Cartography.
The science or practice of drawing maps.
I don’t claim to be any sort of an expert in this, but I do understand maps to be graphical representations. They demonstrate, in a pictorial form, what things are and where they are so people can see and appreciate the landscape on a page. Users can work out how things relate to other things, how to move from one thing to another thing. Planning journeys, making connections and considering ideas of space and time are all made possible.
So, this ‘cartographic approach’ (that's what I am calling it anyway!) is how I have decided to
progress my curriculum thinking – with a graphic ‘map’ of each subject. A
visual representation of the subject that shows how I conceive of the subject
landscape and one that will enable me to plan and consider the journeys across
the landscape, to identify sensible checkpoints along the way, to appreciate
where we might wander back on ourselves, or how to cut across previous paths.
A map also allows for more flexibility than a linear
journey. I can take different journeys through the same landscape with the same
map. This is helpful as I want my teaching to be flexible and I intend to
reflect on and change my curriculum over time.
You can construct your curriculum ‘maps’ in lengthy written
documents, or unwieldy tables if you wish, but I feel you’ll be missing a trick.
I have found the process of creation and use of a graphic curriculum map to be
fulfilling, motivating, interesting and productive. This has prompted me to
think deeply and provides a much easier way to identify connections (which will
inform teaching and retrieval on implementation) and to communicate the subject
landscape with other stakeholders.
Business Curriculum Map
I am currently actively researching different approaches to
creation and delivery of a business curriculum and it is becoming clear that
there are a number of different routes which can be taken in teaching the
subject. Here are three main approaches that seem to garner support:
-
Small to large – This approach applies
chronological thinking to the problem and begins by teaching about small
start-ups and entrepreneurship and then builds to cover growth before finishing
with coverage of issues affecting large and multinational firms.
-
Specification order – This approach applies
practical logic to the problem and is no doubt the easiest approach for someone
wishing to teach in the order of a textbook, or ensure everything is neatly
organised. I have some reservations about simply adopting this approach without
rationale though (see below).
-
Functional – This approach applies
organisational thinking to the problem. After initially considering the setup
of firms, a route is taken through each function in turn and then the learning moves on by considering how external factors influence the functions.
I have always conceived of business organisations along
functional lines; marketing, operations, finance, HR. This reflects my own
educational experience of the subject (I went through, function-by-function, in
my own GCSE study; I took modules on separate functional topics at university; my lecturers had functional specialisms) and also my own commercial experience
and knowledge (I have worked in HR; I have friends with functional jobs; many
organisations are arranged along these lines).
This is how my schema of a business is formed. My internal mental map of a firm makes sense of the subject by organising all topics related to what happens inside a business into functional areas and non-functional topics are arranged separately, either to explain key questions (such as how, who, where and why to set up a business) or external issues (such as influences from outside that might affect the functions).
This, therefore,
is how I have constructed my map, it is visual reflection of my own thinking. The layout of the graphic conveys the broad direction of the journey we will take (right to left, top to bottom), but the absence of a single, linear route opens up the opportunity to flexibly move around the landscape as required.
Version 1
Version 2 (after seeking feedback and teaching team
discussion – more on that next time!)
A Learning Journey vs Organised Pinball
The idea of a ‘learning journey’ is somewhat appealing and
especially, so at least it seems, is the creation of neatly wiggling pictures
of them. It is really good for students and teachers to be able to understand
and discuss the journey they will take, but I think there is a danger in
holding to a model that is too linear in construction though. Whilst the
narrative is clear in my head, the journey isn’t necessarily a simple line and
the path I take often represents something more akin to ‘organised pinball’ as
I flit back to former topics or concepts at times, in teaching and also in
practice. These flashbacks form part of the plot, but they would look rather
messy if visually illustrated on my map.
In using a map, instead of a linear journey, I can point to,
and refer back to, any part of my map in any lesson. I don’t need a line that
connects back up to ‘ownership’ when I am teaching about ‘sources of finance', but I can point to that connection at that time, students will be
able to see that I am walking us briefly back to a place we have been before. I
might also ping forward to mention some of the economic or legal implications
of marketing choices made when teaching that for example, but this, again, is
pointing, mentioning some future destinations we will visit, but no lines needed.
