Sie sind auf Seite 1von 14

Running head: FINAL REFLECTION

Final Reflection: Learning Lived


Naseeb K. Bhangal
Loyola University Chicago

FINAL REFLECTION

This final summative reflection paper reviews current critiques and emerging best
practices for curriculum development in higher education. A synthesis of semester-long course
readings, class assignments, and group project is provided along with personal examples of
learning. Prior to providing a personal philosophy of curriculum development, this paper will
highlight Fink (2013) and Wagner's (2010) critiques surrounding outdated learning practices, i.e.
lecture-based courses, in order to lay down a foundation for the remainder of the paper. The
paper will then focus on my personal philosophy of curriculum development, which is rooted in
Wagner's (2010) assertion that "For students to become innovators in the twenty-first century,
they need a different education, not merely more education" (p. 201). My personal philosophy
represents a blend of Fink (2013), Wagner (2010), Nilson (2010), and Kuh's (2008) suggestions
for curriculum development, including but not limited to: significant learning experiences,
application-oriented education, feedback-centered courses, innovation, and syllabus construction.
Following the personal philosophy section, connections between the Curriculum in Higher
Education and Advanced Student Development Theory courses will be offered in order to
highlight the importance of fostering identity development in curriculum. A final review of
essential themes that emerged for me as a learner, i.e. reflective learning and anti-oppressive
learning, and a self-assessment of my strengths and areas of growth will be provided.
Common Curriculum Concerns
In order to appreciate the significance of curriculum design and development, it is
important to highlight the current nature of learning in higher education. Fink (2013) believed
that "when we examine [learning] from inside the academy and look at the quality of student
learning, we find a more disturbing picture" (p. 2). Fink (2013) goes on to describe this
"disturbing picture" (p. 2) as decreasing "academic motivation and openness to diversity" (p. 3)

FINAL REFLECTION

among students and lack of creativity among faculty, specifically within course design. Fink
(2013) suggested that the "basic problem is that, although faculty members want their students to
achieve higher kinds of learning, they continue to use teaching practices that are not effective at
promoting such learning" (p. 3). Throughout the semester, we have read in depth about how
outdated models of teaching and assessment, i.e. lecturing, memorization, and tests, continue to
obstruct learning in the classroom (Fink, 2013; Wagner, 2010; Keeling, 2006; Keeling, 2000).
In his book, Creating Innovators, Wagner (2010) described the "disturbing picture" as the
stifling of "curiosity, creativity, and imagination" (p. 98) due to adult behavior, limiting students'
sense of innovation in all spheres of their lives. According to Wagner (2010), while majority of
the twentieth century necessitated knowledge acquisition, "in the twenty-first century, what you
know is far less important than what you can do with what you know" (p. 142). With an
increasing demand for technological services and rising globalization, the twenty-first century
economy is a breeding ground for innovators (Wagner, 2010). Under these conditions, the
"interest in and ability to create new knowledge to solve new problems is the single most
important skill that all students must master today" (Wagner, 2010, p. 142). While many
educators are aware of this expectation, there are few opportunities in higher education for
students to investigate their questions or create things on their own, which Wagner (2010)
believed were "essential practices of innovation" (p. 141). What gets in the way? Wagner
(2010) maintained that "As adults--parents, teachers, and mentors--it is sometimes too easy for
us to treat the dreams and fantasies of [students] as peculiar or even ridiculous" (p. 98). Finks
(2013) disturbing picture and Wagners (2010) focus on learning and innovation is essential.
Students in higher education are rarely given the opportunity to create knowledge, often forced
to regurgitate facts. When students secure a competitive research opportunity, it is aimed at

