The Y in everYthing -- i.e curriculum design

I had what I considered a well-planned lesson for my first practice. My tutor read it and smiled. "Why are you doing this?" he asked. My first thought was to say, "because you told me to" but I bit my tongue instead. I had drawn the topic from a hat and needed help with the main and subsidiary aims. His smile widened so I improvised the rationale (useful for beginners, fun activities, colour-coded morphemes, drilling, pairwork) yet modified versions of his original question kept cropping up. Eventually, he offered an idea: "think of this lesson as a flower," he said. "These activities are very good but... do they connect at the centre? In fact, what is at the centre?"

His Socratic way to elicit my intentions was as revealing as the image he provided. With it, he had depicted the heart of the curriculum question: why do everything we do? 

I will attempt here to answer that question here and explore why intentionality is essential to achieve a cohesive and effective curriculum. 

The C word

Typically, upon hearing the word curriculum people think of “content”, or as described by McGee (2012), "knowledge as a product" (p. 89). It is defined by drawing from its Latin origin, "course", or invoking its aim to describe it as a “plan”; and there is often the insinuation that curricula are masterminded by someone but executed by someone else. So, what is it? 

For short, the curriculum is the alpha and the omega of teaching. Across a school, the curriculum expresses at every level from the paradigmatic to the pragmatic (McGee, 2012); and within our classrooms, it will display in two dimensions: there is the intended curriculum and the operational one. (Eisner, 1966, as cited in McGee, 2012, p. 77). In other words, the curriculum garners both learning intentions and teaching methods and sits at the centre of every didactic bloom, holding together every sequence, and infusing every outcome. It is a threefold yet holistic phenomenon: the “intended, implemented, and attained” curricula (Thijs et. al., 2009, p10). Or, in other words, the curriculum is a torch pointing in a certain direction, the signposts along the way, and the destination. All at once.

The torch

All intended curricula, either enshrined in policy or implicit within a community, directs teachers by shining on what it "should aspire to and value in its schooling" (McGee, 2012, p. 87).

In this country, such guidance is provided by The New Zealand Curriculum (and Te Marautanga o Aotearoa). Rather than a repertoire of Syllabi, it is a philosophical statement nested within a worldview born from gradual shifts in historical and educational values (McGee, 2008). As a foundational statement, The NZC beacons for an autonomous and accountable system. It is an operational document by setting Achievement Objectives for what is imparted in all areas. It is supportive in offering parameters for the developmental progressions expected at every stage. It is also aspirational by seeking to anticipate the struggles future citizens will face, and democratic by unifying all educational efforts towards an equitable goal. Its Principles call educators to encourage, model, and explore high ideals of inclusivity, responsiveness, innovation, and social justice. And for learners, the NZC is concerned with their success in developing key competencies across cognitive, self, and social dimensions (The New Zealand Curriculum / Kia Ora - NZ Curriculum Online, n.d.). It should be noted, however, that critical viewpoints have raised concerns regarding contradictions between the NZC's intended and implemented curricula. As a statement of what matters, it remains anchored within a dominant Anglo-European framework and displays an “exclusive interpretation of intercultural principles” (Salahshour, 2020, p.9) that remains vastly restricted to tokenistic practices.

The signposts

Start with a plan

The Languages area of the NZC is designed around proficiency, rather than linguistic complexity or topics. It has three strands, with communication at the core and language and culture knowledge as subsidiaries. Its Achievement Objectives span 8 Levels irrespective of age but which are, typically, linked to the last four years of secondary schooling. Most importantly, assessment focuses on competence in 4 communicative skills --speaking, listening, reading, writing-- and one functional skill: presenting information. It does not provide syllabi for every level but uses descriptors that are concerned, mainly, with pragmatic targets, like responding to requests, and cognitive ones as well. (Achievement Objectives / Learning Languages / The New Zealand Curriculum / Kia Ora - NZ Curriculum Online, n.d.).

Clear direction

The NZC's holistic approach focuses on performance without being prescriptive. This places the responsability on teachers to design a cohesive curriculum that will lead to performative success. 

In my initial anecdote, the setting was a struggle to identify the aims for a twenty-minute lesson. I had inadvertently committed what Wiggins and McTighe (2005) describe as one of the “twin sins of traditional design” (p. 16) by making didactic decisions prior to selecting goals. In doing so, I had adopted an accidental style of teaching where lessons might be visibly engaging but arguably effective, or I would otherwise teach the test and the textbook. As theorised by Wiggins, this common approach fails from bypassing intentionality in class design by "throwing content and activities against the wall and hope some of it sticks" (p. 15). The NZC invites us to reverse the process: focus on the desired attained curriculum by first selecting "explicit and transparent priorities" (p.16) and then consider the rest -- how learning is evidenced, the relevance and order of sequences, efficient instructions, most productive interactions and layout, seamless transitions, and so on. 

Travelling by invitation

Attained curricula will surge from intended outcomes matching the necessary ones through progressively stretching students' cognitive fabric. This involves recognising them as participants who "construct learning through engagement and active exploration" (Dumont et. al., 2010, p.6). That is, only that which fulfils a student’s unique learning need will have a true developmental and educational effect in them and procure adaptive expertise (p.3). 

I have shared in this post how one seemingly ordinary English class changed the course of my life. The anecdote illustrates how aims and needs are linked in the learning experience, which accounts for how often I think about it. What strikes me is how the most transformative aspect of that teaching sequence was probably unintentional. Perhaps knowingly, the teacher was employing a pedagogical approach from a particular philosophy of language. Her aims were appropriate and her methodology, engaging. However, it was the fact that she invited me to discover the inner workings of the English language by myself that became the catalyst for an unstoppable reaction. Out of those twenty minutes of private tutoring, such was the learning I truly needed. The teaching that remained with me forever.

