The art of teaching is one that encompasses both a significant amount of planning and an ability to adjust lessons along the way. While I am a logical person by nature and prefer to have every lesson planned out and ready to go, that is not always appropriate for reaching the needs of my students. There are times when I have had to completely change a lesson right before I taught it – or even mid-lesson! It all depends on how well students are engaging with, and comprehending a lesson. By doing some formative assessment along the way, I can see whether my lessons are hitting their intended mark or require modification to do so. The same is true with the teaching curriculum; there are times when it needs to be modified to reach its intended audience effectively.
The main reason, thus far, that I have had to adjust the curriculum is to meet the state standards. In Washington state, students’ learning is supposed to meet the Essential Academic Learning Requirements (EALRs) and so I plan my units and lessons around doing just that. Sometimes the curriculum that is used in the school does not specifically meet those standards or includes units that are unnecessary for meeting those standards. In those cases, I have either modified the curriculum or omitted entire units (especially in the subject of math where the curriculum seems to include many units that are unnecessary to meet 2nd grade EALRs). Because there is so much emphasis placed on meeting these state standards and having students learn them to mastery, there is no room in the curriculum for extra units. For this reason I adjust the curriculum to meet those learning requirements.
Aside from meeting the EALRs, I also adjust the curriculum for the sake of fluidity in the classroom. This is also largely based on formative assessment – as I teach I am able to judge whether or not students are understanding or if some re-teaching is needed. If the whole class needs re-teaching I may spend some extra time on a subject or teach it in a way that is different than the curriculum presents it. Sometimes it is simply necessary to modify curriculum instruction to meet the needs of struggling students, and not the whole class. Both instances have occurred and called for curriculum modification in my classroom. Just yesterday in the middle of a lesson about “main idea” when I started to realize I was getting blank stares from the audience, I stopped the Smartboard progression that I was using and moved instead to modeling with a book. This went over with students much better and I felt like they truly grasped the important information. This was a time when I felt modifying my lesson was absolutely necessary and benefited the entire class. Because I know my students, what they are capable of, and what is difficult for them, I can adjust my teaching to fit their needs.
While it would be nice to not have to modify the curriculum or my teaching, I think that doing so would put my students at a disadvantage. They would not be meeting the EALRs sufficiently and they would not get the teaching that they need, in some cases, to meet their needs. All in all, I think modifying the curriculum will always be a part of my teaching as long as it is done to better reach students and help them meet those state standards.
Chelsea Hasenpflug's bPortfolio 