In the traditional approach, the teacher selects one of the larger content groups to drive the curriculum sequence. This is, in the case of this eighth-grade teacher, either literature (reading) or writing. Either will work. In the two previously mentioned descriptions, she chose literature as the “spine” around which the sequence of all content revolved. A teacher approaching the problem of sequencing in her own classroom might do much the same thing with the standards. She will choose one strand of standards to sequence for the year and align the other strands to it. For the purposes of this example, the teacher chooses reading.
There are two major reading strands in ELA: (1) reading of literature and (2) reading of informational text. This represents two choices: the teacher can (1) sequence the strands or (2) combine them. For example, consider the following two typical third-grade state standards for ELA—the first for literary texts and the second for informational texts—noting that they are exactly the same.
1. Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers.
2. Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers.
Although the teacher can apply the standards to different content, she knows the similarities within the standards far outweigh the differences. So, it is likely she would choose to work on both those strands simultaneously across the entire year. From the sequence of those standards, the teacher can connect writing standards, speaking and listening, language, and the rest to the reading strand. For example, as students build their knowledge and skills in reading texts, both literary and informational, teachers can infuse the development of writing, vocabulary, and grammar, as well as speaking and listening skills, within the activities and assessments for the development of reading skills. This means that, in the previous example involving similar literary reading and informational reading standards, the teacher would likely introduce both types of texts at the same time, working on the common reading skills with both. Thus, reading “drives” the curriculum sequence, but no standards are eliminated.
This now establishes the general sequence of the standards across the school year. Next, the teacher looks at what the standards ask of the teacher and of the student, and she looks for a more specific sequence that allows organization of the content. A review of the reading standards indicates that students will work over an extended period of time on reading and interpreting literary and informational texts. Students will work on the skills all year long even though they are challenging and involve a large amount of content knowledge. This means that the traditional sequence of literature—from less challenging to more challenging, from short story to poetry, or from informational text to persuasive passages—would serve the development of the knowledge and skills that the priority standards in reading require.
The specifics of this example are not that important. The more important issue is the analytical approach to developing the learning that the teacher engages to create the sequence of standards. The particular sequence of standards will vary depending on the content area. Some content areas, such as the ELA example, feature standards that are large and apply throughout the entire school year. Other content areas have standards that are more sequential. In this case, one standard is the basis of another, and instructors need to teach them in that sequence. Here there will be many more standards for the year, but only a few that will be in operation at any given time. When students reach proficiency on a certain standard, the teacher removes it from instruction and replaces it with the next standard in the sequence.
It is at this point that experience teaching the class (or grade level) is invaluable. A knowledge of the students involved in the class or grade level and the challenge the standards represent will allow an experienced teacher to accurately judge the proper sequence. Some schools, departments, or districts already provide a pacing guide or scope and sequence. Such a document may or may not be useful in planning for standards-based instruction. If it was developed with a traditional, content-driven approach, it may not help. Consider that any such document should serve the students’ needs, not the other way around. The teacher may need to revise any documents that do not approach sequencing of instruction from a standards-based approach before the teacher can use them for planning standards-based instruction.
Once the sequencing process is complete, the teacher has a general plan for the year. The next step is to look at specific units of study and plan how to share this journey with the students.
Creating the Unit Plan
When designing a unit plan, teachers must provide students with a series of scaf-folded learning opportunities based on the proficiency scale’s learning progression. Understanding that progression is key to creating an effective unit plan. Also essential to the unit design is a focus on priority standards. The priority standard and its associated proficiency scale provide both the teacher and his or her students with the sequence of learning that will guide student growth.
Early in the unit, the focus should be on establishing a solid foundation of the prerequisite knowledge and skills for the priority standard. Focus will then shift to moving past those basics, identifying learning targets that represent the steps in achieving proficiency on the priority standard. At some point in the unit, the teacher will present students with the opportunity to operate both at and beyond the standard. The proficiency scale clearly presents this progression of learning. Obviously, instruction and learning activities will be different at higher and higher levels of the proficiency scale. Students require more direct instruction as they deal with basic knowledge and skills, and they can handle more independent learning opportunities as they achieve and exceed proficiency.
Moving students to and beyond the standard is an important consideration when planning a unit. In a traditional system, teachers facing large amounts of content often feel bound by having to move forward to “cover the content” or “make it through the textbook.” In a standards-based system, where the focus moves from covering content to developing student knowledge and abilities as the standards guide, the teacher’s task is to help every student reach proficiency on every priority standard. Teachers must find how every student can reach proficiency on the priority standards. By carefully selecting priority standards and spending the instructional time to help students reach proficiency and beyond, teachers will provide their students with a deep understanding of the important material. Some content will have to go to make room for this kind of instruction, but the result will be deeper-thinking students who appreciate what they have learned.
Types of Lessons
In order to link the proficiency scale with requisite instructional strategies to operationalize this learning progression, it is useful to identify several different types of lessons students will experience throughout the unit. Marzano’s (2017) The New Art and Science of Teaching is the basis of the descriptions of lesson types here. Marzano (2017) identifies four types of lessons and associated activities.
1. Direct instruction (DI) lessons: When students experience new content, teachers often use instructional strategies that they might describe as direct instruction. In direct instruction lessons, teachers will do many of the things good teachers have been doing for years when they share new content with their students: they identify the important information, chunk the content, provide opportunities for students to process that content, and process the information. Teachers are often in front of the class and leading students through the content by directly presenting it in a direct instruction lesson.
2. Practicing and deepening (PD) lessons: Once students have a good grasp on the new content, teachers ask them to engage in activities that deepen their understanding and abilities with that content. Instructional strategies in practicing and deepening lessons are different than when introducing new content and asking students to engage in high-level critical thinking. A few examples include examining similarities and differences, examining errors in reasoning, or using structured practice sessions.
3. Knowledge application (KA) lessons: