place to start. Here is a good article on “backwards design”
http://www.ubdexchange.org/resources/news-articles/backward.html
Several years ago I was teaching a class on technology and standards based instruction and had a couple teachers from the local Catholic school attending. We decided to use that she would use the Catechism as a standards document and then design activities to reach particular learner goals.
One distinction that is often useful to start from is the difference between content standards and performance standards.That state of California has academic content standards for its students which identify what students are supposed to know. Performance standards are more based on what you want to be able to observe the learner performing. (In general, Science and Social Studies lend themselves more towards content standards with discrete bodies of knowledge/facts to be known, while math and English have more need for standards based on the acquisition and use of particular skills/strategies).
So, one would need to have a sense of both what a learner needs to know at the end of your lessons as well as what “behavioral objectives” you might be able to observe as a demonstration of successful teaching. (I’ve blended in a couple terms that are not from Wiggins and McTighe here).
I’d love to hear more about how you applied this.
Comment from jfieldnerd – 4/11/05 6:14 PM
Comment transferred from old blog
You may also be interested in some of the session reports from the recent ASCD Annual Conference, in particular the one on encouraging sensitivity to differing religious expressions: http://ascd2005conference.blogspot.com/2005/04/encouraging-sensitivity-to-differing.html
This year’s conference on Understanding by Design and Differentiating Instruction is sold out, but it will be repeated next summer: http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/menuitem.094e328178c0162abfb3ffdb62108a0c/
Jay McTighe, a coauthor of the Understanding by Design book–and the recently released expanded 2nd edition, will be holding a Web Seminar on May 3: http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/menuitem.51d81290deb240a98d7ea23161a001ca/template.article?articleMgmtId=ec89016620520010VgnVCM1000003d01a8c0RCRD#usingrubrics
Comment from frnklnbrdly – 4/13/05 10:54 AM