Chapter 5 Choosing Outcomes

Given Ozar's deceptively simple definition of learning, the list of common traits of successful adults (Figure 5.1), and the positive role that extracurricular activities have in regards to an adult's effectiveness, it's no wonder that an outcome-centered curriculum should reflect the broadest sense of idealism and a realistic grounding.

A few thoughts arise from this. Some years ago, I was given the chance to develop a curriculum for a course entitled,"Comparative Legal Traditions." This course was an examination of various legal systems around the world. When creating the course I did not have the benefit of exposure to the theory of an outcome-centered curriculum. So, I forged along, developing the syllabus/goals for the class largely from the text I chose and my knowledge of the area. It was that simple.

The class was mostly successful. There were, however, the constant challenges of keeping the students engaged in the study of ancient and medieval history and connecting that study to "beyond the school walls." (p. 67) This situation lead to my realization, overtime, that a curriculum encompassing a "totality of circumstances," i.e. outcomes reflecting "universal dimensions of living" (p. 74) was mandated. Outcomes eventually came to more specifically emphasize such aspirations as greater sensitivity towards cultural diversity, expanded understanding and appreciation of the impact of religion on a legal system and awareness of indigenous conflict resolution. In a way, choosing an outcome was not difficult. Finding the best strategy was.

In any event, the shift from the text-only basis of the curriculum evolved. Also, a search for more practical outcomes and strategies to assist the student in achieving a better grasp of discipline-related skills emerged. For example, role-playing and a series of mini-papers augmented multi-choice exams. In the final analysis, had I been following the outcome-centered process from the start, I believe that I could have improved, much more quickly and effectively, the relevance and usefulness of this course for the student .

Feb. 26: Ozar readings

Some passing thoughts on Ozar . . . Ozar's three ingredients of the decision-making process for outcome-centered curriculum - outcomes, assessment and strategy - are a neat package for the educator. Chapter Three reads so clearly that what lurks beneath - the complexity of the actual process - is somewhat obscured, however. Apply, for example, these ingredients to Ozar's postulate of "[d]eveloping curriculum . . . is the work of a community." (Ch. 1, p. 4) Formulating/identifying "community in the curriculum" (how, when, who, where) may or may not initially be a tough assignment; certainly it is valid. Just what the student should be able to do as a result of this exposure, can be more problematic, however. In this regard, the transition from input to output mindset, is a hurdle, if not a ponderous responcibility for the teacher ~ one which would seem to require the psychic ability of the Oracle at Delphi, the creative spontaneity of Mozart, and the business moxy of Bill Gates. Still, I have seen the output application. It works.

In terms of Catholic education, the author stresses the critical role of "integration of faith, life and learning . . . in the actual curriculum of every student." Id. This is the graveman of Catholic education. It is especially so in light of the rapidity of technological and scientific advancement and the changed nature of the work environment, where the "social" aspect of the "team player" is critical and digital media the font of communication. The current era is additionally marked by the rise of rationalization as a means of explanation and exculpation, both in professional and personal relationships. Add all these ingredients together and one gets a dense soup of ethical dilemma(s). The urgency for outcome-mindset and its sister elements of strategizing and assessing is even more compelling when developing a values-oriented curriculum fostering spiritual strength and grounding to the student so that he/she can walk the right path during these ethical storms.

Monday, February 16, 2009
My Beliefs:Teaching/ Learning- Catholic School
My Beliefs

My beliefs on Catholic school learning and teaching are predicated on my own learning experiences in Catholic schools (grades K-undergraduate), which were very Industrial Age (I.A.), and also my own teaching in secular schools. In the days of my early learning, the focus was on intellectualism/"reason," without a New Age (N.A.), holistic approach to the individual student. (This is a true generalization. There were definitely wonderful exceptions.) There were traditional adherence to assessing a student solely on his or her test scores. The teacher played the classic role of autocratic expert and enforcer. In high school students were placed in the "A," "B," and "C" groups. The students in "A" were the smartest, etc., smart/dumb labeling and stratification at its height. Subjects by and large were taught as individual compartments; a rare field trip exposed us to the outside world of books. Still, I thrived in this environment and thought my academic learning experience was superior, despite its rigors. So, when I started teaching, I followed this classic I.A. model. I was somewhat of a tough, rule-oriented teacher, viewing students as a general group, evaluating their overall accomplishment largely on test grades or major assignments. I definitely emphasized highly structured book learning, with students rarely doing collaborative assignments. I expected them to produce on their own, just like I had. Worked for me, why wouldn't it for them?

Implementation

Times have changed. It didn't long in teaching for me to realize, that the more effort you put into understanding an individual student, the more he or she would derive and meet expectations. Gradually over the years, I shifted my attention from the "whole" group to individuals via increased office hours and availability right before and after class. A very important and apparently effective N.A.-type teaching vehicle I began to increasingly use was specific, constructive suggestions on student writings and tests. This was to become hallmark as it was almost like a private tutoring session, but just on paper. This is standard fare now, but at the time, it was quite a switch in emphasis for me. I instituted small group exercises and student peer-review. Adding mini-assignments of writing and oral presentation gave the students room to shine outside of their tests. Students were allowed to choose the topics of their writing assignments where appropriate. That always made the learning experience more meaningful. As far as grades, I didn't even want to give them anymore because I increasingly came to believe that lower ones did stigmatize the students. Grades still had to be assigned. (There must be a better way.) Further, I encouraged comparative studies, especially of the impact of religion on the laws of individual nations. We were going global. In sum, I will incorporate these N.A. approaches and as well some I.A. methods in my teaching in Catholic schools. Structured outlining is still important to know; discipline in studying is still needed! In any event, the key facet of my teaching there will be conveying the spiritual component in all learning, with a view to the importance of interfaith understanding, a holistic approach all the way.

"The reward for patience is patience." Saint Augustine