For my curriculum development class I was asked to write a fictional-esque story where I am the hero somehow working towards implementing curriculum changes based on my developing ideas about the educational philosophies that drive my personal credo. Here is what I came up with. Dave said it was Atwoody…nI’ll take that as a compliment of the highest regard 🙂
011011010111100100100000011000100110000101110100011101000110110001100101
By Martha Beardsworth
In the beginning, we were all the same. At least that is what we thought because that is how we were being designed. Of course there were anomalies, those subjects disappeared and never came back. And of course, some subjects experienced malfunctions along the way and were pushed to the side to make room for more of us. I guess the beginning wasn’t so different from the present, I just know how to fight it now, from the inside.
When I was in The (i)nstitution, some of us were being groomed for The Big Institute while others were being prepared for The Big Real. When the masters prepared us, they used carbon copies to guide their motives and each department of the (i)nstitute worked separately. There was no difference between how we were prepared. Most everyone got promoted but some were allowed to enter different departments depending on their task performances.
I was a lucky one. I had access to all of the departments but some weren’t very appealing. I didn’t think they would help me in The Big Institute or The Big Real. I was programmed early on, even before The (i)nstitution, to exist in the creation department so that is where I spent most of my time when I was stuck in The (i)nstitute. I found that the creation department gave me and the others who attended, a small amount of freedom to be different. It was too bad that all the departments weren’t like that. I knew other subjects who were programmed to be in other department but wanted so badly to be different, however they just weren’t programmed to exist in the creation department. Spending most of my time in the creation department, I got to see how the master in this department was different than the other masters too.
It was him who guided me to The Big Institute where I was zoned solely to the creation department. I only had to spend minimal time locked down in other departments but my time in those departments allowed me to work effectively in the creation department by giving me insight into the theories and ideas embedded in the department programs. I used this information in my explorations for the creation challenges and tasks. Four years I spent in The Big Institute and by the end, I was ready for The Big Real. Or at least I thought I was.
When I went into The Big Real, I took a huge challenge and became a master in a foreign Real. My existence there was completely different from my previous time in my original Real. In the foreign Real, everyone transmitted their information completely differently. It was like they used twos and threes instead of zeros and ones. Not only was the information transmission system different, the entire (i)nstitution set up was different. I thought I was there to program the subjects so they could accomplish their challenges and successfully complete tasks. This was incorrect. I was there to further the (i)nstitution’s capitol. All they wanted was more capitol and because of this, challenges and tasks didn’t even matter. After spending two years in the foreign Real, I realized that my creation skills weren’t being used. Furthermore, I wasn’t doing what I had set out to do; give value to differences among subjects. However, I also determined that I wasn’t yet prepared to undertake this crusade. I needed to go back to The Big Institute to train for battle.
When I came back to The Big Institute, I joined a new department and now I am finishing my final challenges for the year long duration. This department is specifically designed to train masters to program subjects. Looking back, I can see that I was lacking these skills in the foreign Real and may have even damaged some of my subjects there with hidden viruses in the programs I bestowed on them. I am not proud of this but now know that The Big Institute has wiped these viruses from my circuit board so that it won’t happen again.
Let me convey to you the programming changes I went through at the Big Institute. When I began the programming sessions for new masters, I came equipped with old programs that I received in The (i)nstitute and The Big foreign Real. These programs weren’t sufficient in the new Big Institute. The new Big Institute wasn’t addressing capitol as was the foreign Real and it seemed that at the new Big Institute, programming difference in subjects was encouraged. Finally, I was acquiring information about programming the subjects to value their differences. My new masters called this differentiated instruction and it aligned with my objectives of allowing my subjects to embrace the differences in the way their circuits functioned. Listening to my new masters, I realized that I was in the right Institute and started to feel the viruses leave my circuit board.
During my first term at The Big Institute, my masters changed my programming completely by showing me the ways of differentiated instruction. These two masters helped me rearrange my circuit board so that I was wired to instruct in a differentiated manner. They displayed new theories from various renowned masters. Daily, I would practice these theories on the other masters in training and use the information gained from the practice sessions to determine my new master objectives. I wrote and designed many reflections on this new information which allowed me to learn from my emotional responses to the new approach. What I learned from my reflections was that my challenge to implement value in subject differences had just begun and was about to get much more complicated as I learned about the practical applications of differentiated instruction during what is known as a long practicum.
