Posted: May 8th, 2015

Reflective Journal

Reflective Journal structure in general:

Throughout this unit you have been exposed to various theoretical models for developing curricula and the different rationales for such curricula to be adopted. Develop a reflective journal to map your journey through this unit to show how the critical components/issues associated with developing a curriculum (whether it be subject specific or inclusive in intent) are connected to what kinds of things we would seek to evaluate. Demonstrate your knowledge of the ways you could evaluate curriculum and identify how this fits with your own personal beliefs and assumptions in relation to teaching and learning.

You may like to base your journal around insights from 4 – 5 key readings to assist you to structure your response.

 

1. Discuss or argue a journal paper/report/an issue from a private standpoint or from various perspectives
2. Synthesize or analyse some materials or resources for building up an argument
3. Compare and contrast a particular issue with prior or new knowledge
4. Generate questions and think deeply as a result of perception of the resources
5. Describe personal experiences and integrate them into the issues in concern
6. Express freely for or against the specific questions given by teachers
7. Develop the ability and critical attitude to integrate learning into real-world experiences

 

Reflective Journal structure in details:

Dear writer please use these References in my Reflective Journal: (cheek the attachment file name Program calendar and topic)

 

Marsh, C. J. (2009). Key concepts for understanding curriculum (4th Edition). New York, NY, USA:Routledge

 

Marsh, C.J. (2010). Re-examining the conceptual models for school-based curriculum development. Chapter 17, p. 287 – 290. In Hau-fai Law, E. &Nieveen, N. (Eds).Schools as curriculum agencies: Asian and European Perspectives on school-based curriculum development. Rotterdam. Netherlands: Sense Publishers. [Available at – https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/907-schools-as-curriculumagencies.pdf]

 

Schiro, M. (2013). Curriculum theory : conflicting visions and enduring concerns / Michael Stephen Schiro (2nd ed.. ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Thousand Oaks, Calif. : SAGE Publications.

 

Moore, A. (2015). Understanding the school curriculum:Theory, politics and principles.London: Routledge.

 

Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

Walker, D. (1990). Fundamentals of curriculum. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

 

 

 

• Introduction:
• No formal introduction. All that is needed is a very short introductory sentence telling me which readings you have chosen and why. Are they all on the one theme? Do they represent a really crucial understanding that was developed in your head when you read it? Like an ‘aha’ moment. There is no conclusion needed. You can use headings to identify the different readings if you wish.

 

 

• There are some question I asked my teacher to make the structure easy to understand (please read it carefully):

1. Q: Do the readings have to be from the unit?(cheek the attachment file name Program calendar and topic)

A: Yes, it is advisable to choose readings that you have not consulted for Assignment 1. That way you ensure you have covered a larger proportion of the unit content.

 

2. Q: If you only want us to deal with 4 – 5 readings how many references would there be?

A: As well as the references for your 4 – 5 readings you will find that you will relate your readings to other articles/ readings you have come across. These can either be from the Blackboard site or from other readings you have come across on your own ie. Freire etc. All these need to be referenced.

 

3. Q: How many words can you go up to? The 1000 word limit seems too small to deal with that many articles?

A: You can certainly go up to 1500 words. I agree the word limit is quite small.

 

4. Q: Can I use handouts from class or quote what you said in the workshops?

A: Yes but they cannot be used as one of your articles you are focusing on for your journal. They can be used as something that you link your readings to in your reflection.

 

5. Q: Can I use ‘I’?

A: Yes, as a reflective journal you will need to use ‘I’ quite a bit.

• Important information:

 

• The paper is to be a maximum of 1500 words.

 

• Assignment must have a Titlepage and a Contents page.

 

• The word count DOES NOT include the Title page, Reference page.

 

• The referencing style is APA 6th Ed., I attached the guide of the referencing style.

 

 

Resources:

 

Marsh, C. J. (2009). Key concepts for understanding curriculum (4th Edition). New York, NY, USA:Routledge

 

Marsh, C.J. (2010). Re-examining the conceptual models for school-based curriculum development. Chapter 17, p. 287 – 290. In Hau-fai Law, E. &Nieveen, N. (Eds).Schools as curriculum agencies: Asian and European Perspectives on school-based curriculum development. Rotterdam. Netherlands: Sense Publishers. [Available at – https://www.sensepublishers.com/media/907-schools-as-curriculumagencies.pdf]

 

Schiro, M. (2013). Curriculum theory : conflicting visions and enduring concerns / Michael Stephen Schiro (2nd ed.. ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Thousand Oaks, Calif. : SAGE Publications.

 

Moore, A. (2015). Understanding the school curriculum:Theory, politics and principles.London: Routledge.