Sequencing – Specification vs Story
Previously I have many times been guilty of blindly
delivering courses in specification order. This is undoubtedly organisationally
convenient in many ways and apparently widely commonplace from what I can see
(for example in my experiences tutoring students from other schools, as well as
in my own experience teaching in a number of schools). I am certainly willing
to accept that the order of the specification might appear completely logical
to you and thus you stick with it (whoever writes these things must have some
rationale behind their own choices) but this approach is ill-advised if you
cannot provide a rationale for this order that makes sense in your own mind.
It’s initially a logistical headache to pull the specification
apart and put it back together the way you want it, but I have found this
liberating and far more effective in the end. The story of each module is now
one I have crafted myself, I know how to weave them together to create a grand
narrative for the teaching of the whole course. Eagle-eyed onlookers will
notice that I have in fact made relatively few changes to my GCSE journey
(compared to the specification, we use Eduqas), but I have certainly engaged in
a far more considerable re-ordering of the A level economics specification
which I hope to share shortly also.
The most significant act I have made is moving the external
influences topic to the end of the course as I find it hard to understand how
students can appreciate external influences on something which they don’t
understand. So I am always keen to develop sound understanding of the internal,
functional workings of a business, before I consider the impact of influences
from outside. This is not perfect, and I know other specialists would argue
that few internal decisions exists without external influence, but this is why
we must choose our own narratives. We must select the story that makes most
sense to us in guiding others to understand our thinking.
Building in Retrieval
I have found that a move to deeper consideration of the
order of topics taught was a natural progression from considering how to
teach; you don’t need to read about cognitive science and evidence-informed
strategies for too long before you stumble across something that suggests you
space out learning/practice, or that you interleave it. So many teachers are
aware today of the importance of considering when to teach topics with
care.
I have found that a graphical approach facilitates this as I
can easily use the graphic to think through what I am teaching and visually
connect topics that I would wish to cover with retrieval practice or to recap.
The graphical approach also facilitates easy sharing of these ideas with
colleagues, who may not have the time to trawl through lengthy written
documents to find and remember these links every lesson. This is certainly not
the finished article for me yet, but here is what this graphical thinking looks
like.
Where next?
We are providing colour copies of the map to each of our new
students which we will refer to regularly in lessons in order to help students
understand our journey and topic connections. We are also going to display
large versions of the graphic in poster form for teacher reference and I am
currently producing a simplified wall display version too. We are also looking at how we can graphically map curriculum connections more widely, for example
linking to topics taught in other subjects and to careers. This is certainly in
its infancy, but this image represents some idea of how our work might progress.
How can I do this myself?
Hopefully I have inspired you to consider more deeply the concept of a curriculum ‘map’ and also to consider taking a graphical approach to your curriculum thinking, planning and communication. I would recommend starting by hand-drawing a sketch of how you ‘see’ the whole subject in your mind. You can then work on creating a graphic electronically. I created my graphic in PowerPoint (switch the gridlines on to help alignment and a see a slide as a blank canvas) and used icons from The Noun Project. I would thoroughly recommend reading the book ‘Dual Coding with Teachers’ by Oliver Caviglioli which will get you started with the basic principles of graphic design (to help ensure your creation is effective and attractive). I would also fully expect that the upcoming release of the book ‘Organise Ideas’ from Oliver and David Rodger-Goodwin will also be very useful in this domain, as this book covers the graphical representation of ideas, particularly with word-only diagrams (these is no need to use pictures in your map unless you feel they have use).
Share and Collaborate!
I would very much love to hear your thoughts on this topic
and to see any other graphical representations of curriculum mapping and thinking which you
may have created or come across! I am very keen to further develop my own
thinking in this domain in order to support curriculum development across
our subject community. This is an ongoing project and am extremely grateful to
the teachers who have already got involved in this – do join us!
To be continued… next time: curriculum stakeholders.
This is part two in a series of curriculum blogs which I am writing
for teachers and school leaders. The aim is to:
-
Support subject leaders as they develop
curriculum thinking and conduct discussions with all stakeholders
-
Inform senior leaders (particularly those with
line management responsibility for business, economics and other KS4+ only
subjects) about the issues which might be pertinent to curriculum thinking in
those subjects
-
Share and debate curriculum design ideas in the
business and economics subject domains
Previously in this series: Curriculum Confessions.
References
Caviglioli, O.
(2019). Dual Coding with Teachers.
Twitter: @olicav
Caviglioli, O. &
Rodger-Goodwin, D. (2021). Organise Ideas.
Twitter: @olicav
@MrGoodwin23
Comments
Post a Comment