Running head: FINAL REFLECTION1

FINAL REFLECTION8

Final ReflectionHiram RamirezLoyola University Chicago

Final ReflectionLearning is an innate process that we engage in from an early age. As we are developing as children, we observe and interact with various stimuli that help to expand our understanding of the world around us. We also listen to the people around us to begin to grasp language and develop other concepts. Throughout history, institutions like schools and universities have been built to help further our learning. But these institutions were created without understanding the complex ways in which our brains process, compartmentalize, and remember information. Even today, we are still struggling to learn how our brains work and how it navigates learning. Through this course, I have been able to explore different theorists and framings for understanding how contemporary scholars are conceptualizing learning. The content in this course has also taught me how we need to structure and facilitate learning in the classroom. Through this learning process I have developed a personal philosophy around curriculum development. In this paper I will highlight what I have learned about myself, how the various concepts in the class connect, themes I have learned in the course thus far, and my philosophy of curriculum development. Self-AssessmentDuring the course of the semester, I slowly came to realize certain strengths and areas of growth for myself. The strengths I discovered were that I am able to apply Finks (2003) concepts of backward design and integrated course design well. During the course I used backward design in both curricular and co-curricular ways. An example of a curricular use for backward design was the development of a syllabus in the course, and a co-curricular example would be the project with Marquette. And outside of the curriculum development course, I have also used backward design. I have used this concept to develop papers for my queer theory course by thinking of what I wanted to develop and working backwards to develop an outline. Through these various exercises I was able to understand how this concept could be applied. With the integrated course design, I found the synergy between the learning outcomes, activities, and assessments to make sense. I valued the seamless ways in which these three components of curricular experiences needed to interact. But through this process, I also learned that I had some areas of growth. During the course, I struggled with developing well-structured and measurable learning outcomes. I also feel that my ability to develop strong rubrics could be improved. Ensuring that I go back and forth between each component is crucial when developing the learning outcomes and rubric. Though synergy between the three components makes sense, it takes a great deal of work to ensure they complement each other. But the papers and projects in the course have helped me to not only explore these strengths and areas of growth, but also to further develop them. Connections to the CourseThe diverse readings, assignments, and group project were all experiences that helped to further my understanding of curriculum development. The course readings helped give me knowledge and information about this topic, which allowed me to develop a conceptual framework (Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 1999). With this conceptual framework I was able to apply the knowledge I gained through the various assignments and group projects. For example, with the first assignment on the core curriculum of various institutions I was able to see how learning was structured at institutions. Through the analysis of core curriculum, I saw how institutions intentionally integrated learning to support the development of conceptual understandings (Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 1999). Conceptual frameworks were also useful during my queer theory course this semester as I struggled to understand the various theoretical frameworks we were taught. Once I understood that queer theories were framed to contradict or resist hegemonic heterosexist society, a conceptual framework for this topic, I was able to better understand the theories. Conceptual frameworks help to frame other concepts under a conceptual umbrella. Another assignment that taught me about curriculum development, was the paper on course syllabi. This paper was an exploratory investigation into how the course syllabi reflected or deviated from Finks (2003) integrated course design. The assignment also allowed me to see how different faculty members developed their learning outcomes. As Nilson (2010) discussed, it is important that students have engaging activities while learning and teachers infuse real life examples. Some syllabi developed strong learning outcomes that reinforced active engagement by students and endorsed real life connections. But even with strong learning outcomes, Fink (2003) reminds us that there needs to be intentional synergy between learning outcomes, activities, and assessment. In this way, learning is maximized and students leave a course understanding enough concepts for the rest of their academic journey. The third assignment in the course that involved curriculum development was the service-learning program analysis. This paper showed me how different institutions articulate and implement service-learning. It also reinforced what Jacoby (1996) shared, that service-learning takes place both in the classroom and outside of it. It challenged me to rethink the ways in which curriculum development could be applied. The analysis of service-learning programs also reinforced the need for structured spaces for students to practice critical reflection (Honnet & Poulsen, 1998). The paper also challenged my understandings of how service sites should collaborate during the service-learning experiences. Some service-learning programs seemed to have a strong and collaborative relationship with their service-learning site while others just seemed to have a list of organizations they used. Like Howard (1993) mentions the role of the service site should be a partnership and they should be involved in the learning process for students. The fourth assignment that furthered my understanding of the content in the course was developing a syllabus and then writing a reflective analysis. For this project I was able to practice using Finks (2003) integrated course design. Finding ways to creatively cultivate synergy between the various facets of the syllabus was a great exercise. This project also allowed me to develop learning outcomes that included the taxonomy of significant learning (Fink, 2003). Understanding how to incorporate caring and human dimensions into the course was new for me. This new revelation has also made me consider how I am infusing some of the concepts in the taxonomy of significant learning in my scholarship. I am questioning how I am infusing a human dimension in my work and ensuring that my research is not only adding knowledge to the field but actively expanding the ways in which the topic is being discussed. This new way of thinking about my scholarship has made me reconsider how I should think about my research of Latino men and machismo. This enlightenment has been refreshing and I appreciate the way the course challenged me in this way. The final assignment for the course, the group project, was a culminating experience that tied in everything I had learned. Applying Finks (2003) integrated course design, using Nilson (2010) to develop the learning outcomes, and considering how students could creatively engage in their reflection was developmental. Also making sure that the students developed during their experience at the pre-, mid-, and post-service level was also difficult. Backward design, from Fink (2003), was very useful when developing the learning outcomes to be developmentally progressive for this assignment. Themes During my reflection of this course, I realize that there are reoccurring themes that illustrate my learning in this course. The three main themes that rose to the surface were engagement, reflection, and intentionality. Many of the course readings, assignments, and the group project reinforced these three themes. Learning to see how students need to be engaged in their learning and facilitating this process through curriculum was a core concept during my learning. A great example of how I have used this theme in another course was in my quantitative course for a presentation. During the presentation, to ensure they were actively participating and engaged, we sporadically asked them question about the material. The second theme, reflection, was also critical in this course. Without reflection students cannot process what they have learned and develop conceptual frameworks for future reference. Reflection also allows students to build more connections with other knowledge they are gaining and emphasize the value of the information they are learning. The last theme is intentionality. Many of the course readings discussed the need for purposeful development of syllabi and other facets of curriculum development. The course itself was also intentionally designed to allow students to learn the concept of learning very broadly, and then focus in on specific ways of looking at the larger body of knowledge around learning for students. With intentionality as a cornerstone in curriculum development, learning can be maximized. Philosophy of Curriculum DevelopmentMy philosophy for curriculum development recognizes the ever evolving body of knowledge around learning. I see curriculum development as a process that is in constant flux and must be revisited at every opportunity. As I began to shape my philosophy of curriculum development, the three themes above were crucial. Engagement, reflection, and intentionality became the foundational to my understanding of curriculum development. The first theme, engagement. Allowed me to recognize the multitude of ways in which knowledge can be gained and must be engaged through various mediums to allow students to maximize on the learning that can take place in the classroom. As students develop their understanding of their learning, it is my role to support them in reflecting on how this knowledge ties in to their educational journey thus far and how it will help further their development in the future. Reflection is a powerful tool to not only have students further their understanding but also to build new connections. The last theme, intentionality opened my eyes to the purposefulness of teaching. Curriculum development for one class must be considered a part of the larger curriculum development experience of students throughout their academic career. Intentional measures can be taken to enhance the learning that students have in their courses, and also allow learning for the instructor. In these various ways, I have learned about curriculum development and crafted a philosophy. ConclusionThrough this course, I have learned about key concepts in curriculum development. I have also developed a conceptual framework for curriculum development that I am able to rely on for future projects. For example, with my understanding of backward design I can reconsider how I write my papers or attempt to tackle presentations. Thinking about the end product or outcome of an assignment can be the beginning point for me in developing the various components for an assignment. This course has also taught me that learning is not a static process and one that needs active participation in both the learner and the instructor. Knowledge gained my individuals is only useful if it can be recalled and utilized in various contexts, so learning to teach in a way that lends itself to practical uses is crucial. The knowledge I have gained in this course will serve me well in my future academic journey.

ReferencesBransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Fink, L.D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to developing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Honnet, E.P. & Poulsen, S.J. (1998) Principles of Good Practice for Combining Service and Learning, The Johnson Foundation. Howard, J. (1993).Community service learning in the curriculum. In J. Howard (Ed.), Praxis I: A faculty casebook on community service learning. (pp. 3-12). Ann Arbor: OCSL Press.Jacoby, B. & Associates. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and Practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.