Backward Design
Backward Design
复制标题
落后设计
DOI：
10.1177/004005990904100501
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
1
通讯作者：
S. Pope
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Childre;Jennifer R. Sands;S. Pope
她希望她的学生能像她一样对这门学科充满热情。她用讲座和PowerPoint笔记涵盖了教科书中的所有信息，甚至在大多数单元的末尾包括一个实验。即便如此，她的学生最多也就是为了考试而记忆信息;他们在考试之后就再也记不住了。在她所讲的最后一个单元里，她的学生不停地抱怨，"为什么我们必须知道这个？" "这对我的生活没有帮助。"她怎样才能让她的学生对学习感到兴奋呢？她如何帮助他们真正理解内容以及它与他们的生活有何关系？作为教师响应2001年《不让一个孩子掉队法》的要求，并考虑进口记录残疾学生学习成绩差的研究，关键的挑战是设计课程和教学，促进理解，保留和推广（Bulgren，Deshler，&伦茨，2007年）。为了迎接这一挑战，并充分准备学生，以满足课程标准，教师必须超越过去的教学实践，课程曝光和利用书籍作为课程指南（Carnine，1991; Gersten，Baker，Smith-Johnson，Dimino，& Peterson，2006）。这就需要转变模式，使教科书成为各种教学工具之一，而不是日常教学的唯一基础。然而，脱离教科书驱动的课程并不是一种新颖的方法。它植根于建构主义方法，目前通过教育理论家将该方法应用于课程设计模型（Wiggins & McTighe，2006）而在教育中受到青睐。过去和现在的建构主义的应用集中在学生如何构建理解。学生先前的知识和经验被组织成图式、模式和联系，以便于理解和记忆。建构主义所有应用的关键是，儿童需要机会通过自己的思维过程以及与他人和环境的互动将他们先前的知识和经验与新信息联系起来（Scruggs & Mastropieri，1994）。这样的机会让学生使用他们的图式作为基础，建立一个框架，理解新的想法和信息。通过这种知识和技能的逐步建立或支架，学生可以得到支持，超越死记硬背的知识，发展理解的深度。课程设计是培养学生建构理解能力的核心。如果没有适当设计的课程，教学可能是无效的脚手架
wishes that her students were as enthusiastic about the subject as she is. She covers all the information in the textbook with lectures and PowerPoint notes, and even includes an experiment at the end of most units. Even with all of this, her students at best memorize information for a test; they never retain it beyond the test. In the last unit she covered, her students kept complaining, “Why do we have to know this?” “This is not going to help me in life.” How can she get her students excited about learning? How can she help them to truly understand the content and how it relates to their lives? As teachers respond to the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 and contemplate the import of research documenting poor learning outcomes for students with disabilities, the key challenge is to design curriculum and instruction that facilitate understanding, retention, and generalization (Bulgren, Deshler, & Lenz, 2007). To meet this challenge and adequately prepare students to meet curricular standards, teachers must reach beyond past practices of teaching for curriculum exposure and utilizing books as curricular guides (Carnine, 1991; Gersten, Baker, Smith-Johnson, Dimino, & Peterson, 2006). This requires a paradigm shift in which textbooks are one of a variety of teaching tools rather than the sole basis for daily teaching. The move away from textbookdriven curriculum, though, is not a novel approach. It is rooted in the constructivist approach currently finding favor in education through the work of educational theorists applying the approach in curriculum design models (Wiggins & McTighe, 2006). Past and current applications of constructivism focus on how students construct understanding. Students’ prior knowledge and experiences are organized into schema, patterns, and connections for understanding and remembering. Key to all applications of constructivism is that children need opportunities to connect their prior knowledge and experiences with new information through their own thought processes and through interactions with others and the environment (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1994). Such opportunities allow students to use their schema as a basis on which to build a framework for understanding new ideas and information. Through this gradual building or scaffolding of knowledge and skills, students can be supported to move beyond rote knowledge and develop depth of understanding. Curriculum design is at the center of developing student ability to construct understanding. Without appropriately designed curriculum, instruction can be ineffective at scaffolding