PLAGIARISM FREE "A" WORK

NeNe1994

Chapter1BeginningWiththeEndinMind.pdf

Home >Education homework help >PLAGIARISM FREE "A" WORK

Chapter 1

Beginning With the End in MindBeginning With the End in MindBeginning With the End in Mind

Higher education is populated by dedicated professional educators who deliver a high-quality academic experience to their students. However, professional development activities related to teaching are usually lim- ited to occasional workshops featuring a single skill, such as creating a syllabus, techniques for assessment, or new instructional technolo- gies. Many of us attended required onboarding seminars for new faculty members that provided basic instruction in the teaching component of our jobs. Nevertheless, no matter how many workshops or seminars we attend, or how experienced we may be, it is not the same as undergoing a formal program of study into the art, science, practice, and skill of teaching.

Faculty members come to their positions as subject-matter experts, having earned the highest degrees available in their respective fields and achieving rec- ognition as producers of new knowledge through research or contributors to culture through creative practice. In fact, these are standard criteria for virtually all faculty job postings. Members of the professorate continue their disciplinary

CHAPTER SUMMARY

n Educational Philosophy

n Backwards Design: Beginning With the End in Mind

n Learning-Centric Teaching and Instructional Design

n Empathy, Definition, Ideation, and Iteration

n Where Next?

n The Design Process

Mackh, B. M. (2018). Higher education by design : Best practices for curricular planning and instruction. ProQuest Ebook Central <a onclick=window.open('http://ebookcentral.proquest.com','_blank') href='http://ebookcentral.proquest.com' target='_blank' style='cursor: pointer;'>http://ebookcentral.proquest.com</a> Created from amridge on 2021-10-10 03:32:02.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

activity throughout their professional lives, with an expectation that each person will make ongoing contributions to knowledge or culture.

Furthermore, all faculty members are educators because we teach stu- dents the essential skills and knowledge of our academic disciplines. Our achievements in research or creative activity strengthen this expertise, which we then bring to our classrooms. Professional service further supports our disciplines and our college or university, consequently enriching our teaching as well.

Traditional evaluative criteria for promotion and tenure generally split fac- ulty activities into 40% for research, 40% for teaching, and 20% for professional service, but in actual practice, we often spend the majority of our time teaching or on related tasks such as course development, grading, and meeting with stu- dents. According to the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (2003),1 teach- ing and related tasks account for 62% of faculty members’ time, with 18% spent on research and 20% on administrative or other tasks. All of these activities ought to work in concert, and all of them ultimately support the success of our alumni as well as contributing to knowledge and culture. Even when research is valued above all other faculty pursuits (which is especially evident at top-tier research universities), it also contributes to our graduates’ success across disciplines, as shown in Figure 1.1.2

Research, teaching, and service each contribute to student learning and our graduates’ eventual success, either directly or indirectly.

1. Research builds upon existing knowledge to create new learning. 2. Teaching improves and expands student learning. 3. Service translates learning into action that improves communities and

citizens.

Isn’t it curious, then, that we seldom undergo formal training in educational theory or in curricular and pedagogical development, despite the demonstrable importance of our responsibility to teach? Yet instead of the prerequisite study and certification required of many other educators, faculty members typically learn to teach by teaching, sometimes assisted by colleagues and mentors in our academic disciplines.

Speaking from my own experience, the only preparation I received for the first course I taught as a graduate instructor occurred when my academic advisor handed me a copy of the former instructor’s syllabus. He answered my questions and dropped by my classroom on occasion, but for the most part, I was on my own. At the institution I attended for my doctoral studies, graduate instructors were first required to serve as teaching assistants, a task mainly involving taking attendance and grading papers for the instructor of