FINAL REFLECTION

helping faculty with their respective research and innovation efforts, not their own. It should be
noted that the aforementioned shortcomings facing students and educators in learning and
assessment is not an exhaustive list, but instead a starting point in understanding where change
can take place for learning to take place. It is here, between Fink (2013) and Wagner's (2010)
critiques, that I begin to construct my philosophy of curriculum development.
Philosophy of Curriculum Development
In the face of outdated teaching practices and diminishing creativity in learning, focusing
on significant learning experiences is vital for me. When describing significant learning
experiences, Fink (2013) noted that this type of learning "makes a difference in how people
live[and] requires [educators to] help students connect what they learn in [their] courses with
their 'life file' rather than just with their 'course file'" (p. 7). This seems like a simple distinction
when developing curriculum, but is often overlooked by faculty who are burdened with several
other institutional responsibilities (Fink, 2013; Nilson, 2010). As an educator, Fink's (2013)
distinction between "life file" and "course file" is an important starting point for me.
The process of curriculum development for any subject may be considered an opportunity
for students to connect their stories with course content. In the "Syllabus and Reflective
Analysis" assignment, I paid close attention to the course content and learning activities that I
introduced into my "Storytelling for Social Justice" syllabus. I provided several opportunities,
via course assignments, for students to reflect, write, and present their narratives as it relates to
the overarching theme of social justice. For this particular course, my hope was to solicit the
stories that frame students' respective worldviews, beliefs, and commitment to enacting social
justice. Should I have the opportunity to design another course, I would re-commit to soliciting
stories from my students in order to ensure a connection between the "course file" and "life file."

FINAL REFLECTION

Regardless of course discipline this narrative-based approach to curriculum development is


supported by Fink (2013): "students seek a personal, meaningful understanding of the material
being studied" (p. 21), encouraging educators "to think about the impact of how they teach and
assess, and not just on how much students learn but on the quality of that learning" (p. 21).
When constructing my "Storytelling for Social Justice" syllabus, I focused on ensuring that
my assessment incentivized students to write and present quality stories by soliciting narratives
from their lived experiences. I incorporated opportunities for students to receive consistent
feedback from peers and faculty into the curriculum by requiring students to solicit and submit
reactions from the class after narratives are shared. This type of assessment activity is
encouraged by Kuh (2008): "[students] benefit more, especially when they get frequent feedback
from the faculty member, peer mentor, and other students in the course" p. 24. Initially I wanted
to create several assignments, but a closer reading of Fink (2013) and Kuh (2008) challenged me
to approach curriculum development with an appreciation for quality versus quantity.
My philosophy of curriculum development is also rooted in Wagner's (2010) demand for
innovation within education. With an increasing demand for innovators in the twenty-first
century, "Common sense suggests that the classes that best prepare students for work in
innovative companies would create a culture that most closely resembles what they will
encounter in the workplace" (Wagner, 2010, p. 99). This semester I have learned first-hand the
value of a classroom culture that resembles the workplace expectations for innovation. I have
worked with my peers in a small-group throughout the semester to create a professional
development training that has actively encouraged me to connect course material to a
professional need. While producing curriculum for Marquette University has required tedious
work, it has also been rewarding to see my peers and I become more familiar with Fink's (2013)

FINAL REFLECTION

taxonomy of significant learning and backward design. This accomplishment is best explained
by Wagner (2010): "Learning research shows that students understand and retain much more of
what they learn when they have studied and used the knowledge in an applied context" (p. 175).
In order to facilitate this type of learning, Wagner (2010) noted that the instructors must be
comfortable with relinquishing "control in classes to make them more student-led andplace
considerable emphasis on self and team evaluations versus the grade given by the teacher" (p.
175. This type of instruction is similar to Fink's (2013) forward-looking assessment. As an
instructor, I hope to foster innovation in the classroom. The way in which I hope to do this is to
provide students with a realistic real-world problem they will encounter and invite them to create
solutions as innovators. This is in effort to strengthen students' intrinsic motivations to be
"lifelong learners, to be the architects of their own learning, their own careers, to bring into being
that which they desire" (Wagner, 2010, p. 176).
The most practical tools I have learned to incorporate into my philosophy of curriculum
development come from Nilson (2010). Reflecting on the "Syllabus and Reflective Analysis"
assignment, I appreciated having the opportunity to construct a course syllabus. The assignment
pushed me to integrate Fink's (2013) backward design with Nilson's (2010) recommendations.
Both readings emphasized the importance of formulating learning outcomes before selecting the
course content, assessment activities, and learning activities that will ultimately help students
achieve those outcomes. I have come to recognize the importance of taking time to ensure that I
have well developed and achievable learning outcomes before jumping to course content,
assessment, and learning activities. While I was shocked by the initial length of my syllabus, I
took comfort in Nilson's (2010) perspective: "The more information you include, the less you
have to improvise or decide on the run, and the fewer student questions you will have to answer"

