Goal: 4 - A teacher knows the teacher content area and how to teach it.

An important criteria for being an effective teacher is knowing the content of the material

that is to be taught. Without an in depth understanding of the material, it would be hard to

competently and skillfully design learning goals, activities, and assessments. Even more

important is knowing how to teach the subject. Johnson (2013) posits that great teachers don’t

teach, they “engineer learning experiences that maneuver the students into the driver's seat and

then the teachers get out of the way.” The Industrial Revolution ​Unit​ presented with this paper

uses this philosophy of teaching by actively engaging students minds and hearts in the learning

process. It is an interdisciplinary unit that incorporates numerous learning activities with

opportunities for active learning, both mind and body, coupled with authentic performance based

and written assessments to show what each student had learned by the end of the unit.

I planned the lesson using The Backward Design model by Wigging, G. and McTighe, J.

(2005). For the unit I first had to consider what it was that I wanted my students to come away

from the experience understanding. These learning goals came directly from my state standards

for the grade I was planning the unit for. Wigging, G. and McTighe, J. says, “Only by having

specified the desired results can we focus on the content, methods, and activities most likely to

achieve those results” p. 15. The learning goals I chose were taken from several subject areas

that included reading, writing, speaking, technology, science, and cultural standards. Once these

were decided upon, I was then able to determine the evidence and material I would use, create

formative and summative assessments, and design learning activities to meet those goals.
 Throughout the unit, I made sure to provide ample opportunities to check for student

understanding by using both formative and summative assessments. “Understanding is revealed

in performance” Wiggins, G. and McTighe, J (2005). Included in the assessments were two

authentic performance tasks which included realistic prompts that encourage critical thinking and

problem solving. Importantly, these tasks also added meaning and purpose to what was learned,

while also giving the students the opportunity to practice the information taught. Miller (2008)

says, “When we’re thoughtful in our planning, we lend purpose, focus, and direction to our

teaching. Likewise, when students are clear about what they’re to be learning, why it’s

important, and how it will help them, it gives purpose, focus, and direction to their learning, too”

pg. 85.

Although I did not teach this specific unit to a class at this point, my goal would be to

continually provide feedback to students on their formative and summative assessments, giving

them an opportunity to resubmit their work after they revised it based on suggestions I have

given them. Tomlinson, C. and McTighe, J. (2006) say that, “Learners need to find out promptly

their strengths and weaknesses in order to improve. The greater the delay, the less likely it is that

the feedback will be helpful or used” pg. 78. This is important for me as a teacher because I want

my students to do their best, and when they submit work that is not their best, I believe they will

learn far more if they are given the opportunity to revise their work using guidance from a

teacher, rather than just receiving a grade for it and moving on.

Due to the rise of technology in the world, I believe students should be provided with

frequent opportunities to use and interact with it in their daily studies. Dede (2010) suggests that

the use and interaction with technology in curriculum can, “improve success for all types of
learners and may differentially enhance the performance of at-risk students.” Throughout the unit

I wrote, I made sure to incorporate the use of technology in multiple ways to support student

learning and success.

 References

Dede, C. (2000). Emerging influences of information technology on school curriculum

[Abstract]. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(2), 281-303. doi:10.1080/002202700182763

Johnson, B. (2013, June 28). Great Teachers Don't Teach. Retrieved June 05, 2018, from

https://www.edutopia.org/blog/great-teachers-do-not-teach-ben-johnson

Miller, D. (2008). Teaching With Intention. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction & understanding

by design: Connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and

Curriculum Development.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.