Farrell's "Backwards Model" and Teacher Evaluations

What is Farrell’s Backward Planning Model?

Farrell’s “Backwards Model” focuses on the systemic pedagogical practices. The elements of Farrell’s lesson design are focused on text and student’s mastery of the material. 

Elements of Farrell’s backwards planning model include:

1) All learning beginning in the text

2) The teachers’ job is to engage the reader and activate prior knowledge

3) Multiple readings of academic text are routine

4) Independent mastery of text being essential to mastery

5) Writing records and creating thought through writing

6) Teachers frequently communicate their ideas through writing

7) Rhetoric is as important as concept (Glatthorn et al., 2018).

 

Using Farrell’s Backwards Planning Model in My Classroom

    I have not personally adopted Farrell’s backwards planning model because I plan lessons using the 5E model and the Understanding by Design model written by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe. The Understanding by Design Model shares some similarities to Farrell’s model in that the assessment is planned first. However, there are differences in focus of instruction and Understanding by Design provides more of a framework for planning curriculum. The reason I have adopted the BSCS 5E model and Understanding by Design for instruction is because they are more conducive to science learning. Farrell’s backwards planning model has many differences from the 5E learning model. For example, the first phase of the 5E learning cycle involves the engagement phases where student’s prior knowledge is assessed through short activities or discussions, whereas Farrell’s first element of lesson design involves student’s solely engaging in text. I prefer the 5E model because formative assessment and revision of prior concepts is continuously taken into account. I also do not agree with Farrell’s idea that all learning begins in text because one of the primary principles of the 5E model is that students learn while doing. Literacy is essential to learning, but it is not the only vehicle for understanding concepts. 

Does Farrell’s Lesson Design Align with Written and Taught Curriculum?

    The steps of Farrell’s lesson design align with the written curriculum but seems too rigid for taught curriculum and assessment. The main reason is that the check for understanding occur after the guided practice through student discourse, but discussions and formative assessments should occur in all elements of lesson design. Lesson design should afford more flexibility and this model would fit in well with a technological design focus. Implementing some principles from the naturalistic model is significant in designing student centered curriculum. 

Evaluating Classroom Culture and Teacher Effectiveness

    The indicators that matter the most to me are assessing prior knowledge, relating concepts to real-world experiences, student ownership over their own learning, and students solving problems using critical thinking skills. Ferrell’s backwards planning model misses some crucial factors in students’ taking ownership of their own learning through reading and re-reading the texts with teacher led discussion to assess prior knowledge. Furthermore, Glatthorn et al. (2018) states that discussions should be text based because displaying of text is more valuable than creating visual displays. Assessment should present a variety of methods to demonstrate learning.

    The way that I plan on evaluating teacher effectiveness and culture in the classroom is to conduct informal observations and gather data about research-based teaching strategies, grouping patterns, technology use, and levels of knowledge. Additionally, artifacts in the form of lesson plans and sample assessments will be collected to evaluate goals of learning and whether the data matches the walk-through observations. 

    During these walk-throughs I will also complete certain tasks including asking students about what they are doing and assessing whether grouping is being used intentionally. It will take time to gather enough data to develop a thorough evaluation of classroom culture and teacher effectiveness. It is important to vary focus in these observations and provided immediate feedback (Glatthorn et al., 2018). 

    Another method that will be used for evaluating teaching effectiveness will be Professional Learning Communities. According to Glatthorn et al. (2018) professional learning is effective if it is based on sound research, facilitates dialogue, and responds to district goals. Whenever you listen to teachers and align goals of curriculum together you can create an effective learning community. Glatthorn et al. (2018) explains that when professional learning is used effectively it is more likely the written, taught, tested, and learned curricula is more consistent. 

References:

Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., Whitehead, B. M., & Boschee, B. F. (2018). Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation. SAGE publications.