FINAL REFLECTION

(p. 33). In my new role as Program Coordinator in the Department of Student Diversity &
Multicultural Affairs (SDMA), I am responsible for co-instructing a UNIV 102 course titled,
"Interrupting the School-to-Prison Pipeline." I am eager to build upon the existing UNIV 102
course syllabus, specifically including more details in weekly lesson plans, in order to provide
students with the tool "they need to succeed in [the] course from the start" (Nilson, 2010, p. 37).
Finally, Fink's (2013) focus on new forms of learning continues to peak my interest as I
continue to grow my knowledge of curriculum development. While the UNIV 12 course is
paired with an experiential Alternative Break Immersion trip, I still want to explore Fink's (2013)
new forms of learning, which include but are not limited to the following: active learning, smallgroup learning, assessment as learning, service learning, reflection on one's own teaching and
learning, and instructional technology. Brownell and Swaner's (2010) five-high impact strategies
(i.e. first-year seminars, learning communities, undergraduate research programs, and servicelearning programs) build upon Finks (2013) new forms of learning, which I aim to incorporate
in future course design and instruction. Lastly, I aim to revisit Fink's (2013) recommendations to
faculty to improve their knowledge of subject matter, teacher-student interactions, design of
instruction, and course management as I continue to work as an educator, both within and
outside of the classroom. The next section reviews connections drawn between the course and
the group project.
Connections between the Course and Group Project
One of the most notable connections I have drawn between course material and the group
project is the value of forming strong partnerships between student affairs and academic affairs
to support student-learning. Keeling (2004) described these learning and development
opportunities as "powerful partnerships" (p. 23), which are usually jointly planned to combine

FINAL REFLECTION

knowledge acquisition and experiential learning to promote more complex outcomes. In this
course our group project is the perfect example of what can result from a "powerful partnership.
As a result of our course partnership with Marquette University, my group, and I, have been able
to move beyond simple knowledge acquisition and towards application, integration, human
dimension, caring, and learning how to learn.
On a personal level, working in a group to apply Fink's (2013) backward design model
has strengthened my ability to not only use Fink's (2013) model but also explain my thought
process to my colleagues. While I usually prefer working on my own, this "powerful
partnership" with Marquette encouraged me to learn how to work and solve problems in the
company of others, and [sharpen my] own understanding by listening seriously to the insights of
others, especially those with different backgrounds and life experiences" (Kuh, 2008, p. 20).
After completing this assignment, I have come to value this type of learning and assessment
activity. Unfortunately, I am baffled by the fact that this type of learning is underutilizing
(Keeling, 2004; Keeling, 2006). It is here that I turn to Keeling (2006), who noted that the
challenge in forming these partnerships "is gaining consensus that student learning is so
important that faculty, staff, and administrators will be willing to climb outside the comfort of
their silos and reinvent higher education" (p. 65). I would also add that students need to also
invest in this type of learning as students, like me, are often reluctant to engage in group projects.
As a UNIV 102 instructor, I strive to be a proactive and reliable campus partner with Campus
Ministry in order to ensure that the aforementioned learning experience is readily available to
students. I aim to do this not only because of what the literature suggests, but also due to the
benefits I have experienced first-hand in this course from a powerful partnership in curriculum.

