Influence of conceptbased curriculum frameworks on teachers curriculum

+ Influence of concept-based curriculum frameworks on teachers’ curriculum making: Preliminary findings from a Ph. D study Elaine Toh/ Institute of Education

+ Evolving Educational Context in Singapore n 1997 : Thinking Schools, Learning Nation ( TSLN) n 2004: Teach Less, Learn More (TLLM) Past Recent Years § Government & Independent schools § Integrated Programme (IP) schools § Niche schools § Specialised schools § Single MOE syllabus § Diverse school curriculum § A reduced but more integrated MOE syllabus § National examinations: GCE O & A levels § IB curriculum § exemption from O levels in IP schools § Teachers as curriculum implementers § Teachers as curriculum makers

+ My Research Problem : The What? Understanding By Design (Ub. D) (2005) Teaching for Understanding (Tf. U) (1998) § Both originate from the US educational context § Association for Supervision § Harvard University & Curriculum Development (ASCD) § Offers systematic & comprehensive guidelines for curriculum & lesson planning § Emphasis on conceptual knowledge & understandings

+ My Research Problem : The Why – 2 Main Problems In using these frameworks: § Not all welcome these frameworks § Generally, the Humanities & English teachers are more receptive while the Maths & Science teachers failed to understand their relevance & use § While some experienced teachers struggled, less experienced teachers adapted with ease. §Many teachers struggled to use these frameworks together with the MOE syllabus.

+ My Research Problem : The Why – 2 Main Problems In how these frameworks guide teachers to construct/ reframe the subject knowledge: § Teachers struggled to reframe the subject knowledge conceptually § Teachers with strong subject knowledge are more open to use these frameworks & better able to rework their knowledge conceptually.

+ Ub. D & Tf. U: Concept-based Curriculum Frameworks Understanding By Design Teaching For Understanding § Big Ideas § Generative Topics § Enduring Understandings § Throughlines § Essential Questions § Understanding Goals Erickson’s (2002) Concept-based Curriculum • Key concepts & increasingly sophisticated generalisations • Conceptually based questions to elicit conceptual thinking • Grade level, critical content topic, listed without verbs

+ Erickson’s (2002): Structure of Knowledge

+ What Ub. D, Tf. U & Erickson claim. . ✖ Traditional classroom relies too much on content, textbooks, memorisation of facts & practice of skills (Erickson) ✖ Against Tyler’s use of behavioural objectives use of verbs from Bloom’s Taxonomy because it limits instruction to a topical approach (Erickson) ✔ Importance of conceptual understandings in students’ learning ✔ Prefers the verb understand ✖ Against ✔ National ✖ Because ✔ Teachers of their training & selection of content, curriculum planners use verbs to link content & process skills ✖ Ub. D: teachers will have difficulty identifying concepts & conceptual understanding curriculum is beneficial & important in setting standards & determining content as active curriculum makers, having greater ownership of their practice

+ Kim: On Lesson Planning & Having Curriculum Discussion with Colleagues “. . to make decision on the what to teach and then why…the how doesn’t matter… the power in this will be determined by … how teachers facilitate & get the students to come to the whatever kind of understanding”

+ Kim: Who is she? n 37 years in teaching n Varied experience in teaching & geography : in primary school/ government/ independent/ IP schools/ secondary – JC (KS 3 -5) n Taught different types of students : lower ability - gifted students n Was in curriculum planner in MOE n Was involved in geography teacher training at the NIE n Now in independent, all boys, IP school, teaching Lower Sec boys & IB students n School staff developer

+ Kim: Encounter with Ub. D? n Heard n Did about it from a former colleague her own readings on Ub. D n Attended a ASCD conference in Denver Colorado in 2006 n Was attracted by word ‘understanding’ didn’t know what essential questions were n“ To me, I don’t learn things without understanding… my school experience was meaningless because I was subjected to memorising things so I never liked it. ”

+ Kim as Curriculum Maker “In the past, my intention was to teach geography & geographical understanding… now I think I am teaching children how to learn & geography is a medium for me to teach them how to learn”

+ Kim: Views on Knowledge in the Curriculum “ … it is important to understand the structure of knowledge in geography & how this subject is built upon because it influences how I teach…. hence teacher’s competency in subject knowledge is important … it is not the pedagogy. . ”

+ Kim as Curriculum Maker “…the lesson focus is not to teach them the content. I am getting them to see how to connect knowledge, how to build up knowledge and see patterns and all… The students will struggle. It is due to how their brains has been framed and how the mind has been trained how learning should take place”

+ Kim as Curriculum Maker n Sees her practice as inductive concept teaching: examine data - see the patterns - question the meaning - ask why & factors affecting n Learning in geog: “ seeing big ideas, seeing connections, seeing patterns & thinking about how things link and all” n Reflections: “ is always about whether to restructure the flow of the lesson or change / improve the questions asked”

+ Kim : Questions to frame knowledge n“Whenever I think of the content I teach, I think of it in the form of questions. . I frame everything with questions. Questions are powerful in helping me frame the inquiry … & to reframe a more inquiry mode of thinking. ”