 

Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 

Walker, D. (1990). Fundamentals of curriculum. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Please try to use these Resources

 

The draft rubric for assignment 2: Reflective Journal

Criteria	Requires Attention	Pass	Credit	Distinction	High Distinction
Reflections	Only includes mere descriptions of theoretical knowledge; no reflection is demonstrated beyond the descriptions.   No attempt to Incorporate own opinion into discussion, or opinion is not be grounded in theory or examples.	Includes description of events but largely descriptive style of language.   Some attempt to incorporate own opinion into discussion, however, opinion may not be grounded in theory or examples. Little or no attempt to incorporate original ideas.	Includes description of events, and a little further consideration behind the events using a relatively descriptive style of language; no evidence of using multiple perspectives in analyzing the issues.   Incorporates own opinion into discussion, linked to theory or examples.	Showing satisfactory ability to relate acquired knowledge to previous experiences; demonstrating attempt to analyze the issues from a number of different perspectives.   Incorporates own opinion into discussion, with foundation in theory and examples, with some incorporation of ideas to promote further thinking.	Ability to proficiently demonstrate reflection and deep thinking of acquired knowledge and concepts, and integrate them into different issues from wide range of perspectives (e.g. different contexts, cultures, disciplines etc.); creative solutions and critical thinking skills demonstrated in the writing Incorporates own opinion and original ideas into discussion, explicitly shaped by a strong foundation in theory and examples, and to promote further thinking.
Content	No personal response is made to the issues/concepts raised in the course materials. Does not reflect on own work at all and no examples are provided   No evidence of independent investigation. Original questioning and analysis. No attempt to take and understand multiple perspectives. Response demonstrates a lack of reflection on, or personalization of, the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials to date. Viewpoints and interpretations are missing, inappropriate, and/or unsupported. Examples, when applicable, are not provided	Analysis conveys little or some evidence of a personal response to the issues/concepts raised in the course materials. Demonstrates an ability to reflect on own work but the ideas are not well developed and provides only one or limited examples Little evidence of independent investigation, original questioning and analysis. Attempts to take and understand multiple perspectives. Response demonstrates a minimal reflection on, and personalization of, the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials to date. Viewpoints and interpretations are unsupported or supported with flawed arguments. Examples, when applicable, are not provided or are irrelevant to the assignment.	Analysis conveys adequate or some evidence of a personal response to the issues/concepts raised in the course materials. Demonstrates an ability to reflect on own work but provides few examples Some evidence of independent investigation, original questioning and analysis. Takes and understands multiple perspectives and through these can provide a critical discussion of the issues at hand. Response demonstrates a broad reflection on, and some personalization of, the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials to date. Some viewpoints and interpretations are supported. Some appropriate examples are provided, as applicable	Reflection conveys appropriate evidence of a personal response to the issues raised in the course materials. Student demonstrates that he/she is beginning to develop new ways of reflecting on their world Demonstrates an ability to reflect on own work. Provides examples consistently. Begins to demonstrate good meta-cognition. Evidence of independent investigation, and original questioning and analysis. Independently takes and understands multiple perspectives and through these can provide an insightful critical discussion of the issues at hand. Response demonstrates a general reflection on, and personalization of, the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials to date. Viewpoints and interpretations are supported.   Appropriate examples are provided, as applicable	Reflection conveys extensive evidence of a personal response to the issues raised in the course materials. Student demonstrates personal growth and  awareness Reflects well on own work, demonstrates a range of meta-cognitive practices and provides many examples Strong evidence of independent investigation. Original questioning and analysis. Independently takes and understands multiple perspectives and through these can provide an insightful and/or exhaustive critical discussion of the issues at hand. Response demonstrates an in-depth reflection on, and personalization of, the theories, concepts, and/or strategies presented in the course materials to date. Viewpoints and interpretations are insightful and well supported. Clear, detailed examples are provided, as applicable.
Text	Is not comprehending or reflecting on what is read or viewed.	Demonstrates some basic comprehension of texts but does not make connections with the bigger picture.	Demonstrates basic comprehension of texts and is able to make one or more connections to the bigger picture.	Is able to make inferences and comprehends deeper meaning on most occasions. Relates texts and issues raised to other texts consistently	Is able to make inferences well and comprehends deeper meaning, consistently demonstrating insight and their relevance to the world and society
Writing	Do not show any original thinking or perspectives; chaotic in organization and presentation of ideas Arguments or perspectives are vaguely mentioned; the writing lacked an organized flow and the ideas were hard to follow.   Writing is unclear and disorganized. Thoughts ramble and make little sense. There are numerous spelling, grammar, or syntax errors throughout the response.	Arguments or perspectives are able to be identified, writing has some adequate coherence. Some ideas were able to be followed but there are some diversions that take the reader away from the topic in focus.   Writing is unclear and/or disorganized. Thoughts are not expressed in a logical manner.	Arguments or perspective havesome clarity. Writing shows adequate clarity with a few insights. Writing generally organized but with minor deviation from the topic.   Writing shows some clarity and has basic organisation with only most sentence/paragraphs constructed well. Some thoughts are expressed well in a coherent and logical manner.	Arguments or perspectives are clearly stated; organized flow in writing but not deep enough to be very insightful.   Writing is mostly clear, concise, and well organized with good sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent and logical manner.	Writing is well-focused; arguments or perspectives are precisely defined and explained; coherent flow in developing an insightful idea demonstrated.   Writing is clear, concise, and well organized with excellent sentence/paragraph construction. Thoughts are expressed in a coherent and logical manner.
Referencing	No or very inadequate referencing. Referencing contains frequent significant errors and inaccuracies that significantly diminish the credibility of the essay. Some or many ideas, claims or quotes may not be referenced. No reference list, or no attempt at in-text referencing. Poor grammatical expression and frequent significant errors in spelling evident. Achieving a Satisfactory or less on this criteria means that you cannot score higher than a Credit for this assignment.	Referencing has some errors but they do not impact on the credibility of the essay.	Referencing is done mostly well. Some minor errors evident.	Referencing is largely accurate, correct and consistent with fewer than three minor errors identified.	Referencing is accurate, correct and consistent, with no errors identified (the odd comma or fullstop may be missing)