Planning Backward or Forward
In my discussions with school administrators, instructional coaches, and teacher educators, there seems to be a general consensus in favor of backwards planning. In fact, some backwards planning advocates go so far as to poke fun of forwards planning. Forwards planning advocates (few and far between), on the other hand, tend to characterize backward planning as ... well ... backward. Who's right?
Those who create lesson plans backward generally talk about "beginning with the end in mind." Basically, in this approach, choose a curriculum standard or objective and plan learning experiences to address it. The primary advantage of this way of planning is that teaching and learning are apt to relate directly to curriculum standards and objectives. One problem with backward planning is that often, in their attempts to address a specific objective, teachers end up with sterile, boring, disconnected learning activities.
Those who create lesson plans forward are more focused on the experience. Is it authentic? Is it engaging? Do people generally choose to engage in this type of experience? Start with an engaging experience and then seeThe major critique and potential problem with this approach is that sometimes classroom activities aren't connected to meaningful learning objectives—activity for the sake of activity.
Those who create lesson plans forward are more focused on the experience. Is it authentic? Is it engaging? Do people generally choose to engage in this type of experience? Start with an engaging experience and then seeThe major critique and potential problem with this approach is that sometimes classroom activities aren't connected to meaningful learning objectives—activity for the sake of activity.
|
The fact is that conscientious teachers can develop effective and engaging lessons starting from and progressing in either direction—backward or forward.
Rather than perpetuating a forward vs backward binary, I recommend reflexive planning. It doesn't matter where curriculum planning begins as long as it effectively addresses curriculum standards and objectives in meaningful, engaging, authentic ways.
More importantly, however, an engaging experience (what I refer to as CORE experiences) can address many standards together at the same time. Once an experience has been chosen, whether you came to the experience first or second, consider how to apply it in ways that address multiple standards.
See Five Steps to Curriculum Integration to see examples of reflexive planning.
Rather than perpetuating a forward vs backward binary, I recommend reflexive planning. It doesn't matter where curriculum planning begins as long as it effectively addresses curriculum standards and objectives in meaningful, engaging, authentic ways.
More importantly, however, an engaging experience (what I refer to as CORE experiences) can address many standards together at the same time. Once an experience has been chosen, whether you came to the experience first or second, consider how to apply it in ways that address multiple standards.
See Five Steps to Curriculum Integration to see examples of reflexive planning.
|