EDUC 5113 Week 3 Blog Julia Weisenfels

Week 3 EDUC 5113 Julia Weisenfels

Question: Am I more Naturalistic or Technological? Do I see any possibilities to adopt a dual approach in curriculum design and instructional delivery?

As a science and mathematics teacher in a small, rural school district, I have experienced the adoption of new curricula as well as the elimination of curricula.  They were both the results of student needs, or lack thereof, and state requirements.  A Physics course was dropped and the administration opted for it to be offered on line due to lack of interest from students.  Quantitative Reasoning (Q.R.) was added and replaced Advanced Topics Mathematics, which was mandated by the Arkansas Department of Education.  The curriculum for the new math course was guided by the standards, and I designed the curriculum, as I assessed the interests and needs of my students.

     Curriculum development that emphasizes defining the terminal learning objectives early, then creating steps to accomplish them, is known as the Technological approach (Gatthorn, A., et. al. p. 214).  It involves an orderly sequence of steps, beginning with determining the general goals of the course, then assessing students’ needs, identifying objectives, sequencing, selecting materials, and ultimately establishing a curriculum guide (Gatthorn, A., et. al. p. 215).  In contrast, the Naturalistic approach to curriculum development emphasizes the quality of the learning activities and allows for flexibility.  The main difference in the two approaches lies in the manner in which needs are identified and the course is developed.  Alternatives to the course are assessed and decisions are made collaboratively by a planning team.  Things to be considered include targeted audience for the course, elective status, time frame and frequency of instruction, content and continuity with other courses offered by the school.  This process is time consuming, as several participants are involved and many steps are considered before the course begins.

     I am more technological in my approach to curriculum development and I believe that is because I teach in a small district and I am the only person who teaches some subjects.  When I was told that I would be teaching Q.R., I began preparing by looking for the state standards.  I knew who my “audience” or students would be and what their goals were, which were to get a math credit, then to graduate.  My goal for them was to teach them mathematics skills that they could use in their daily lives, such as calculating sale prices when a product was advertised as a percent off, figuring sales tax, and total prices after deducting coupons and adding sales tax.  I wanted them to convert percentages to decimals, and vice versa, and calculate tips as percentages of their restaurant bills.  I also immersed them in the kitchen using recipes and doubling and halving the ingredients.  Finally, I included a unit on calculating income taxes.  I chose the lessons and the materials based on the state’s educational standards for the course.

     I do see possibilities of adopting a dual approach to both curriculum design and instructional delivery.  Referring to the Q.R. course, the sequence of instructional units could be flexible, and the sequence chosen could be different for different groups of students from one year to the next.  I determine what will capture the students’ attention (Gatthorn, A., et. al. p. 227).  Since many of the students would go directly into the job market after graduation, I focussed on possible daily math encounters such as cooking and restaurant math, measurements, and money.  I would eventually include saving money, purchasing cars and houses, and paying  rent.  The standards and objectives drive my planning process, which is characteristic of the technical model of curriculum development.  However,  I wanted to design quality learning experiences while keeping the objectives in mind, which is more the naturalistic approach to development.                    

     The beauty of being the sole teacher of a subject is being able to be as flexible as I need to be with content and time management, while being driven by content standards.  In doing this, I  combine the naturalistic and the technological approaches to curriculum planning and instructional delivery, creating the optimum learning environment for my students.  My critical thinking expectations can be achieved using a dual approach, and my students experience success as they prepare to use mathematics in the real world.

Reference:

Gatthorn, A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B., Boschee, B. (2019). Curriculum leadership:  Strategies for development and implementation. (7th Edition, p. 214-231). SAGE Publishing.