+ Kim : Reflecting on her lesson “ I find it more powerful now that I aim at their learning. I now look at the content and look at how it is learnt and then helps me to design the lesson in stages to develop that learning & understanding. In fact it enhances the geography in my lesson. Rather than in the past, I would have said : rocks are made up of minerals… remember that granite has feldspar, mica and all… sandstone has this… limestone has this. . ”

+ Kim : Reflecting on her lesson “The content is reshaped, refined and reframe in the way that… how knowledge is built. . It is asking about how do you know what you know… like in theory of knowledge. . they have ways of knowing. I am looking for ways of knowing the content. If I know that, then I will translate them into ways of learning the content. . ”

+ Kim : Reflecting on her lesson “lesson planning becomes uncovering the ways of knowing that geographical knowledge such that you recreate the way of knowing. I unpack that for my lessons. ” “ to me it is not the pedagogy because I unpack their way of learning which will determine how I am going to present it to the students. ”

+ Kim as Curriculum Maker “As teachers… we don’t tell students the thinking behind the design. We just get them to do worksheets or watch a video but we are not telling them how we will be building their understanding. I have made students conscious of that so that they can be more conscious of their own learning. ”

+ Kim: Ub. D connected with her own learning “ I think the whole idea is not Ub. D but using more conceptual understanding. Concepts & conceptual understanding falls into my own schema of how knowledge is learnt. That is why it fits so well. I evolve and learn from my own practices. Talking to people is more powerful even. ”

+ What the literature says…. n Concept- led curriculum approach is not new. n Hilda Taba (1962) proposes a sequence in knowledge (specific facts & processes, basic ideas, concepts & thoughtful systems) n Stenhouse (1975) believe that it is possible to purely utilise content for curriculum development ‘ Knowledge has structure, and involves procedures, concepts and criteria. Content can be selected to exemplify the most important procedures, the key concepts and areas and situations in which the criteria hold. . ( They) are important because they are problematic within the subject. They are focus of speculation, not object of mastery. Educationally, they are also important because they invite understanding at variety of levels’(Stenhouse, 1975, p 85)

+ What the literature says…. n Conceptual knowledge as troublesome knowledge: Threshold concepts (Meyer and Land, 2006) – conceptual lenses (Erickson 2002, 2007 & 2008) n Gabler & Schroeder (2003) on types of concept teaching: Inductive & deductive concept teaching n Milligan & Wood(2010): teachers continue to focus on achievement objectives, topics & facts, students have superficial understandings. Suggest that conceptual understandings as ‘transition points’ of learning

+ What the literature says…. n Debates on the objectives model focuses on structure, level of specificity or distinctions in objectives n Criticisms against objectives model: focus on its purpose & focus n Stenhouse (1975) on limitations of the process model : ‘ The process model is essentially a critical mode, not a marking model. It can never be directed towards an examination as an objective without the loss of quality…The process-based curriculum pursues understanding rather than grades when the two conflict, and since grades are attainable without understanding, this penalises the limited students in terms of opportunities even though it is educationally advantageous…’ ( Stenhouse, 1975, p 95 -96)

+ What the literature says…. n Irony is that Ub. D & Tf. U are process-based frameworks geared specifically for teachers, they are challenging for teachers n Stenhouse (1975): teachers are both strength & weakness in process curriculum model. There is a conflict of interest & change in roles of teachers in assessment & grading as teacher becomes the critic rather than assessor. n Ub. D(1998, 2005): planning & developing curriculum for understanding because of subjectivity of understanding goals & backward design principle changes thinking processes & approach to curriculum design n Erickson (2007): changes classroom pedagogy from topic to idea approach. n Blythe (1998) and Tomlinson in Erickson (2007) observes that teachers notions of effective teaching, their intellect and imagination may be challenged by use of these frameworks.

+ References n Erickson, H. L. (2002). Creating Concept-based Curriculum and Instruction : Teaching Beyond the Facts. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press. n Erickson, L. H. (2007 ). Concept-based Curriculum and Instruction for the Thinking Classroom. California: Corwin Press. n Erickson, H. L. (2008). Stirring the head, heart, and soul : redefining curriculum and instruction. (3 rd Ed. ). Thousand Oaks, Calif. ; London: Corwin. n Wiggins, G. and Mc. Tighe, J. (1998). Understanding By Design USA: ASCD. n Wiggins, G. and Mc. Tighe, J. (2005). Understanding By Design USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development n Mc. Tighe, J. and Wiggins, G. (2004). Understanding by Design: Professional Development Workbook. USA Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development n Blythe, T. (1998). The Teaching For Understanding Guide San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. n Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World Inc. n Gabler, I. C. and Schroeder, M. (2002). Constructivist Methods for the Secondary Classroom: Engaged Minds Pearson. n Meyer, J. and Land, R. (2006). Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding : Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge. London: Routledge. n Milligan, A. and Wood, B. (2010). 'Conceptual understanding as transition points: Making sense of a complex social world'. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42 (4), 487 -501. n Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development. London: Heinemann Educational.

+ Questions?