Here are initial draft versions of capacity matrices for the following Tech for Learning Professional Measurement Topics:
We Could Use Your Feedback:
Would you please consider taking a few minutes, look over one or all of these, and send us some feedback (email or comments below). Think about these feedback questions:
- Do the Learning Targets seem to be named appropriately (or do you have a better suggestion)?
- Does the organization of the Learning Targets within the Measurement Topic make sense?
Does the organization of the “Knows & Dos” within each Learning Target make sense?
- Are there any missing “Knows & Dos” that we should consider including?
- Are there any Learning Targets for that Measurement Topic that we should consider adding (and if so, would you recommend the “Knows & Dos”)?
- Does any phraseology need to be tweaked or revised? (Come on! Hasn’t everyone been dying to use “phraseology” in a sentence!?) 😉
- Any other suggestions for edits or revisions?
A Little Background on the Work:
Many thanks for Kathy Martin (principal in RSU4) for coming over and helping me get started last week. She shared RSU4’s capacity matrix for Empower/Educate (so, by extension, I should thank Norma-Jean Audet and Cathy McCue, too!), which we used as a format for framing the professional learning curriculum work. It let us punch out a less RSU4-specific version of the Empower curriculum, then draft the Personal iPad Use curriculum (using some ideas and activities from the initial training Auburn does with primary grades teachers). Thanks to Shelly Mogul for helping me make the Capacity Matrix Template a little more user friendly.
Knowing that we want this to be an Auburn & Friends project (in this case, emphasis on “& Friends.”), we tried to keep the learning targets somewhat generic. If your district uses iPads, we wanted you to be able to use the Personal iPad Use Capacity Matrix and didn’t want it to be too “Auburn-specific.” Same with Educate/Empower. At the same time, we wanted you to be able to use our capacity matrix as a model if you do things differently than we do. So, for example, if you use MacBooks or Chromebooks, etc., instead of iPads (or if you use Project Foundry or Jump Rope instead of Empower, etc.) we wanted you to be able to use the capacity matrix here as a model (perhaps without making too many changes) for creating your own capacity matrix for the device (or program) that you do use.
We started realizing that the Curriculum is different from the Modules/Pathways/Badges. There is certainly a lot of overlap and they are closely related, but they aren’t the same. I think all my years teaching high school somehow convinced me that the curriculum and the course were the same… At first, I was expecting the curriculum to look more like a training agenda, but realized that was really the badge/module – the activities you do to learn the stuff we want folks to know and be able to do.
So, to be clear, we’re only really working right now on defining the curriculum. Building out some modules or badges will come soon. And we’re starting to gain clarity on how the two are different (the curriculum work focuses on what teachers should understand or be skilled at, and the badge work focuses more on learning tasks, learning resources, and assessment options). The curriculum just tries to define the learning targets, not how you’ll get there (they’re 2 different things).
Also, some of you who have done this kind of Customized Learning curriculum work in other contexts will know that we still need to cycle back sometime soon and connect a more descriptive rubric (scale) to each Learning Target, including assigning a taxonomy level to each 2 and 3.