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

RE SE

A RC

H Re

se ar

ch is

a p

ur po

se fu

l i nv

es �g

a� on

cr ea

te , d

is co

ve r,

o r

le ar

n so

m et

hi ng

n ew

Sc ie

nc e

Te ch

no lo

gy En

gi ne

er in

g M

at he

m a�

cs H

um an

i� es

A rt

M et

ho ds

M et

ho do

lo gi

Pr oc

es s

D is

co ve

ri es

Im pa

ct s

D is

se m

in a�

W hy

/H ow

/W ha

U �l

ity In

st ru

m en

ta lit

y Im

pa ct

Th eo

ry &

ax is

Te ac

hi ng

Le ar

ni ng

A lu

m ni

S uc

ce ss

M et

ho ds

M et

ho do

lo gi

Pr oc

es s

D is

co ve

ri es

Im pa

ct s

D is

se m

in a�

W hy

/H ow

/W ha

U �l

ity In

st ru

m en

ta lit

y Im

pa ct

Th eo

ry &

ax is

Te ac

hi ng

Le ar

ni ng

A lu

m ni

S uc

ce ss

M et

ho ds

M et

ho do

lo gi

Pr oc

es s

D is

co ve

ri es

Im pa

ct s

D is

se m

in a�

W hy

/H ow

/W ha

U �l

ity In

st ru

m en

ta lit

y Im

pa ct

Th eo

ry &

ax is

Te ac

hi ng

Le ar

ni ng

A lu

m ni

S uc

ce ss

M et

ho ds

M et

ho do

lo gi

Pr oc

es s

D is

co ve

ri es

Im pa

ct s

D is

se m

in a�

W hy

/H ow

/W ha

U �l

ity In

st ru

m en

ta lit

y Im

pa ct

Th eo

ry &

ax is

Te ac

hi ng

Le ar

ni ng

A lu

m ni

S uc

ce ss

M et

ho ds

M et

ho do

lo gi

Pr oc

es s

D is

co ve

ri es

Im pa

ct s

D is

se m

in a�

W hy

/H ow

/W ha

U �l

ity In

st ru

m en

ta lit

y Im

pa ct

Th eo

ry &

ax is

Te ac

hi ng

Le ar

ni ng

A lu

m ni

S uc

ce ss

M et

ho ds

M et

ho do

lo gi

Pr oc

es s

D is

co ve

ri es

Im pa

ct s

D is

se m

in a�

W hy

/H ow

/W ha

U �l

ity In

st ru

m en

ta lit

y Im

pa ct

Th eo

ry &

ax is

Te ac

hi ng

Le ar

ni ng

A lu

m ni

S uc

ce ss

F IG

U R

E 1

.1 O

rg an

iz at

on al

C ha

rt o

f R

es ea

rc h

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

record. Once we were given a teaching assignment of our own, a copy of the previous instructor’s syllabus and perhaps some verbal advice were treated as sufficient preparation for independent teaching. I opted to take my training a step further by participating in a TEACH Fellowship, a competitive program offered through the university’s Teaching, Learning, & Professional Devel- opment Center.3 This yearlong experience included 18 hours of workshops, videotaped consultations, two midterm evaluations of teaching performance, completion of a teaching portfolio and curriculum design project. None of the other graduate instructors in my program chose to take this step, but I found it to be a valuable asset to my subsequent teaching both then and in my later faculty positions.

This book was written as a way to bridge the gap that I observed between the actual practice of teaching and the knowledge that can be gained through focused formal study. As a comparison, consumer electronics have advanced to such high levels that we can use them intuitively right out of the package. Even so, many of us have experienced moments of frustration where we can’t make a device do what we want it to do, wishing it had come with a detailed user’s manual. Author David Pogue and O’Reilly Media produce a series of publications in response to this need—the “Missing Manuals”—beginning with Windows 2000 Pro: The Missing Manual and most currently Switching to the Mac: The Missing Manual, El Capitan Edition (2016).4 I’d like you to consider this book in the same spirit—to be the guide for teaching in higher education that most educators never received when we were given our first teaching assignments. The chapters that follow will help those at all levels of experience to design, develop, and deliver excellent educa- tional content to their students.

EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY

Much of what we do in our classrooms depends on how we view our role as instructors. You’re probably familiar with the debate between an instructor’s role as “a sage on the stage” or “a guide on the side.” Some instructors remain firmly in the sage-on-the-stage camp, lecturing through every class period, while students listen attentively and take copious notes. Conversely, other instructors rarely lec- ture at all, allowing students to construct knowledge independently, intervening only when the student requests assistance.

This need not be an either/or proposition. Most courses utilize a variety of instructional strategies, including lecture, project-based learning, discussion, group activities, and more. We might visualize this as a dual continuum as illus- trated by Figure 1.2: the more active the instructor, the less active the student; the more active the student, the less active the instructor.

