III. Impact on Learning

Since I made this curriculum map a week before the end of the school year, I cannot say that it already has had an impact on my student learning.

However, most of the learning strategies in my map are research/scientific-based; proven to be effective by teachers, including myself (few are created by yours truly). They are student-centered, mostly hands-on activities. The biggest change I made was the assessment part. I added more authentic and differentiated assessments that my students will most likely appreciate this coming school year because they are based on the feedback by teachers, parents, and students.

I am confident that if I follow my curriculum map next year, my students will benefit from it. Because the lessons are relevant to them, learning will be long-term.

II. Master of Program Competencies

My artifact helped me improve in the following competencies:

Competency 1: Teachers are committed to students and their learning.
My curriculum map encouraged me to be more diverse and multicultural. It made me accept that diversity is one way to promote student learning. When I was designing my map, I pondered on each student’s intelligence(s) and different learning style(s) that may have something to do with their cultural background.

Competency 2: Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students.
I have been teaching 3rd grade Science for three years now. However, my artifact made me see the big picture as I used the Backwards Design Model. From seeing the big picture or the learning goals, I was able to research and think of relevant and appropriate teaching practices. The instructional tasks and the assessments matched the standards and the essential questions. I can also say that they were more differentiated to accommodate the individual students’ needs.

I learned a lot from Zemelman, Daniels, and Hyde (2005). They discussed the qualities of best practice in teaching science. I have known some of them, but they expound a lot more. I have a better understanding about the difference between scientific inquiry and hands-on Science—that they are not synonymous. We can have hands-on activities, but students do not necessarily doing scientific inquiry. Also, scientific inquiry may not need hands-on activities in certain topics.

Competency 3: Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning.
This simply means that teachers have knowledge of instructional delivery and assessment. My artifact honed my skills in creating ability and age/level-appropriate evidence of learning.

Competency 4: Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.
My artifact made me a better decision maker. While making my curriculum map, I used mental imagery—or what I tell me students, TV on the Mind strategy. This was my form of reflection, “watching a scene where I execute the entire lessons with my students.” I thought of how my students would interact with such approach; whether the lesson will be productive or not.

My curriculum map also made me think of my past experiences:
Which learning strategies were effective?
Which activities were appreciated by my students?
Which assessments were more valid?
How can I make my unit plans more interesting to reach all learners?

Each program competency complements the others. The curriculum map binds them all together.

Zemelman,S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (2005). Best Practice: Today’s standards for teaching and learning in America’s schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

I. Improvement in Practice:

Creating my artifact (Curriculum Map) gave me the opportunity to reflect on my teaching practice. As a result, my knowledge and understanding in the areas of the 4 MSE goals have greatly expanded.

I learned that differences are normal. Diversity should be viewed as an asset; that we learn from people who are different from us. Moreover, school structures and procedures can cause some “disabilities,” like requiring absolute silence and no interactions in the classroom (Zemelman, Daniels, & Hyde, 2005).

I have been aware that students have different learning styles and intelligence(s). I have also been aware that someone’s culture and subculture have a lot to do with how he/she learns.

However, I thought that diversity would mean a lot more work and preparation on my part. I also thought that I would not be fair if I gave “special” consideration and accommodations to some students on the bases of their differences.

I provided my students a variety of activities—from pencil and paper to hands-on. However, it was mostly teacher-directed/planned. No wonder it was laborious and time-consuming on my part!

I agree with Zemelman Daniels, and Hyde (2005), that I should see diversity as a great opportunity not just for me to teach but for my students to learn. It is also an excellent way for the students to learn from each other. Social interactions promote meaningful and long-term learning.

I will allow them to own their learning by involving them in planning and deciding their culminating activities. I will be a facilitator and a guide for my students. Together we will strive to produce meaningful evidence of their learning.

As part of considering diversity, it is also important to involve parents when creating curriculums or curriculum maps. Asking input from all walks of life will strengthen the relevance of our curriculum design.

The 3 stages of Backwards Design Model are: Identify results or outcomes (standards and essential questions); determine acceptable learning evidence (differentiated or balanced assessments); and plan instructional strategies and learning experiences that are within the students’ competency level (Himes, 2002). I did not understand why traditional and authentic assessments were written first before the instructional tasks (lessons) in our unit plan format. My assessments were limited because I was more focused in writing the learning strategies. Now, I have a clearer understanding on Backwards Design planning. I also realized it is much easier and more effective to plan this way—having the desired product (through learning skills and differentiated assessments) in mind before planning the lessons.

My curriculum map made me realize the importance of balanced assessments and giving my students more freedom/options on their culminating activities. Assessments are not just means for putting grades in their report card. They are also a means to evaluate my teaching practice—whether it’s effective or not. My artifact gave me an opportunity to be creative on my assessments. It made me consistently ask:
1. Will this kind of assessment bring reliable proof of long-term and relevant learning?
2. Is this age/ability-appropriate? Will it be attainable by each student?
3. Will my students be motivated do accomplish this?
4. Have I considered diversity or multiculturalism?

In spite of my country’s culture, which is collectivistic, I have been very individualistic when doing tasks. That is my learning style. Perhaps because of experience and observation, I used to think that collaboration is a waste of time. There are more gossips and personal sharing than work-related discussions during grade level meetings. So I usually end up asking my grade chair to delegate us tasks to do, either by pair or individually. As a result, these meetings were unproductive. Each of us heard our own voice, but ignored the ideas of others.

“The expertise and knowledge of teachers is vitally important to teaching and improved student learning. The very foundation of curriculum mapping requires teachers to talk together about what they teach. These conversations compel teachers to analyze practice, make decisions about curriculum changes and modifications, examine assessments, and ultimately learn from each other in a collaborative manner.” (Udelhofen, 2005, p. 3). When I made my curriculum map, I recalled and evaluated my colleague’s previous statements. I reviewed some of the thematic unit plans they shared to me, and I realized that they were full of bright ideas—From the differentiated assessments to learning strategies.

This coming school year, I will share the Learning Circle advice to my grade level. I’m sure that if we follow this, our meetings will be very productive:
"Be respectful of others
Agree that being professionals means adapting, not adopting, new ideas.
Agree that there are lots of ways to teach, assess and learn.
Ask thoughtful questions.
Welcome all points of view.
Limit the frequency and lengths of meetings.
Agree how participants will take turns talking.
Agree to give each speaker undivided attention.
Refrain from giving advice or ideas unless the speaker requests them.
Agree that conversations at the meeting should not be repeated elsewhere unless permission is granted by the person telling the story” (Davies, A., 2000, p. 81).



Himes, F. (2002). Instructional design intensive workshop. Paper presented at the FHDA virtual conference. Retrieved July 6, 2009 from http://pixel.fhda.edu/id/index.html

Davies, A. (2000). Making classroom assessment work. Courtenay, British Columbia: Connections Publishing.

Udelhofen, S. (2005). Keys to curriculum mapping: Strategies and tools to make it work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Zemelman,S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (2005). Best Practice: Today’s standards for teaching and learning in America’s schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.