FINAL REFLECTION

The next section explains additional connections I have drawn from the course to my learning
experiences at Loyola, specifically student development theory.
Connection to Advanced Student Development Theory
Throughout the semester, I have been able to draw several connections between my
Advanced Student Development theory course and the Curriculum in Higher Education course.
While we have explored significant learning experiences, curriculum design, and high-impact
learning experiences in this course, we have spent a significant time in Advanced Student
Development Theory looking at student development through the Model of Multiple Dimensions
of Identity (MMDI) (Jones & Abes, 2013). While identity development might not be seen as a
necessary outcome of curriculum design, I continue to connect Fink's (2013) taxonomy of
significant learning to identity development. Specifically, Fink's (2013) emphasis on the human
dimension, caring, and learning outcomes is most notable when considering identity formation.
According to Jones and Abes (2013), a socially constructed view of identity promotes a
move away from seeing identity as essentially an unconscious process leading toward
individuation, although one rooted in social context, toward elevating that social context as
integral in the construction of identity (p. 57). In other words, an individuals sense of self and
identity (i.e. race, gender, sexuality, and class) is constructed through interactions with others
and the larger environment, which includes systems of oppression and privilege, social norms,
and societal expectations. Thus, social context and construction becomes important to consider
when designing curriculum of any kind. It is here that I value Fink's (2013) taxonomy because it
reminds educators to ensure that their courses are moving beyond knowledge acquisition,
application, and integration to focus on deeper, and arguably, more meaningful skills and
outcomes (i.e. human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn). The following section will

FINAL REFLECTION

10

cover the importance of reflective learning and anti-oppressive learning, which extends the
connection between curriculum and social identity development.
Essential Themes
The following two themes emerged as essential for me in articulating my learning through
this course experience: reflective learning and anti-oppressive learning. Since the beginning of
the semester, we have attempted to understand high-impact learning practices. What is notable
about high-impact learning is the deliberate incorporation of reflection within the academic and
experiential learning process. According to Cress (2013), "Reflecting on our experiences lends
new significance to what we are learning. It allows us to compare initial goals and objectives
with eventual outcomesto assess what we have accomplished" (p. 9). In other words, learning
cannot truly take place without reflection. Throughout this course, I have valued the opportunity
to slow down and reflect on course readings and assignments. In turn it has allowed me to
integrate reflection opportunities into the group project, recognizing that transformative
education "places the student's reflective processes at the core of the learning experience and
asks the student to evaluate both new information and the frames of reference through which the
information acquires meaning" (Keeling, 2004, p. 9). As I continue to think about myself as a
learner and as an educator, I hope to deepen my knowledge and facilitation of reflection.
In addition to reflection, I have focused a great deal on connecting semester-long course
materials to my pre-existing knowledge of anti-oppressive education. As a South Asian, Sikh,
gay, woman of color, I am always interested in whether a course will reflect or invite my various
identities and/or lived experiences. After taking Critical Social Theory, Social Justice for
Multiculturalism, and Women in Higher Education, where I actively explored anti-oppressive
pedagogies (i.e. intersectionality, multiple feminisms, queer theory, and critical race theory), it is

FINAL REFLECTION

11

important for me to not only master curriculum design, but also reflect on whether my
curriculum is accessible to diverse populations of students. Majority of my undergraduate
curriculum dismissed my identities, leaving me unmotivated to explore my identities and/or
move beyond knowledge acquisition in the classroom. Wagner (2010) reminded instructors:
"passion and purpose are even more essential for young people from disadvantaged
backgrounds who struggle against poverty and prejudice. For this group, having a strong
sense of passion and purpose is what enables them to have the courage, discipline, and
tenacity to transcend their circumstances and surrounding and to have hope and direction
for their future" (p. 139).
It is important to consider what happens when this passion and purpose is not cultivated in
curriculum? In answering this difficult question, I recognize I am in a position to develop and
contribute to curriculum that can help students from minoritized identities to find their purpose
and passion, i.e. human dimension learning outcome. I take comfort in my curriculum
philosophy which seeks to incorporate a narrative-based approach to designing learning
outcomes, assessment activities, and learning activities. The final section reviews my areas of
growth and strengths after completing this Curriculum in Higher Education course.
Conclusion: Self-Assessment
As I reflect on this course for my strengths and areas of growth, I am drawn to Keelings
(2004) call to action for student affairs practitioners:
"In order to respond to this challenge, student affairs professionals must be able to
proactively identify needs and be agents of change, they must be advocates for the needs
and concerns of students, they must be critical and reflective thinkers and they must be
skilled at facilitation, collaboration, and conflict resolutionstudent affairs professionals

