Tag: model

In this post, I want to introduce you to a Learning Alignment Model that I have developed with some of my partner schools over the last few years.

It is not a step by step process to design learning, but more of a high-level thinking model to engage with that uncovers some interesting potential tensions in our classroom work.

As you will see the model also helps explain a little about the line of sight from whole school strategy through to the actual process of learning.

Starting Points

There have been a few sources of inspiration for this Learning Alignment Model.

First would be the work of Dylan Wiliam and his simple, yet a powerful, statement that “children do not learn what we teach.” In explaining this Wiliam refers to the work of Denvir and Brown (1986) who explored the developmental path of learning number concepts with 7-9-year-olds.

Wiliam explains that despite targeted instruction children do not learn what we teach. You can access a webinar here in which Dylan Wiliam explains this in more detail, have a look from the 01:48 mark.

This discrepancy and unpredictability remain a powerful provocation. It is something that I experienced throughout my teaching, but I never stopped to question or reflect why. This model helps to surface that provocation.

The second instigation is the various definitions of curriculum. When you explore the work of curriculum development, various sub-sets of the curriculum emerge. For example these eight ideas:

The recommended curriculum derives from experts in the field. Almost every discipline-based professional group has promulgated curriculum standards for its field.

The written curriculum is found in the documents produced by the state, the school system, the school, and the classroom teacher, specifying what is to be taught.

The supported curriculum is the one for which there are complimentary instructional materials available, such as textbooks, software, and multimedia resources.

The tested curriculum is the one embodied in tests developed by the state, school system, and teachers. The term “test” is used broadly here to include standardized tests, competency tests, and performance assessments.

The taught curriculum is the one that teachers actually deliver. Researchers have pointed out that there is enormous variation in the nature of what is actually taught, despite the superficial appearance of uniformity (Gehrke, Knapp, & Sirotnik, 1992).

The learned curriculum is the bottom-line curriculum—what students learn. Clearly, it is the most important of all.

In addition, there is often reference to the hidden curriculum (a term coined by Jackson, 1968) is the unintended curriculum-what students learn from the school’s culture and climate. And the excluded curriculum is what has been left out, either intentionally or unintentionally.

These definitions are taken from Planning And Organizing For Curriculum Renewal by Allan A. Glatthorn, Judy F. Carr and Douglas E. Harris.

This model of curriculum design and development is at the core of my own model.

A final core provocation for me was the concept of Constructive Alignment from John Biggs the author of the SOLO taxonomy. He explains:

In constructive alignment, we start with the outcomes we intend students to learn and align teaching and assessment to those outcomes.

The idea of alignment provides an accelerant for how these parts work together. I wanted to create something that combined the three concepts and focused more on the learning experience than just the curriculum.

I share it as an ongoing work in progress and I would be grateful for your comments and critique.

When you review the model I want you to take into account a few ideas about how it might be used and thought about.

Supporting Notes and Explanations

• It deliberately emphasises learning over assessment or curriculum.
• Instead of saying planning I have used “Designed Learning” as I think this is richer articulation of what needs to occur. Start with the learner.
• I felt I needed to add the word “Experience” in to the upper levels to distinguish from the core level of “Learning” at the base.
• There is a connection between a broader whole school vision statement (Conceptual) and the designed learning. How each classrooms aligns itself to those core values and how that flows down to the learning that occurs.
• As you move down the model there is less control. We can write visions statements down and collaborate on learning design, but as soon as those ideas are enacted there are more variables.
• There can be a big difference between what we design, what we teach and what the actual student experience ends up being. This was highlighted to me recently when a young teacher reviewed some video of her lesson introduction and realised how much she was talking. Her perception of that was very different than the actual experience students had.
• The base level Learning was added later as the model developed as I wanted to include the cognitive process we do not see. How do we know that learning has happened? In order to be able to better understand this we need better proxies for learning. This leads to discussions about assessment design which is a bridge between instruction and learning.
• Write these out on cards and consider how they pair together and influence each other. Explore how they are sometimes aligned and sometimes very much disconnected.
• There is a major assumption inherent in the model that better alignment = better learning. I am not sure this is always true. Sometimes great learning happens when we least expect it and often when we do not plan or design for it. Does all learning have to be designed?
• This alignment could be different for every child. When we move the model from curriculum and design to learning, we have to consider the actual experience and change in long term memory will be different for every student.

Here is the model in plain text format.

To finish, I want to share some summary questions that you can use when exploring the model and that act as further provocations for thinking about the design of learning.

Accompanying Questions and Provocations

• How do you know that learning has occurred?
• What can you do to better understand the student experience?
• What is the difference between planning and designing?
• What proxies for learning do we use?
• How does the student experience of learning align with what our community values the most?
• How is every learning experience an expression of what we are striving to achieve as a whole school?
• How can we make the best use of unexpected teachable moments with the same rigour as those that we design?
• How might we use formative assessment to bridge between teaching and learning?
• How can we improve our skills in assessment design?

I still have plenty of areas I want to explore with this model and I would be delighted to hear your reaction and response.