Will anything I deliver in a class serve as a catalyst in my students' lives? For that to be the case, I should replace the abstraction at the centre of my flower with aims customised for their needs (motivations, and preferences) and adopt a reflective approach to discern what Dewey called the “classroom experiences that are educational, non-educational and mis-educational” (cited by McGee, 2008, p.68). For instance, I am currently teaching a mixed senior class (NCEA levels 1 and 3). All students are highly motivated and data shows they perform at a high literacy stanine. They are also doing two courses at once: three days a week with me and the rest on correspondence. The challenge will be how to plan an engaging, cohesive curriculum that supports and challenges each one to the right extent. I will require adaptive sequences for commonly used topics which have the potential for differentiation within every task. These should not burden them with extra work but provide a wealth of input and ample chances to apply "meaningfully-learned knowledge and skills flexibly and creatively in different situations" (Dumont et. al., 2010, p.3). Thus, the curriculum is one for all and yet adaptable to every learner or level. 

The destination

 My childhood experience also reveals the level to classroom exchanges where a hidden curriculum will exist. That is, where “unintended lessons, values, and perspectives” can be acquired from day-to-day experience and human interaction (Hidden Curriculum Definition, n.d.). The hidden curriculum serves as the ideal vehicle for existencial aims to be reflected on and modelled. Such undercurrent, which should be intentionally tapped into by teachers, may deliver profound transformation beyond all syllabi. This ulterior view of the curriculum recognises that classrooms are spheres where spiritual, moral, political, social, communicative, and analytic values will be necessarily present and acted upon (Van Brummelen, 2002, p.59), either purposefully or not. As explained by McGee (2012), "curriculum development involves clusters of important decisions, but there is connectedness between all of them" (p. 84). 
In my subject, I hope to prop all experiences on what I consider the highest ethical pillars: love, compassion, integrity, trust, and cooperation (New International Version, 2011, Peter 3:8).  In my view, the latter is particularly evidenced by a collaborative and trusting approach to shaping curricula, how I encourage peer relationships and coaching; and how I manage conflict (Nuthall, 2007). Both in and outside the classroom, I can use relationships to “foster values that help students become loving and principled persons” (Van Brummelen, 2002. p. 58).

To summarise, intentionality is a key pedagogical skill that amplifies learning by helping teachers to exploit every teachable space available. Through selecting relevant goals for class design, involving learners' needs and context, and recognising opportunities for moral and social development, I can shape an integral and effective curriculum for Spanish and for every specific class. Which makes my old tutor’s loving question even more relevant twenty years on: 

Why do I do everything I do?

Takeaways: 

• Shaping curricula involves every educational decision from understanding what it means to learn something, what matters enough to be learned, and how it might affect learners' lives.
• Guiding principles, like those from the NZC, still require teacher's active participation to define how the curriculum will occur in practice.
• Intentionality allows teachers to build units towards clear aims and helps to shape cohesive planning.
• Curricula need to be acutely sensitive to learner's specific needs.
• Hidden curricula provide teachable spaces where spiritual and moral transformation can take place and should be intentionally used in and outside the classroom.

References:

Achievement objectives / Learning languages / The New Zealand Curriculum / Kia ora - NZ Curriculum Online. (n.d.). The New Zealand Curriculum Online. Retrieved 6 March 2021, from https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/Learning-languages/Achievement-objectives#collapsible7

Dumont, H. (2010). Educational Research and Innovation The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice (Education Research and Innovation) (n ed.). OECD Publishing. http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/50300814.pdf

Hidden Curriculum Definition. (n.d.). The Glossary of Education Reform. Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://www.edglossary.org/hidden-curriculum/

McGee, C. (2008). Understanding curriculum. In C. McGee & D. Fraser (Eds.). The professional practice of teaching (3rd ed., pp. 97-117). Cengage. 

McGee, C. (2012). Teachers and curriculum decisions. In C. McGee & D. Fraser (Eds.). The professional practice of teaching (4th ed., pp. 76-95). Melbourne, Australia. 

Musingafi, M.C., Mhute, I., Zebron, S., & Kaseke, K.E. (2015). Planning to Teach: Interrogating the Link among the Curricula, the Syllabi, Schemes and Lesson Plans in the Teaching Process. Journal of Education and Practice, 6, 54-59. Retrieved 4 March 2021 from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1082472.pdf 

New International Version. (2011). BibleGateway.com.
www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-International-Version-NIV-Bible/#booklist

Nuthall, G. (2007). The hidden lives of learners. NZCER.

PB4L Restorative Practice / School-initiated supports / System of support (incl. PLD) / Kia ora - NZ Curriculum Online. (n.d.). Ministry of Education. Retrieved 24 February 2021, from https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/System-of-support-incl.-PLD/School-initiated-supports/PB4L-Restorative-Practice

Salahshour, N. (2020). A Critique of New Zealand’s Exclusive Approach to Intercultural Education. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 1–18. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40841-020-00179-9

The New Zealand Curriculum / Kia ora - NZ Curriculum Online. (n.d.). The Ministry of Education. Retrieved 4 March 2021, from https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum#collapsible7

Van Brummelen, H. (2009). Walking with God in the classroom (3rd ed.). Purposeful Design. 

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. ASCD.