FINAL REFLECTION

12

must possess the following values: appreciation of difference, altruism, truth seeking,
freedom with responsibility, equality and fairness, human dignity, justice, and community
empowerment" (p. 32).
Throughout this course, I have sought to improve my ability to advocate for the needs and
concerns of all students, especially those on the margins of academia. By familiarizing myself
with ineffective teaching and learning pedagogies (Fink, 2013; Keeling, 2006; Keeling, 2004), I
feel better equipped to provide meaningful learning experiences to students in my current role
within SDMA (Wagner, 2010; Brownell & Swaner, 2010). While I hesitate to engage in
personal reflection, I have been challenged to reframe my understanding of reflection as an
important tool to promote and assess student learning and teaching. As Keeling (2004) noted
above, facilitation of reflection is an important skill for student affairs practitioners. While I
developed curriculum, synthesized theories, and analyzed high-impact learning practices (i.e.
service learning), I can grow to improve my facilitation skills. For example, I am not certain if I
have the capacity to actually facilitate the curriculum I have developed and/or strive to develop.
As such, if I aim to facilitate course instruction or reflection, I recognize I must continue to to
engage in self-reflection and teaching (both within and outside the classroom) more regularly.
As a student while I have pushed myself to develop meaningful learning outcomes and
activities, I have been uncomfortable forming assessment activities. In the group project, I
refused to create rubrics or criteria for assessment, relying solely on forward-looking assessment
activities and the FIDeLity framework. I am still intimated by rubrics and criteria and the
intentionality this form of assessment requires. Thus, I foresee assessment being an area that I
will need to revisit should I move forward with course instruction.

FINAL REFLECTION

13

Finally, while I am very passionate about applying critical lenses to my courses, I need
further practice scaffolding and layering critical lenses on top of course content. I suspect that
this will take time and will come with additional curriculum development experience. In
summary, this course has pushed me to delve deeply into my pre-existing knowledge of
curriculum to explore new forms of learning. Admittedly, the learning activities I completed in
this course were unexpected and challenging. However, by completing these activities, I have
gained the confidence I required to develop challenging and fruitful learning outcomes,
assessment activities, and learning activities for my UNIV 102 course. I am confident that I will
continue using course material and assignments in my current professional role to ensure
significant learning experiences for my students.

FINAL REFLECTION

14
References

Brownell, J.E. & Swaner, L.E. (2010). Five high-impact practices: Research on learning
outcomes, completion and quality. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Cress, C.M. (2013). What is service-learning? In C.M. Cress, P.J. Collier, V.L. Reitenauer, and
Associates (Eds.), Learning through serving: A student guidebook for service-learning
and civic engagement across academic disciplines and cultural communities (pp. 7-15).
Sterling: Stylus Publishing.
Fink, L.D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to
developing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Jones, S. R., & Abes, E. S. (2013). Identity development of college students: Advancing
frameworks for multiple dimensions of identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Keeling, R.P. (Ed.). (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student
experience. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators & American
College Personnel Association: Washington, DC.
Keeling, R.P. (Ed.) (2006). Learning reconsidered 2: Implementing a campus-wide focus on the
student experience. ACPA, ACUHO-I, ACUI, NACA, NACADA, NASPA, & NIRSA:
Washington, DC.
Kuh, G.D. (2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them,
and they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Wagner, T., & Compton, R.A. (2012). Creating innovators: The making of young people who
will change the world. New York: Scribner.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen