As we continue to progress through our educational journey through UNBC’s Education program, we have been discussing some of our experiences with BC’s curriculum, while examining recent updates and changes made to BC’s Curriculum, theories regarding curriculum as praxis, and considering what role formative and summative assessment plays in the classroom.
BC has recently made several progressive steps towards providing a curricular structure composed of fluid inner-workings, which allows the learning trajectory to take shape in seemingly infinite forms within the classroom. In reflection, this is one quality which I would consider central to my most memorable teachers during my time in public education. Certain educators have been able to manipulate the previously rigid structures in order to create a space of learning applicable to the classroom community as a whole. The changes made to BC’s curriculum not only foster this approach for educators already employing it, but encourages others to learn and begin creating these spaces in their classrooms.
A good example of the “space” I am referring to, I was able to personally observe in my second observational practicum at DP Todd Secondary School in Mr. Friesen’s grade 9 English class. Students were working on a unit project for Shakespeare’s Midsummer Night’s Dream. My experiences with Shakespeare during high-school typically did not foster individuality within the curriculum outline. Myself, and my classmates, regurgitated identical sections of prose, were evaluated on our capabilities of reciting specific verses, and were educated in the structures of iambic pentameter, and how to take quotations from script. What I saw in Mr. Friesen’s class was the complete opposite of what I had experienced, and really opened my eyes to the potentials of employing the fluidity of BC’s new curriculum in praxis, and also exemplified the responsibilities placed on the teacher when employing formative and summative assessments.
The project students were working on was a “Character Map.” Select characters from the play Midsummer Night’s Dream were outlined in a handout, with the option of selecting additional characters resonant to the students. Students were to pick another “universe” relevant to them; whether it be from a TV show, video game, book, or otherwise, and select characters from that universe to represent characters from the play. The first challenge was in selecting characters which showcased major themes relevant to the characters of the play, for example: similar social positions, love interests, motivations, etc. They were then to select a pertinent quotation from the play to represent the characters to place with pictures of the characters from their selected universe, and create a network of lines showcasing the relationships as they develop and change over the course of the play.
Several things stood out to me about this project. First, the incentive showcased by students to make the project their own was remarkable. There were examples from every corner of creative media, from Family Guy, to Kingdom Hearts, various anime, discovery channel shows, and an absurdly convincing Grand Theft Auto comparison. This to me showcased the first opportunity for formative assessment within the project itself. Mr. Friesen interacted with each student individually, during their conversation the student justified their position with the selected characters, to the extent that it was obvious they understood the characters and their motives from the play. What I favoured about this approach was that it transferred a large portion of the onus to the teacher in regards to understanding the students individuality in relation to their project. The teacher becomes responsible for stepping beyond the understanding of “course content,” and additionally needs to open themselves up to understand the student as an individual, and how they compose their narrative. Failure to do so would result in discounting valid comparisons on the premise of not understanding the students selected “universe.” I believe that this also fostered a far more organic engagement between student and curriculum, as the relevance of personal content encouraged deeper thinking about the course material. While I was not in attendance for the completion of the assignment, I can visualise what summative assessment would look like for me in that setting; with onus remaining primarily on the teacher for understanding how the expression of learning and progress manifests in the diverse range of individuals participating in their classroom.
Thank you.