Another common debate involves the philosophical orientation of the classroom toward an instructor-centered or student-centered model. An

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

instructor-centered classroom operates under the assumption that the instructor possesses knowledge that she transmits to the students through a one-way com- munication. The instructor is responsible for his or her teaching, and students are responsible for their own learning. In contrast, a student-centered classroom places the student at the forefront of this equation, but this might raise troubling issues such as whether the student is a consumer of education and what respon- sibility the instructor shares in the student’s acquisition of knowledge. For exam- ple, under a completely instructor-centered model, a student who fails a course is wholly responsible for his own failure. However, under a completely student- centered model, the instructor might be deemed to have failed to provide ade- quate instruction rather than the student failing to learn.

Taking a learning-centered approach avoids the problems of these extremes. In this model, students are neither passive recipients of transmitted knowledge, nor are they demanding clients. Likewise, the instructor is neither the font of all knowledge nor the students’ servant. The focus of a learning-centered classroom is the subject matter of the course as it occurs within a specific disciplinary con- text, engaging both the student and the instructor as active participants. We might frame learning-centered education as a pedagogical triangle (see Figure 1.3), in which the student, instructor, and subject matter exist within a balanced yet dynamic relationship occurring in the context of a given academic discipline.

Therefore, this book adopts a learning-centered educational philosophy. The instructor’s primary responsibility is to create and deliver a learning experience in which the student is an active participant, aligned with a particular academic discipline’s norms and practices and shaped by the instructor’s application of skill and knowledge in teaching.

Listening/Note-taking Ac�ve Par�cipa�on Independent Study

Lecture Facilita�on Supervision

Instructor Ac�vity

Student Ac�vity

FIGURE 1.2 Student–Instructor Continuum

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

BACKWARDS DESIGN: BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

In his bestseller Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, author Stephen Covey rec- ommends “Habit 2: Begin with the End in Mind.”5 Even though it’s become some- what cliché, this isn’t just good advice for life—it’s the first step toward planning and designing effective curriculum. Beginning with the end in mind is like plan- ning an expedition: First, you choose the destination, then you plan how you’ll get there.

In curriculum design, our destination depends on this question: What skills and knowledge should our students acquire by the time they graduate? Just as we can’t take a road trip without first planning our route, we can’t achieve the goal of producing well-educated graduates unless each course deliberately aligns with that goal, leading students step by step toward the excellence we want them to achieve. When applied to higher education, this is called backwards design.6

Before we go further, let’s stop and consider why we’re talking about this. In higher education, where colleges and universities have clearly defined educational missions, we want our students to do more than just memorize facts—we want them to become accomplished disciplinary practitioners who contribute to our areas of expertise and go on to lead successful, productive lives. We also want to enhance our institution’s reputation for excellence in education and raise the profile of our college and its programs and departments. Therefore, the end we should keep in mind exists on multiple levels: in the outcomes we write that

StudentCourse/Subject

Instructor

Discipline

FIGURE 1.3 Pedagogical Triangle

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

explain what our students must know and be able to do by the time they gradu- ate; in the learning experiences we design that facilitate our students’ successful attainment of these outcomes; and in the deepening of our knowledge of educa- tional theory and philosophy that will allow us to improve in our instructional delivery and better fulfill our duty as educators.

Understandably, research and creative practice receive a great deal of empha- sis as major contributors to our professional reputations and the status of the institutions where we teach, whereas excellence in teaching lacks comparable prestige. Nevertheless, the impact of our teaching extends far beyond the final exam, shaping our students’ academic experience for good or ill. No matter how renowned we may be in our chosen fields, these accomplishments cannot benefit our students at all if we lack the ability to translate our disciplinary expertise into relevant and impactful instruction. Shouldn’t we, therefore, devote at least as much passion, energy, and curiosity to our teaching as we do to our other disci- plinary engagements?

Nothing prohibits us from continuing to teach as usual. Attempting to change our professorial habits is a far greater challenge, yet there is much to be gained in the attempt. Certainly, it can be awkward and frustrating to change longstanding habits, but by choosing to reach beyond what’s comfortable to what’s possible, we will benefit our students, our institutions, and ourselves as well.

