Curriculum_Design_Models_Biology_ICT.pptx

ICT in Biology

1. Curriculum Design Models & Approaches in Biology/ICT Tyler • Taba • Backward Design • Spiral Curriculum with published case studies in science/biology teaching

2. Purpose & Scope Provide a clear overview of classical and modern curriculum design models. Apply models to Biology teaching enhanced by ICT (e.g., virtual labs, bioinformatics). Offer published case studies and practical recommendations. Visual: Simple roadmap graphic showing the 4 models leading to applications and case studies

3. Why Curriculum Design Matters for Biology/ICT Ensures alignment among learning goals, assessments, and learning activities. Supports integration of ICT (simulations, data analysis tools, CUREs) for deeper learning. Improves transfer and retention in concept-dense subjects like Biology. Visual: Icons: target (goals), checklist (assessment), laptop/molecule (ICT)

4. Tyler’s Rationale — Overview Four guiding questions: objectives, learning experiences, organization, and evaluation. Linear, objectives-driven planning anchored on measurable outcomes. Influential in outcomes-based curriculum and standards alignment. Visual: Flowchart with 4 boxes in sequence: Objectives → Experiences → Organization → Evaluation

5. Tyler’s Rationale — Strengths & Caveats Strengths: clarity of aims; systematic alignment; evaluability of outcomes. Caveats: can be overly linear; may narrow curriculum to what is measurable; less responsive to emergent learner needs. Visual: Two-column pros/cons graphic

6. Taba Model — Overview (Inductive/Grassroots) Teacher-centered, inductive development beginning with diagnosing learners’ needs. Seven steps: diagnose needs → formulate objectives → select content → organize content → select learning experiences → organize learning experiences → evaluate. Stresses iterative refinement with teacher input. Visual: Seven-step cycle diagram

7. Taba Model — Strengths & Caveats Strengths: context-responsive; elevates teacher expertise; supports iterative improvement. Caveats: time/resource intensive; requires capacity-building for design and evaluation. Visual: Stakeholder map highlighting teachers at the center

8. Backward Design (Understanding by Design) — Overview Three stages: Identify desired results → Determine acceptable evidence → Plan learning experiences. Emphasizes authentic performance tasks and transfer of learning. Useful for integrating ICT as evidence of understanding (e.g., data analyses, simulations). Visual: Three-stage arrow diagram; add the 'Six Facets' as callout

9. Backward Design — Assessment & Evidence Balance formative and summative assessments aligned to goals. Performance tasks: wet/dry labs, virtual labs, bioinformatics pipelines, science writing. Six Facets of Understanding: explain, interpret, apply, perspective, empathize, self-knowledge. Visual: Assessment alignment matrix (goals ↔ evidence ↔ activities)

10. Backward Design — Strengths & Caveats Strengths: tight alignment; clarity on evidence; promotes authentic tasks. Caveats: requires upfront clarity of outcomes; risk of 'teaching to assessment' if misapplied. Visual: Iconography: rubric, portfolio, lab notebook

11. Spiral Curriculum — Overview Key idea: revisit core concepts at increasing levels of complexity across grades/courses. Builds on prior knowledge; supports mastery through spaced reinforcement. Common in science programs (e.g., Philippine K–12 spiral progression). Visual: Spiral staircase graphic with biology concepts (cell → tissue → organ → systems → evolution)

12. Spiral Curriculum — Implementation Notes Requires careful scope & sequence to avoid fragmentation and ensure coherence. Plan explicit connections and increasing cognitive demand (Bloom’s progression). Pair with common assessments and concept inventories to monitor growth. Visual: Concept map showing cross-grade links

13. Matching Models to Biology/ICT Contexts Tyler: standards-driven units with clear, measurable objectives (e.g., genetics competencies). Taba: teacher-led adaptation to local contexts (e.g., coastal/mangrove biodiversity modules). Backward Design: design around authentic evidence (e.g., p53 mutation analysis, bioinformatics). Spiral: long-term progression (e.g., cells → heredity → molecular genetics → genomics). Visual: Matrix/decision tree suggesting which model to use when

14. Case Study — Backward Design for Biology/CUREs CUREs designed via backward design clarify research skills and evidence of learning. Examples: p53 mutation characterization; microbiome sequencing and analysis; quantitative biology goals. Findings: improved engagement and inclusivity; clear alignment of outcomes to authentic assessments. Visual: Flow diagram mapping goals → assessments → research tasks (wet lab + computational)

15. Case Study — Virtual Labs in Molecular/General Biology Scenario-based virtual labs (e.g., genomics, molecular biology) used as prep or homework. Evidence is mixed to positive: some gains in skills/motivation; other RCTs show no significant difference vs. traditional methods—blended use appears promising. Design implication: align vLabs to specific outcomes (analysis, decision-making), not as standalone replacements. Visual: Diagram: blended model (pre-lab virtual → in-lab hands-on → post-lab analysis)

16. Case Study — Spiral Progression in Philippine K–12 Biology DepEd K–12 Science adopts spiral progression; biology content revisited with increasing depth. Studies report both benefits (connection across topics) and challenges (teacher readiness, coherence). Design implication: scaffold cross-grade big ideas and provide teacher PD for continuity. Visual: Timeline showing biology strands across Grades 7–10 with increasing complexity

17. Case Study — Spiral in Higher Ed Science Spiral organic chemistry curriculum showed improved integration across semesters. Biological Systems Engineering implemented spiral instrumentation competencies across the program. Design implication: map competencies vertically and revisit with higher-level tasks. Visual: Competency ladder graphic (intro → intermediate → advanced)

18. Practical Toolkit — Templates & Diagrams Backward Design template: Goals → Evidence → Activities (with ICT tasks). Spiral mapping template: Big ideas x grade/course with increasing complexity. Taba needs assessment checklist and rapid iteration cycle. Visual: Icons: template sheets; add simple flowchart placeholders

19. Recommendations for Your Context (Biology + ICT) Combine Backward Design (unit level) with Spiral planning (program level). Leverage ICT authentically: virtual labs for preparation/extension; bioinformatics for data-rich tasks; collaborative platforms for portfolios. Use clear rubrics aligned to outcomes; include reflection and metacognition. Visual: Strategy map: combine models; align tools; assess authentically

20. Key References (See notes for full details/links) Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Univ. of Chicago Press. Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice. Harcourt Brace. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The Process of Education. Harvard Univ. Press. Harden, R. M., & Stamper, N. (1999). What is a spiral curriculum? Medical Teacher, 21(2), 141–143. CBE–LSE (2017). Case study: Biology instructors transitioning to active learning (Backward Design). JMBE (2017). Define goals before you design a CURE (Backward Design for CUREs). PLOS ONE (2022). Scenario-based virtual labs in molecular biology (effects on skills). Education & Information Technologies (2024). RCT: Labster in General Biology (no significant difference). DepEd (2016). K–12 Science Curriculum Guide (spiral progression). IJMRAP (2021). Spiral progression of Biology content in Philippine K–12. Visual: Add reference icons or simple bibliography layout