Chapter 12.

Content v/s Essential Questions.
" Typical curriculum frameworks emphazise lists of discrete content knowledge and skills. This has the effect of sublty encourage teachers to "cover" things in a mechanistic and overly didactic way that we now is less engaging, coherentm and effective..." (280)

To be realistic we do not plan our sillabi or programmes paying or even formulating essential questions.. It is true the fact that teachers tend to cover the contents; and probably that is why teacher plan programmes in such a way... easier and faster. we cannot deny that.
Starting to formulate essential questions to setlle the basis of our programmes is not a priority for teachers who have hundreds of  tests to check, and classes to give.  Asking such questions IS a good idea, but how possible is?  There it is the main reason why we are planning based on coursebooks or discrete contents. Covering is indeed a help for the teacher with all the work that has to be done. However, I believe that we need to start changing things if we want better education for our children. I know it is really difficult to change, but I think we must start now.

Hands-on and Minds-on Students?

In UbD the author is constantly suggesting that a learner centered method is much more coherent with engaging and effective learning.  Such suggestion caught my attention and led me to reflect on how much autonomy have my students been given in order to NOW make them work and experience on their  own, and only with the little help from the teacher. After trying a couple of times to work in a less teacher centered method, I realize my student have ZERO authonomy, which worries my a lot.  I also realize they are completely dependent of my instructions, my knowledge, my advices, and even my presence.  Thus, it would be impossible to change from one day to another,.  Moreover, I believe the change has to begin Now in order to see the results in next generations. Now, who gives autonomy to teacher who have also been brought up with a strong submition to authorities? I have mentioned several times,  and I do not have any idea on how to make changes possible if teachers do not change....

Here you have some.... FACTS!

... " To "get" a fact requieres only that we grasp the meaning of the words or see the data. To "get" an understanding requires more: Even after the meanings of all the words or data are clear, we maynot get their significance. We have to ask questions about the facts, connect them to other facts, and try to apply them in various situations..."

 We are all clear that we need to transfer our students "understandings" in order to get them develop their critical thinking and creativity, and not only learning by heart facts about a determined content. However, How much of that do we do in our classes? how much of that happenned when we were students? We weren´t educated in constructivist classrooms, hence if we are able Now to discuss and critisize the understandings given to us is because we have learnt paying high prices.
It's true, fortunately, now we have been applying some constructivist concepts and ideas that have improved our education, however there is a lot that remains unsolved.  The same as with Essential Questions, getting our students to get an understanding becomes harder to teachers who are strongly structured  with the old habits of learning facts by heart without questioning, expanding or suggesting. 

Thus, again, the change is is on us.

Essential Questions

In UbD it is suggested to use questions as "doorways through which learners explore key concepts, themes, theories, issues and problems that reside within the content" (106).  Such suggestion makes sense in a contex where students have a high level of autonomy, where the teacher's active role is as guide who helps the students with hints in order to encourage students to discover.  Nevertheless, I dare to say that most of our students lack of such autonomy and expect us to fill them with anwers and not with more questions. This problems is due to decades of instructional education which did not emphasized in developing student's critical thinking and autonomy.  In Chile,  teachers have always been the most important element in the classroom, since they are conceived as the owners of knowledge and the masters to deliver such knowledge to the subdued students.  Thus, trying to implement such an approach that implyies something completely opposed to the learning process of Chilean students is a really difficult task to achieve. Even for teachers to make these essential questions, undoubtebly, becomes difficult at times.

Are we prepared for such a change in Chilean instruction?  We have been witnesses of various unfruitful efforts to start filling our students' world with questions they HAVE to answer. However, as mentioned before, first, us teachers need to be prepared to give such a guidance, and then we can ask our students to think and question the contents. If we ever change our lack of critical thinking, then we can indeed make our students' to develop theirs. In the meantime, we are in the process of making questions for ourselves.

Second entry: Clarity!

As stated in the first entry, planning backwards  presents several difficulties for the teacher to overcome.  One, and the most important I think, is to work in order to fulfil the objectives set before we start the journey. Having long and short-term goals defined with clarity is a really difficult task to achieve, specially if teachers do not have time enough to sit back and reflect on the goals their are seeking to obatain.
Most of teachers work without the clear knowledge of the national curriculum but only the goals of their institutions. However, I think that to have clear objective even within the classroom, we need to look back to the national goals, then institutional, and finally goals set for classes. Only if we follow such reflection teachers can have clear objectives set, thus they are ready to start planning.

Altough this idea sounds perfect for improving our performance as teachers and the education of our students, we must acknowledge the fact that some of this ideas are very difficult to be carried out. Why? I believe teachers spend a lot of time preparing materials and tests and planning  for each class and that has lead to forget the bases for teaching English in Chile: the curriculum.  There is awarness of its existence and also about its flaws, but how  much do teachers know about the goals that have been stablished? Only have such goals in mind first, we can set the content standards for our institutions and classes. However, that is a lot of work to do and if we add  teaching classes it becomes imposible to be carried out.
I do believe is an important work to do, I also believe there should be specialists on the subject, designers, doing such work, though. Designers should only destine their time to study and set goals clearly in order to have teachers planning their classes. Some institutions have such system, but it would be a great benefit for education if it is mass spread.

Post comments on "Please enter Backwards"

I do believe that entering the road backwards helps teachers to make learning meaningful. However, I must aknowledge the fact that there are some difficulties that impeed teacher from writing a 3 pages lesson plan. 

First: teachers do not have the time to go through such a time consuming 3 backward step process.

Second: most teachers have to adjust to a previously stated curriculum that usually fits a set of materials.

At some institutions the curriculum is shaped by the materials. Thus, it is difficult for a teacher to go against the tide and start a backward process when they are being forced to teach by coverage.

Therefore, again we are confronted with the problem of having  wonderful ideas for teaching and improving the learning process of our students, but that are impossible to apply  whatever the obstacles are: lack of resources, lack of time, or lack of freedom.  Thus, what is left for teacher to do is to adapt these ideas, on which I think we are becoming real experts.

First Entry to the Antz Box: Please enter Backwards!

Meaningful learning seems to be the light at the end of the road of teaching. However as teachers and designers walk the path, engaging colourful and sparkling materials appear and diffuse the ultimate goal. Fantastic and entertaining activities offer teachers the opportunity to take a short cut that students seem to like but that never leads them to the finishing line.

Therefore, the lost teachers must wonder what to do with their lost pupils. What to do? What to do?  Go backwards! Do not follow the sparkling materials without first assuring they are not empty and that they subordinate to the great white aim called: Learning Results. Moreover, teachers should not even start walking without having stated what the light is going to be. First step.  Second step: teachers must determine what are going to be the obstacles in the path that will evidence whether students got into the learning results light or not. Finally, third step: Teachers must think on how to make students to walk the path, defeat the obstacles, and fully get the expected results.

         Summing up, the three backward steps to follow before we get ourselves and our students into the road are: 

1.     Identify desired results

2.     Determine acceptable evidence

3.     Plan learning experiences and instruction

(Gran Wiggins and Jay Mc Tighe. P.18)

DON’T GET LOST. PLEASE ENTER BACKWARDS!