LEARNING-CENTRIC TEACHING AND INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN

Traditional approaches to teaching and learning focus on the subject-matter knowledge and expertise that an instructor conveys to his or her students. When we shift the emphasis to our students’ learning, we must also enter into a mindset of innovation since we are diverging from long-established procedures and habits of mind in higher education.

Innovation exists within a three-part framework, represented in Figure 1.4. Desirability is the human factor in innovation. The outcomes we seek through

our teaching and curriculum design must be attractive and beneficial to our stu- dents and to the institution for which we work, but they must also be of personal benefit at some level. In other words, our efforts must lead to a course that stu- dents want to take, that our institution wants to offer, and that we want to teach.

Viability refers to the institutional framework within which our efforts occur. Our plans and goals must be compatible with the mission, vision, and values of our institutions. They must also align with existing policies, procedures, and administrative requirements in our departments, colleges, schools, and the insti- tution at large. For example, a planned course relying on co-teaching will not be viable if one of the cooperating faculty member’s home departments cannot

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

provide a way for the instructor to receive credit for a course taught outside normal channels.

Feasibility is the third side of our triangle. Even when we can clearly envi- sion what we hope to achieve and can prove it fits within our given institu- tional context, we must also be able to bring our vision to life. This involves financial resources, administrative support, faculty participation, availability of facilities, as well as things like scheduling and registration. For instance, if an elective course designed for students majoring in a particular discipline is scheduled at the same time as a course required for the major, students cannot enroll regardless of the careful planning and preparation that went into the course’s creation.

EMPATHY, DEFINITION, IDEATION, AND ITERATION

Empathy is the cornerstone of innovation and the main component in the desir- ability of a product. Just think: Why do people stand in line for days before a new Apple product’s launch? Because Apple has mastered the art of empathy. The company’s focus on desirability leads to products that people are passionate about owning. This is atypical in most commercial ventures. For instance, I used to own a sedan that looked great on the outside, but it was so poorly designed internally that it took my mechanic 14 hours to dismantle the vehicle just to change a leak- ing $5 transmission gasket. He was so frustrated by the attempted repair that he refused to work on the car again. Apple’s focus on customer experience trans- lates into huge sales, whereas the automotive manufacturer’s focus on making a visually attractive yet internally flawed product was ultimately self-destructive— production on that model ceased after just a few years.

Viability

FeasibilityDesirability

Innova�on

FIGURE 1.4 Design Venn—Innovation Is Here

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

Higher education, of course, doesn’t operate under the same parameters as companies that produce telephones and automobiles, yet empathy-driven inno- vation occurs across a broad range of contexts. Service-based settings like health care, social services, and government agencies’ attempts to envision the client’s needs or wants result in a better user experience. Hospitals, for example, now allow patients to preregister for medical procedures, handling paperwork over the phone or online rather than making patients wait in line and then sit at a reg- istrar’s desk for an hour or more on the day of their procedure. Attention to the human element of a bureaucratic process increased efficiency and reduced stress for all concerned.

In this same way, higher education benefits from an empathy-driven perspec- tive. Curriculum designed with the student in mind more fully aligns with a learning-centered model of education. In the field of design, this is known as user experience—a process built on empathy.

Learning-centered course design requires that we know our students as fully as possible. Those of us who have been teaching for many years know that stu- dents today are much different than we were ourselves, and they also differ from the students we may have taught early in our careers. Higher education itself has also changed, especially in terms of public perception, which directly impacts how our students view their educational experience.

In the not-so-distant past, a bachelor’s degree in virtually any field offered sufficient proof that someone was well-equipped for professional-level employ- ment because this credential was comparatively rare: Just 25% of the US pop- ulation completed high school in 1940, and only 5% of the US population held a bachelor’s degree or higher,7 giving a college graduate a distinct edge in the job market. By 2015, however, 88% of the US population attained a high school diploma, and 33% earned a bachelor’s degree or higher.8 In other words, it’s more common to hold a bachelor’s degree today than it was to graduate from high school in 1940.

The increasing ubiquity of a college degree is exacerbated by the rising cost of higher education and by changing attitudes of parents, students, and legisla- tors. Many students and their parents incur significant debt to finance the cost of a degree, all in the hope that the student will exit college with the ability to secure a well-paying job. Whether or not we educators know that the educational experiences our courses offer are intrinsically valuable, it is difficult for others to understand how they can be worth the expense when they can’t see how the course will equip students with the means to earn a living.

