Учителям Манитобы не хватает поддержки для внедрения нового школьного курса физики

Manitoba educators hoping for more support with new science curriculum Key to successful implementation is missing, professor says Manitoba educators say teachers will need more support to successfully implement the province's new science curriculum, as its open-ended language contains fewer specific outcomes. The new curriculum contains several changes, but one that has teachers concerned is the language used to describe the learning objectives. Those formerly asked students to "identify," "recognize" or "describe," but now largely ask that students "demonstrate an understanding" of different concepts or skill sets. Tina Hellmuth retired in December after almost 40 years as a teacher and has always been passionate about science. She thinks the province's new curriculum lacks the specifics for teachers that the previous one had, giving educators less direction and less certainty about goals for students. "My concern is that 'demonstrating an understanding' can mean very different things to very many people," Hellmuth said. She unofficially tested the curriculum last fall while it was undergoing its pilot phase. Hellmuth says it's worrisome that she hasn't seen any "how-to" document released when it comes to implementing the new curriculum this year. For example, she said the previous curriculum included a detailed learning outcomes document, citing a page listing eight intended outcomes for the "Maintaining a healthy body" cluster from the document. In comparison, Hellmuth said, the new curriculum seemingly sums up that list in the line: "Demonstrate the understanding that organ systems interact to maintain a healthy body." The section lists several examples, such as "digestive system: obtaining energy" and "excretory system: removing wastes," but Hellmuth wonders if that's all teachers are supposed to instruct students about. "If I teach that to the kids in three lessons, am I done?" she asked. "Do they have to know the parts of the digestive system? Do they have to know the parts of the excretory system?" Hellmuth also pointed out that other language in the curriculum, such as the description of intended learning outcomes when it comes to the "Indigenous Peoples within the Natural World" strand, hardly changes from year to year, making it difficult for teachers to plan a progression throughout the grades. The Science Teachers Association of Manitoba said last week it had no comment on concerns about the new curriculum. Dawn Sutherland, associate dean in the University of Manitoba's faculty of graduate and postdoctoral studies, says the curriculum's open-ended nature follows a trend across Canada of curricula creating "bigger ideas," allowing teachers to teach in "rich" ways as opposed to simply trying to check off boxes of learning outcomes. She says a curriculum like that needs lots of support from the province or school boards to be successfully implemented — support she's not currently seeing. Sutherland says it's a key to success, without which she's worried "the science being taught in the classrooms will be all over the place." Education and Early Childhood Learning Minister Tracy Schmidt said the department's been listening to feedback gathered from the pilot phase and that additional support resources will be distributed to teachers in the coming school year. Some divisions are able to take matters into their own hands. Jacqueline Monteith is one of two science instructional coaches with the Frontier School Division and was involved with the creation of the new curriculum. She says while it can be intimidating to "see something that's new," the coaching helps teachers be "excited" for the possibilities the open-ended nature allows. Monteith says the number of coaches like her has dwindled over the years but schools tend to have science leads, who help other teachers. She says she's happy to offer support to any teachers who reach out. Hellmuth worries the province is taking a less active role when it comes to support and that leaving divisions with the work of guiding teachers will create unfairness, as those with less resources won't be able to provide as much guidance. "Change is change. It's not always good, it's not always bad," she said. Hellmuth says the curriculum has good things in it, but added, "We need to also be open to making adjustments and realizing possibly we need to flesh out some of the sections." Sutherland says the open-ended curriculum will allow teachers with a strong science background to take it and run. But many teachers, particularly those who teach kindergarten to Grade 6, often don't have that expertise. "I think, you know, teachers need to have discussions around what the science curriculum will look like in their classrooms with other teachers. And that's what PD [professional development] does.… If it doesn't occur, then you'll just get hit and miss," she said, adding teachers might end up guessing or using what they can find online.