Cassadie Ross

I think we throw these expectations at teachers all the time- find ways for your students to engage in meaningful and authentic application of the content and practice of the skills, and we need to actually show teachers what this can look like. I appreciate the examples of project based learning, simulated workplace, and work-based learning in this module. This makes the whole approach to application of the content and skills seem much more tangible. 

We always hear about how important it is to get industry partners' input on curriculum and learning outcomes, and this is the first time I have ever seen a list of actual techniques for doing this. What we DON'T want to do is gather a bunch of industry representatives and have them lecture teachers on all of the things they aren't doing- I have seen this before and it is counter-productive. I appreciate the methods described in this module for interfacing with industry in a way that encourages collaboration.

I've never heard that employability skills should be weighed as heavily as technical and academic skills, but it makes sense. I am grateful to have resources like the employability skills rubric to guide this and will add this to my instructional planning tools. 

As a former English teacher (recovering), it's impossible for me NOT to embed some of the English standards into any curriculum development that I do. I try to be explicit about this in my work with teachers, providing them some high leverage and flexible approaches to literacy and writing and helping them work these skill seamlessly into their content. Many teachers seem overwhelmed by this idea at first, but once we get a few literacy or writing activities into their lesson plans, the value add becomes clear and they find that they actually enjoy the process. 

I think it's important to recognize that new teachers may rely on their own industry experience to guide their curriculum development in the first few years as a new teacher survival mechanism. That will work for the short term, but then teachers need to align their course outcomes to standards and seek feedback from industry representatives in order to ensure that the curriculum is relevant. 

Distilling the framework down to three things: provide multiple ways to access content, provide multiple ways for students to demonstrate their learning, and provide multiple ways for the learning to occur. This seems manageable for the teacher and completely student centered. I am imagining that the framework becomes habit over time. It is less of a prescribed approach and more of a paradigm for instruction. 

I think that the supported goal setting and the opportunities for physical movement lend themselves well to the CTE classroom. The principles of UDL have relevance in any classroom, but I think the framework would be easiest to implement in a hands-on learning, project-based learning environment.

Providing materials in multiple languages has many benefits. Not only does it improve accessibility for English language learners, it provides all students with the opportunity to be exposed to the content and vocabulary in multiple languages. This provides teachers with the chance to elevate bilingualism/multilinguilism as a valuable career skill. 

UDL seems like an incredibly humane approach to learning. By offering mulptiple ways to access content and choice in how the learning is displayed, students will feel more engaged in the class and take more ownership for their learning. Win win!

I guess I'm just suprised that in 2022 we are still talking so much about lecture as a typical classroom procedure. Lecturing to students is a passive experience, even with guided notes. There are so many other ways to engage students in learning activities. If you have to lecture, do it for a few minutes, then let students turn and talk or do a hands-on activity.