Ideas from Paulo Friere, Understanding
by Design and the Ontario Curriculum
And their Application to Layered Curriculum
by Heather Clayton (2004)
One of the exciting privileges of being an educator is the ongoing opportunity to be exposed to and challenged by new and not so new ideas. As a new Special Education consultant in the fall of 2003, I was inspired by the ideas of Kathie Nunley I heard at the ASCD conference in Toronto. As she spoke about the adolescent brain, and then Layered Curriculum™ as her response, it was an “AH-HA” moment for me. Phone calls that I had been receiving from teachers and parents since I had started my job, around the challenges of reaching all students, and providing entry points at all levels of learning, flooded back to me. The core ‘truths’ for Layered Curriculum, the importance of choice, higher level thinking as a goal, and student accountability for their learning, seemed to answer many of the concerns that I was hearing. I have since spent a year investigating related material and especially looking at the links to our Ontario Curriculum materials. This paper will reflect that journey by looking at connections between philosopher, Paulo Friere (whom I studied during my education degree), theorists Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe who have written Understanding by Design, and finally, the Ontario Curriculum Planner and Achievement Charts, to which our teachers in Ontario are entirely accountable. Therefore, the paper is a movement from the abstract ideological to the concrete. I believe the core of these ideas is fully supported and complimented by the tenants of Layered Curriculum.
Paulo
Friere has been called one of the most influential thinkers about
education in
the late 20th century. He is
most known for his concern for the powerless as written in The
Pedagogy of
the Oppressed. Friere posited five
main ideas:
1.
The importance of dialogue
and the fact that the dialogue was two way, contained in a respectful
relationship. It meant that people worked
with each other.
2.
He spoke of “praxis” –
action that was informed by knowledge and should be linked to values. But it wasn’t knowledge for knowledge sake;
rather, it was to empower people to use the knowledge to make an impact
on their world.
3.
He spoke about building
hope for the oppressed. As consciousness is increased, society can be
transformed.
4.
Friere emphasized the
importance of linking education with the real world experiences of the
students.
5.
Friere tried to highlight
and minimize the differences between teachers and learners.
Friere
was often criticized for his extreme ‘either/or’ positions,
particularly around
subjects such as the oppressed.
However, there is much in his philosophy that links with Layered
Curriculum. First, oral discussion and
defense are key to Layered Curriculum. Learning occurs through dialogue
as
ideas are defended and questioned.
Second, the goal of the Layered Curriculum model is to develop
critical
thinkers who can use their knowledge to impact the world. Third, his
considerations
and definitions of the ‘oppressed’ may remind us of students in our
classes,
struggling to access information and express their knowledge in a
limited
system of instruction and evaluation.
Layered Curriculum increases entry points and opportunities for all students.
Finally,
his comments about the importance of real experiences which resonate
with the
students to provide valuable learning are supported by teachers all
over North
America who are trying Layered Curriculum and are excited by the real
learning
that relevant hands on experiences are providing. A
teacher recently told me that she had given a particular
geography unit test for several years,
but this year taught the unit in a Layered Curriculum format and
the
marks on the test were significantly better.
Paulo
Friere was primarily concerned with the empowerment of learners. By using choice, accountability and higher
level thinking, Layered Curriculum is a concrete, practical
reinforcement of
many of Friere’s ideas.
Stephen
R. Covey, author of 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, states
that we
need to “begin with the end in mind”.
This statement summarized the model for thinking about and
planning
units developed by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe. In
their book, Understanding by Design, they propose a
‘backwards design’ which counters much of how teachers traditionally
planned. The two main ‘backwards’ ideas
include the fact that it is important to start with the goals and
objectives
and derive the performance tasks from them.
Often teachers are caught trying to use a particular textbook or
some
common practice and they develop their unit from that point. Similarly, assessments should be designed at
the start, not thought about once the teaching has ended.
Both changes result in more coherence
throughout a unit, which in improves student learning and performance.
Wiggins and McTighe
identify 3 stages in Backwards Design and Layered Curriculum clearly
has
similarities and links with each stage.
In this paper the focus will be the first two stages.
|
Filters |
Comparison with Layered
Curriculum |
|
1. Larger concepts…the application of the
essential ideas to ongoing life. |
The goal of
‘A’ layer is to get students to critically interact with learning and
apply to everyday issues. |
|
2. Is the learning authentic, moving the learner
from passive to active participation? |
Through oral
defense, debate and kinesthetic tasks students are active learners. |
|
3. Identify and correct misconceptions. |
On-going,
face to face contact with teachers, gives students daily feedback. |
|
4. Engagement is a key to learning. |
Allowing
students choice and giving them responsibility increases the engagement
of students. |
Each of the layers of understanding is linked
to types of assessment. Performance tasks
and projects seem to link more directly with the enduring
understandings than the quizzes and tests, but clearly all have a place. Teachers using layered curriculum comment over
and over at how the involvement in meaningful tasks and projects in
their units seems to improve student performance on traditional unit
tests. A Layered Curriculum unit, designed
intentionally, based on expectations, where all of the ‘B’ and ‘C’
layer activities are stepping stones toward learning and ‘enduring
understandings’ of the ‘A’ layer, fit nicely with the methodology of Wiggins and McTighe. The challenge for the Layered curriculum teacher is to
consider the activities carefully, planning from the outcomes and
objectives, and being able to see how each activity links to and builds
towards those enduring understandings.
It
is interesting to note how Layered Curriculum utilizes some of the key
concepts
of philosopher, P. Friere, and how it lends itself to the ideas of
Wiggins and
McTighe’s Understanding by Design.
As a teacher/consultant in Ontario, it has also been important
to look
at the links between Layered Curriculum and the Ontario Achievement
Chart and
the Curriculum Unit Planner. In
considering the Achievement Chart, I have used Bloom’s taxonomy as well
as
Layered Curriculum to see how the levels line up. (See
attached Chart). It
is difficult at times to unravel the strands of thinking into separate
categories. It is clear that our goal
as educators is to move students through all types and levels of
learning and a
model like Layered Curriculum does that well.
While the planner is a practical, electronic tool, for the
purpose of
this paper, I wish to consider the principles of instructional design
and the
application of these principles as stated on the website. According to
the
ministry website and power point presentation the key questions we need
to ask
are:
1.
What do I want students to
learn?
2.
What evidence will I
accept of that learning?
3.
How will I design
instruction for effective learning for all?
This
speaks again to the importance of front-end thinking and planning based
on what
students need to know. Evidence of
learning could be a variety of things and indeed, in layered curriculum
encompasses many styles of learning.
The final question is the one that provides that greatest
challenge for
all teachers as our classrooms grow more diverse each year. The huge benefits of Layered Curriculum are
the push to a variety of instructional tasks and evaluation methods,
engaging
all students in learning. In the
instructional elements of planning it is important to start with
expectations:
what do we want the students’ ‘enduring understanding’ to be. To achieve this we need performance based
tasks that encourage meaningful learning.
Assessment and evaluation is to help students improve and meet
the
expectations. Through Layered
Curriculum, students orally defend a large portion of their learning in
day to
day, face to face interactions. Teachers have daily contact and
opportunities
to meet with students. They are guided
and supported much more directly as they demonstrate understanding and
achievement. Developing teaching and
learning strategies emphasizes that all must have the rich experiences. Layered Curriculum, which naturally lends
itself to activities based in the Multiple Intelligences, seems to
provide many
opportunities for helping all to succeed.
All students should be able to access ‘A’ layer: all students
can
critically think. The focus on topics,
themes and resources is what is necessary in any unit and again it
appears that
Layered Curriculum would facilitate that focus nicely.
As
we move from the ideological to the practical in considering the
theorists and
models discussed, key ideas continue to surface:
¨
The importance of dialogue
and real-life practical learning, as well as the students’ ownership in
the process of learning, all impact the engagement of the student.
¨
The key in planning to
identify enduring understandings and then to set up a unit to reinforce
those understandings.
¨
The fact that all, even
the most oppressed, need to be able to access the learning in our
classrooms.
¨
Finally, the importance of
not only allowing all student the opportunity for critical thinking but
the key which is to apply those critical thoughts in ways that will
make a difference in our world.
Layered
Curriculum, which encourages student choice, accountability and a push
toward
high level thinking, is one model that seems to address these concepts
in a
clear, practical and user-friendly way.
| Bloom’s Taxonomy |
Layered Curriculumä |
Ontario Achievement Chart |
|
Knowledge: remembering or recalling
appropriate, previously learned information to draw out factual
(usually right or wrong) answers. Uses words such as how many, when,
where, list, define, tell, describe, identify to draw out factual
answers, testing students recall and recognition. Comprehension: grasping or understanding the
meaning of informational materials. Use words such as describe,
explain, estimate, predict, identify, differentiate, to encourage
student to translate interpret and extrapolate. |
C
Layer
|
Knowledge and Understanding: Knowledge of content (facts terms,
definitions) Understanding of content Communication: Expression and organization of
ideas and information in oral, visual and written forms. Use of conventions, vocabulary and
terminology of the discipline oral, visual and written forms. Thinking: Use of planning skills such as gathering information and setting goals. |
|
Application:
applying previously learned information (or
knowledge) to new and unfamiliar situations. Use
works such as demonstrate, apply, illustrate, show, solve, examine,
classify, experiment to encourage students to apply knowledge to
situations that are new and unfamiliar. Analysis: breaking down information into
parts, or examining information. Use words and phrases such as : what
are the differences, analyze explain compare, separate etc. Synthesis: Applying prior knowledge and skills to
combine elements into a pattern not clearly there before.
Use phrases such as combine rearrange, create, design,
invent to encourage students to combine elements into a pattern that’s
new. |
B Layer |
Thinking:Use of processing skills
(analyzing, generating, integrating, synthesizing, evaluating,
detecting point of view). Communication: For different audiences and
purposes in oral, visual and written forms. Application: Application of knowledge and skills
in familiar contexts. Transfer of knowledge and skills to
new contexts. Knowledge and Understanding: Subject specific content acquired in each
grade (knowledge) and the comprehension of its meaning and significance
(understanding). |
|
Evaluation: Judging or deciding according to some set of criteria, without real right or wrong answers, use words such as assess decide, select, explain, conclude |
A
Layer
|
Application: Transfer of knowledge and skills to new contexts. Making connections within and between various contexts. Communication: Communication for different audiences to inform, persuade in oral visual and written forms. Thinking: Use of critical/creative thinking processes (eg. Inquiry, research, decision making process) |
References:
Covey,
Stephen R. The 7 Habits of Highly
Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1989.
Friere,
Paolo. The Pedagogy of the Oppressed.
New York: Continuum, 1970.
Wiggins,
Grant and McTighe, Jay. Understanding
By Design. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD,
1998.
http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/198199/chapter1.html