Blog #2, Reaction to Ozar - 2/24/09

Prior to reading the first four chapters in Ozar’s book Creating a Curriculum that Works (1994) I never thought about the difference between the questions what shall I teach? vs. what shall students learn? I honestly don’t know if I ever actually knew there was a difference before now. I found Ozar’s outcomes-centered curriculum approach enlightening. Shifting a curriculum to an output mindset rather than an input mindset will create a learning environment most advantageous to the students. While I was reading, I was thinking about our WASC evaluation last year. Although I wasn’t physically there to experience the evaluation, the majority of our faculty meetings and/or in-services this year have primarily focused on our School Improvement Plans and In-Depth Studies. I went back and reread our Science In-Depth Study that our faculty is currently updating. We collaborate in teams (broken out by grade level) to answer the following questions: what students learn, how students learn, and how assessment is used. At times, our teachers are resistant in putting forth the energy and the effort towards these Plan of Action/In-Depth Studies; however, if we shift our focus and create a curriculum revolving around significant learning it can be, as Ozar says, ‘stimulating and rewarding.’

While I was reviewing our Science In-Depth Study, I found it hard to differentiate our goals and outcomes/objectives. Our study states that by identifying learning goals with students before they begin new material, we help the students understand what they are expected to learn with each lesson. After reading Ozar and better understanding the benefits to an outcome-centered curriculum, I think the statement should be revised to say learning outcomes instead of learning goals. “Curriculum that focuses on significant learning begins with clearly articulated learning outcomes.” (p.3)

As a new teacher, I think this book will be a great resource and guide for me. I can apply this approach to create unit and lesson outcomes. I want to be able to observe what has been learned and make it tangible for my students and for me! “Affective outcomes define the significant learning in terms of what students will do in the affective domain in relation to the subject matter.” (p.48)

Blog #1 - Due 2/17/09

Due to my limited experience, I haven't fully formed all of my own personal beliefs about teaching in a Catholic school. Every teacher has a different approach, and I observe teachers utilizing both Industrial-Age and New Science thinking daily. Lecturing to the students is a continuous Industrial-Age practice, which all teachers at my school (both Natives and Immigrants) use. It's important to me that I recognize the differences in each of my students. Even though lecturing to a class doesn't specifically cater to different learning styles, I think it's important that all students realize that listening is a skill worth cultivating. I am a firm believer in always trying to integrate technology into my lesson plans. Most of my beliefs on learning in a Catholic school are derived from my own personal experiences of attending Catholic schools K-12. Throughout my education, I feel I went through a learning transformation, experiencing the shift from Industrial-Age to New Science thinking. I can recall many of the Industrial-Age assumptions on learning being practiced in my early education. The idea of 'smart kids and dumb kids' was one of those assumptions that held true for many of my teachers. When we were divided into academic groups (smart, average, or below average), there was not a lot of room to avoid being categorized or classified. As the technology/dot com era exploded, New Science thinking was integrated quickly into my education. I went from playing Oregon Trail to learning various Microsoft applications within a short time frame. However, a few my teachers refused to accept this New Science thinking for themselves, which as a student we categorized these teachers as 'boring!' Students today embrace technology with a passion and eagerness and I feel it's important as a 21st century educator to implement New Science thinking in all subject areas.

I would consider myself a Digital Native. I am always open to learning different shortcuts, features, or applications that can speed up my process in creating new and engaging lesson plans. We are fortunate to have a SmartBoard in every classroom in our school. While I am still learning everything the SmartBoard has to offer, for me, it's the best resource in creating a stimulating, interactive way to teach the curriculum. With our SmartBoard, I've been able to create lessons like (pre-algebra) Jeporady games and interactive cross-word puzzles for Vocabulary. It's been a great tool to get the kids excited about learning, rather than just sitting there listening to me talk. I am trying to incorporate both the Industrial-Age and New Science thinking by using our SmartBoard as I lecture. I want to create an environment where my students want to ask questions and engage in group discussion while having a clear idea of what is being taught.

Testing it out...

Just making sure this is working :)