Designing the Classroom Curriculum Designing the Classroom Curriculum | Page 52

Designing the Classroom Curriculum
diagnostics. Working out ‘why not’ or ‘the extent’ to which such learning outcomes been achieved (or learnt),
is known as learning diagnostics. These concepts are discussed in Chapters Seven and Ten.
Returning once again to instructional learning outcomes, these instructional statements should contain only one
verb and thus outline for the teacher the specifics of what they will teach, assess and report in a given lesson
or sequence of lessons. “Indicators” in a syllabus serve a similar purpose and teachers often refer to these in
lieu of developing their own ILOs (See Table 5.9 at this chapter’s end).
(2) Using Verbs that define what to teach and what to assess
So let’s now place ILOs in a context of teaching the mandated syllabus. As we mentioned earlier, the syllabus
learning outcome is designed to be achieved across a ‘Stage’ or a two year period. They are therefore complex
and contain a myriad of hierarchical teaching knowledge which needs to be put into strategy for sequential
teaching in specific lessons: hence instructional learning outcomes. The teacher organizes and records these
at LMQ 2 under their ‘parent’ syllabus-learning outcome (for reference back to the syllabus) and in
declarative and procedural knowledge groupings. This arrangement makes the selection of the teaching
strategies, which are devised in LMQ5, and the assessment strategies in LMQ7, easier because the respective
choice is made by matching the key verb in the ILO and the specific knowledge --- implicit in the ILO ---
to be learnt (i.e. procedural or declarative knowledge) to a corresponding teaching and assessment strategy.
Figure 5.1 illustrates how this information is recorded, while ‘five key steps’, which we outline in Chapter
Eight indicates how the assessment strategy is determined.
On details of how to select teaching strategies we recommend ‘Designing the Classroom Curriculum in the
Knowledge Age’ (Lynch and Smith, 2011) and Dimensions of Learning (Marzano and Pickering, 1996).
Every instructional learning outcome must have a key verb. This key verb (see Table 5.7 and Table 5.8 which
follow and example 5.1, in Chapter Seven, for examples of how it’s used) signals the intent of the learning
outcome and the scope of learning (basic- superficial to deep- complex). Put simply the key verb indicates
the extent and depth of learning that should be evident after teaching. For example, and in reference to
Table 5.8, the use of the chief verb ‘compare’ (underlined in Table 5.7) signals declarative knowledge is to be
learnt and that students will be engaging chiefly in analysis, which is complex, and thus requires a deep level of
learning to achieve the ILO. By focusing on the key verb the teacher is, in effect, laying the foundation for
their selection of the teaching (LMQ5) and assessment strategy (LMQ7) that will fit such an ‘expectation’.
Table 5.8: Learning outcomes and key verbs highlighted
Defined Learning outcome Sample Knowledge and Simple Deep Understanding and Reasoning
LMQ2
Understanding question
The student knows the capital 1. Name the capital cities of all 1. Discuss the role served by a state or
cities of Australia
Australian states and territories.
territory capital city.
2. Label a map with the name of 2. Compare the similarities and
the appropriate capital city.
differences between each capital
city.
52