We now face a much different set of cultural expectations for higher education than were prevalent when many current faculty members began their careers, and they differ greatly from the norms under which our present system of higher education arose during the last century. Not only has the perception of a college education as valuable for its own sake shifted to an expectation that earning a

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

degree will prepare a student for a career, but our students themselves place less value on educational experiences when they cannot see how they might be personally relevant.

Educators, however, continue to believe that students should accept our dis- ciplinary expertise as sufficient reason to trust that what we teach is important and expect students to make their own connections between classroom learning and their eventual careers. Empathy exercised within a learning-centered model of education challenges this traditional stance. For just a moment, let’s put our- selves in the place of our students. Imagine you were told that you had to under- take mandatory professional development by completing a 3-credit hour course. Because you will not be reimbursed for tuition, you enroll in an online course through a public university, at a cost of $1,000. This is a significant expense, not to mention that you’ll have to pay for books and materials on top of the tuition, increasing your cost by an additional $200. Now imagine that the course instruc- tor never explains why this course is required and makes no connection to your professional development. Would you be frustrated and annoyed? Perhaps even resentful? I know I would.

When we imagine ourselves in a scenario such as the prior example, we can experience empathy for our students and, consequently, begin to approach our teaching from a more learning-centric model. If we were to benefit from the mandatory training in the previous example, we would need to know why it’s important, how we could apply the course content to our professional lives, and what we were actually supposed to learn. This why, how, and what of instruction is essential. Should it be any different for our own students?

On a macro level, our course planning must consider why our students need to know the concepts we intend to teach, how we will convey this information to them, and what learning experiences and assessments will allow them to learn what we’re teaching and let us measure their learning. This process encompasses all of the components we associate with course design: writing outcomes and objectives, textbook selection, creating assignments and assessments, and so on. As we work through these steps, we repeatedly engage empathy and definition on a micro level with each decision we make about the course. Why will this par- ticular textbook best help my students to learn? How should I create this rubric to evaluate their group presentations? What should students be able to do by the time they take the final exam?

The first time we teach the course that we planned can serve as a prototype, allowing us to test our instructional strategies to determine whether students successfully acquired the skills and knowledge we intended to convey. Each time we teach the course thereafter is a new opportunity to refine our instructional methods. These iterations allow us to engage in a process of continuous growth, responding to developments in our disciplines, to shifts in culture, and to the fluctuations common to university life.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

Our pursuit of pedagogical and curricular innovation also allows us to incor- porate new best practices in teaching and instruction that we may not have attempted before. Cooperative learning, teamwork, student choice, engaged learning, experiential education, and many other strategies are possible beyond standard approaches such as lecture and discussion.

WHERE NEXT?

In the chapters that follow, we’ll look at how to achieve this goal. Along the way, we must think through the steps that will allow our students to achieve the results we seek. How do we plan learning experiences? How should we design our instruction to help our students achieve these outcomes? How do we know if the students have actually learned anything in our classrooms? How can we use what we already do to create more effective curricula that also meet institutional and professional expectations?

First, we consider the norms and expectations of our disciplines at the pro- grammatic level, writing outcomes that explain what we intend our students to know and be able to do upon graduation. Second, we create specific, measurable objectives for our courses, clearly defining what students must achieve by the course’s completion. Third, we create tools to measure students’ mastery of these objectives, designing assessment mechanisms aligned with our objectives and out- comes. Fourth, we create a plan of instruction, mapping out a week-by-week sequence ensuring that appropriate and effective student learning opportunities precede and support our assessments. Last, we select or develop instructional materials to use as we deliver instruction according to the course plan. This sequence is shown in Figure 1.5.

Materials

Instruc�onal Plan

Assessments

Objec�ves

Outcomes

FIGURE 1.5 Course-Planning Flow Chart

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

This process reverses the way faculty usually plan a course. Many of us begin by selecting a good textbook. Then we map out a weekly schedule, writing quizzes and tests based on the readings and lectures we’ve planned. Once we’ve planned the bulk of the course, we look at the body of knowledge we intend to cover and write objectives based this plan. Only after everything else about the course has been set in place do we think about what students should have learned by the final exam.