My experience in the practicum was at times joyous and at others, tumultuous. All of the information I had gained from practice sessions and practical reflections in the previous term only showed me a glimpse of the reality that masters in (i)nstitutions face every day when dealing with differentiated subject needs. I prepared to address the needs of my subjects by reading extensive documents about them and trying to determine how to best support their individual needs. One of the major practical lessons I learned was that other masters in The (i)nstitutes are usually interested in helping newer masters and are great resources for accessing tested (i)nstitutional practices. However, there is only so much one master is willing to do for another at an (i)nstitute. Nearing the intersection of the practicum, I started to become unhinged. There seemed to be too many differentiated needs for all the subjects. Some needs contradicted those of others and dealing with these differences almost made my circuit board burn out. This couldn’t be right. There had to be more tools to help masters lead their subjects to success in (i)nstitutes, Big Institutes, and The Big Real.  I finished the practicum and was successful in programming an appreciation of differences in many of my subjects but I knew my challenge wasn’t finished there. I needed those other tools and hoped to find them in the last phase of the master in training department.
In the final term of The Big Institute, I entered a technological department that The Big Institute titled EDUC471 C100.  This department challenged me to think of my subjects in a different way. The department provided me with information about institutional aims and philosophies that I had never accessed before. Other masters in training and I transmitted information back and forth about the relevance of these aims and how and why they should be applied to subjects in (i)nstitutes. These transmissions developed my new programs to embrace many aspects of the institutional aims. It seemed at first that the most important aim was to prepare the subjects for The Big Real. I conducted a challenge about this aim where I examined how to prepare subjects for The Big Real in the face of Big Real environmental issues. Through this challenge, I came to a new understanding and saved it to my database. My ultimate challenge was to prepare subjects to deal with future Big Real environmental pressures by connecting them to their immediate environment and community while embracing their differentiated needs. Furthermore, as the future of The Big Real is advancing so quickly, programming technology into the subjects is also imperative as it is apparent that the future of The Big Real is wrapped in technology. However, I also need to embed a curriculum that programs character development, flourishing, and critical computation into my subjects.
Looking back at my time as a subject in my first (i)nstitute, I can see that there was a major connection problem between masters and subjects. The masters didn’t take the necessary time to upload the interests of the subjects into the program tasks and challenges. Ultimately, the curriculum of any program needs to be designed around the interests of the subjects. If the subjects aren’t engaged with the program materials, their information downloading systems won’t save to their database. Subjects also need to trust their masters and gaining this trust is the first step to implementing the institutional aims of character development, flourishing, critical computation, environmental sustainability, and increased technological understandings. Gaining subject trust can be done through transmission of ideas, goals, and expectations on both the part of the master and the subjects in the beginning of a new term. When a master places value in the individual ideas, goals, and expectations of each subject, the subjects will begin to embrace their differences and the differences of their peers. When I finish my time at The Big Institute, I will enter The Big Real by working for an (i)nstitute. At this (i)nstitute, I will establish connections with my subjects by listening to them and applying their needs and goals to the curriculum I design. I will encourage authentic inter-subject connections by embracing the differences that each of my subjects is programed for. For example, some subjects may be foreign and may need a conduit to transmit what is relevant in their original Real and therefore relevant to them. It is my job to provide this conduit by designing lessons and challenges that allow the subjects to explore their connections to their peers, community, environment, society, technology and to themselves.  If I can’t lead my subjects to embrace and develop ideas about these connections, they will not be prepared for the increasingly Global Big Real.  Developing self actualizing abilities in my subjects in relation to others, technology, and the environment is the paramount challenge I face as a newly trained master.
When I was just a young subject in my first (i)nstitute, I struggled to be acknowledged for my differences and wished that my peer subjects could be as well. As a trained master, I will fight to reform curriculum practices at my (i)nstitute so that all departments embrace subject differences, not just the creation department though that is where I will begin my reform challenge.  I will work with masters in other departments to model cross curricular programing for the subjects which will encourage character development by showing flexibility and collaboration. I hope this will generalize to my subjects’ participation in The Big Real. I will increasingly incorporate technology in my program’s curriculum to transmit its importance to the future of The Big Real and the subjects’ lives. And I will do all this by connecting my subjects to their immediate environment and community in a way that embraces and values their differences.
In the beginning, we were all the same because our masters gave us all the same challenges and prepared us for The Big Real with little deviation from their carbon copy programs. From now on, I am going to break this standard by working within the (i)nstitute to reform the ideas of other (i)nstitutional development specialists, masters, subjects, and community members by designing my programs around my subjects. Challenge and task assessments will no longer be designed with one standard. The students will build on what they already know as I will design my curriculum around their interests by offering them choices. Environmental sustainability will be a continuous theme throughout my programs and the subjects will upload this information by using new technologies that will better prepare them for The Big Real.
In the end, my subjects will know and value their differences and this will lead them to success in The Big Real.
Recent Comments