However, if we begin with the end in mind, or design a course “backwards,” we remain mindful of what students should learn in our course as well as what they must know and be able to do once they graduate. This not only allows us to create curriculum aligned from the first day of class to the last, but also from students’ first day on campus to the moment they proudly walk across the stage to receive their diplomas.

THE DESIGN PROCESS

Our planning efforts align with the design process, but definitions of this activity are nearly as numerous as designers. Here we’ll take a four-part approach to this important task and touch back to this model throughout the book.

1. Identify: Under a learning-centered philosophy of education, all of our decisions as educators must first consider our students’ needs as learners, driven by the particular outcomes and objectives of our course. There- fore, everything we do must meet this crucial criterion: How does this serve my students’ learning needs in order for them to meet my course objectives and program outcomes? Empathy must drive all of our decisions, considering our curriculum and teaching from our students’ perspective. In product development, this is called User Experience Design (sometimes abbrevi- ated as UX)—the process of enhancing user satisfaction with a product by improving its usability or accessibility to provide a positive interaction with the product. In other words, it’s about placing the user’s needs first to make sure that their experience is the best it can be. We might also call this user-centric or human-centric design. In education, therefore, it comes down to empathizing with our students to identify their specif- ic needs for instruction, which then informs and shapes our choices in designing curriculum and delivering instruction.

2. Ideate: The ideation stage of design involves brainstorming the best way to meet the needs we’ve identified. This can be an extended cyclical process involving developing possible solutions, prototyping, testing, evaluation, and redevelopment until a viable and feasible possibility emerges.

3. Implement: Once we have developed a possible solution, we implement it in our classrooms and observe its results.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

4. Iterate: Each time we teach a course, we have the opportunity to begin again, to revisit the design process, and to make refinements and im- provements that will further support student learning.

Although the design process has four parts, as seen in Figure 1.6, we’ll primar- ily focus on identification and ideation because our goal is to create a course and be prepared to teach it successfully. Implementation occurs when you actually teach the course, and iteration doesn’t happen until after you’ve taught the course for the first time and are ready to make changes based on your first attempt to improve it for the next time you teach.

Remember:

WHY: We want to design curriculum that fulfills our program goals, supports our university’s mission, and produces graduates who are excellent in their academic fields.

HOW: By working step by step, beginning with the results we seek, and continuing through the construction of a fully developed, well-designed course.

WHAT: We will plan a course aligned with disciplinary norms and university requirements, and we will be prepared to improve our pedagogical practice.

Notes 1 Flaherty, C. (April 9, 2014). So much to do, so little time. Inside Higher Ed. www.in sidehighered.com/news/2014/04/09/research-shows-professors-work-long-hours- and-spend-much-day-meetings 2 This chart is based on a synthesis of ideas found in:

Sinek, S. (2009). Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action. New York: Portfolio/Penguin; and Walton, K. (1970). Categories of art. Philosophical Review, 79(3), 334–367.

Iden�fy

Ideate

Implement

Iterate

FIGURE 1.6 Design Cycle

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/04/09/research-shows-professors-work-long-hours-and-spend-much-day-meetings

BEGINNING WITH THE END IN MIND

3 Texas Tech University. (n.d.). Applying to TEACH. Teaching, Learning, & Professional De- velopment. www.depts.ttu.edu/tlpdc/Teach_Program/applytoteach.php 4 O’Reilly. (n.d.). Missing manuals. O’Reilly Media Corporate Website. https://ssearch. oreilly.com/?i=1;q=missing+manual;q1=David+Pogue;q2=Books;x1=author;x- 2=t1&act=fc_contenttype_Books 5 Covey, S. (1989, 2016). The seven habits of highly effective people, habit 2: Begin with the end in mind. Franklin Covey. www.stephencovey.com/7habits/7habits-habit2.php 6 McTighe, J., and Thomas, R. S. (2003). Backward design for forward action. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 52–55.

McTighe, J., and Wiggins, G. (2004). Understanding by Design: Professional Develop- ment Workbook. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. 7 Ryan, C. L., and Siebens, J. (February 2012). Educational Attainment in the United States: 2009. United States Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p20- 566.pdf 8 Ryan, C. L., and Bauman, K. (March 2016). Educational Attainment in the United States: 2015. United States Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/ library/publications/2016/demo/p20-578.pdf

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 1 8 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .