Making It My Own:
Using a Backward Design Methodology to Approach a New Teaching Assignment
Nancy A. Wiencek, Ph.D.
Department of Communication and Journalism
2013-2014
Introduction
It is not uncommon to be asked to teach a course that has been previously taught. When asked to
pick-up a “new” course in the past, I usually began by reading the course description, examining
how the course fits into the curriculum (e.g., core requirement, elective), and taking a look at the
texts and assignments that may have been used in the past. I have found that picking up a “new”
course can be an exciting challenge that involves a consideration (or re-consideration) of course
objectives and content, as well as my own pedagogical approach.
In this case, I was invited to co-teach a brand-new course in the communication and journalism
curriculum in the spring of 2013. I was asked to fill-in for one of two original designers of the
course who had left the university. The course had been carefully designed, readings selected,
and an outline of assignments embedded in the syllabus. Since the course material was
somewhat outside my area of expertise, I gladly followed the syllabus that had been created. I
prepared lectures and assignments based upon the syllabus for my portion of the course, and
actively participated in the lectures and assignments led by my colleague. Throughout the
semester, I sought to bring myself up-to-speed on the course content by doing additional reading
on my own. It was a tremendous learning process and an enriching experience to have had the
opportunity to co-teach with a colleague who had a different area of expertise than my own.
After the experience of co-teaching the course once, I was then asked to teach a section on my
own. With the benefit of having co-taught the course once, I had a clear perspective of the goal
of the course and its objectives. However, the course itself was not my own.
Course Description
COM 264 Introduction to Media Convergence was introduced as a core requirement for all
majors in the Communication and Journalism Department in the Spring 2013 (Communication
Studies; Digital Media: Film, TV and Radio; Graphic Design; Journalism; Public Relations; and
Web Design). The course offers students a broad conceptual framework for thinking about the
evolution of digital communication technologies, the impact that various media platforms and
technologies have on our everyday lives, and how digital media technologies have changed the
communication and journalism industries. In addition, the course is intended to allow students to
use different digital communication technologies. As an introductory course in the major, many
first year students are enrolled in the course.
Questions addressed during the project
I adopted COM 264 Introduction to Media Convergence as the focus of my BRIDGE project.
As I was preparing to teach a section of the course on my own in the spring of 2014, I sought to
address the following questions:




How will I reach the objectives of this course?
How can I improve the course content to meet the course objectives?
What should be my pedagogical approach?
In what ways can I further draw on my academic and professional expertise in delivering
the course content?
Theoretical frameworks and methods
In approaching my research questions, I chose to use a backward design of the course by first
considering the course objectives. I edited the objectives for the purpose of clarification as
follows.
By the end of the semester, students will be able to:
 demonstrate an understanding of the historical development of different media
convergence platforms;
 articulate the impact that digital technologies have had, and continue to have, on the
fields of communication and journalism;
 identify key societal issues that are a result of converged communication in the 21st
century; and
 apply convergence techniques through the practice of digital technology.
Once I was clear on the objectives, I needed to examine how I would reach the objectives of the
course through an examination of the syllabus. I examined each of the readings and assignments
in relation to the objectives of the course.
In addressing my first two research questions, I found it particularly useful to frame my thinking
from an “expert-novice” learning perspective. If this is an introductory class, I wanted to move
my students from the position of novice toward the position of expert. While the students will
clearly not be experts by the end of the semester, I did want them to acquire a basis of knowledge
that would provide them with a framework for building new knowledge in the future. It is
thought that students who retain a basis of knowledge will be more apt to notice connections that
are obvious and taken-for-granted by experts, and will also find a greater flexibility in their
approach to new situations (Hirsh, 2000; Bransford, 1999).
In thinking about my pedagogical approach, I adopted the same assignment-based design
developed by the original creators of the course. While I retained the assignment-based design, I
still found it important examine the purpose of each assignment in relation to the course
objectives. To do this, I first contemplated the challenges in critical thinking (Willingham, 2007),
a skill that requires domain knowledge and practice. In addition, I considered my own academic
and professional expertise, and sought to re-design select assignments based on my strengths and
content knowledge. Overall, as I approached my project I sought to purposefully structure my
syllabus and order my assignments to:




introduce knowledge through selected readings,
clarify and expand readings through class discussion,
practice the application of knowledge through structured assignments, and
reinforce knowledge through a final group project in which students problem solve on
a course topic and present their findings to class.
Once my pedagogical approach was clear, I turned my focus to assessment. To assist me in
evaluating readings and assignments, I drew on Angelo and Cross’s “Classroom Assessment
Techniques” (CATs).
For the readings, I found the following CATs useful:
 CAT 23 “Directed Paraphrasing.” Each class period, students were assigned a
reading or readings and asked to respond individually to a number of questions posted
to Canvas. At the beginning of the next class period, students were assigned to small
groups and asked to use their own words to summarize concepts in the readings.
Through this technique, students demonstrated their understanding of the information
in a language that was clear to each other. Once basic understanding was
demonstrated, I was able to broaden the class discussion.
 CAT 48 “Reading Rating Sheets.” It was important for me to receive feedback on
students’ evaluation of the course readings. Most of the feedback was collected
orally, rather than on sheets, but I gathered important information of their level of
difficultly with the readings, and what they found to be of interest or value.
For the assignments, I found the following CATs useful:
 CAT 13 “One-Sentence Summary.” For the blog assignment and podcast
assignment, students were asked to choose a topic related to a recent discussion topic
and produce a tangible product. To formulate their formulate their thoughts, I asked
students to begin by writing a one-sentence summary (who, what, when, where, why,
how) of their topic and share it with me. I forced students to clearly identify their
topic, and summarize important points, and allowed me to provide feedback on
expectations.
 CAT 47 “Group-Work Evaluations.” Students were asked to complete an evaluation
after their final project, holding each student accountable by his or her peers during
the project. In addition, it provided me with insights into the group process.
Student performance
I used the final course project as a critical assessment tool to determine if the overall course
objectives had been met. The purpose of the assignment was to demonstrate students’ content
knowledge and technical skills that should have been acquired throughout the semester. The
project, which required a class presentation, was also intended to reinforce content one last time
in the course through a final discussion among students.
For the final project, students were asked to pick one topic discussed during the semester and
expand upon it further with new research on the topic. Furthermore, the students were asked to
demonstrate their understanding of the topic by contextualizing it more narrowly through an
example or case study. Working in small groups, the students were required to: a) write a brief
paper with sources on the topic, b) create a website devoted to the topic, c) create a podcast that
highlighted one aspect of their topic, d) present their project to class through a well-organized
PowerPoint presentation, and e) lead a class discussion.
I was pleased with the students’ projects that included topics related to media conglomerates, the
digital divide, social media (Facebook), digital radio, and gaming. The students were able to
connect their topics to current issues and examples found in the news or their everyday lives. I
was especially impressed by the discussions led by the groups and the enthusiastic participation
among class members.
What I learn from my BRIDGE experience
BRIDGE has provided me with a toolbox to creating great course design. While I have
informally used a backward design methodology to structure courses in the past, I now have a
new lens through which I can purposefully apply the concepts that were explicated in the
BRIDGE readings and our group discussions to improve my teaching and outcomes. I was also
exposed to and was able to consider approaches to pedagogy that I had not considered in the
past, and was challenged to think about the difficulties in teaching and learning—especially
when it comes to critical thinking. I benefited from the feedback and ideas provided by my
fellow BRIDGE participants, and the conversations about and exposure to each of our projects.
For this project in particular, I learned that by beginning with my course objectives, there was a
benchmark for which I could evaluate each reading and assignment. In addition I learned the
value of assignment-based course design, as well as the importance of explicit modeling as a
teaching strategy.
Where I go from here
For this course, I will be carefully reading the student course evaluations from this semester and
considering all comments. While the majority of the feedback was positive, there were also
some thoughtful suggestions in the evaluations. I know that this course will continue to be an
evolving project for me. I will be swapping out readings as I continue to find “better” ones and I
will be changing-up assignments to make improvements with an eye toward the course
objectives.
More broadly, I have already begun to think about how the concepts I learned in BRIDGE can be
used to improve all areas of my teaching. I have already tried out a new Twitter assignment in
my public relations course, which proved to be an effective tool that encouraged students to
notice connections between the textbook and current news. In my writing for the media course, I
am redesigning a social media assignment by thinking about objectives first.
Finally, I have developed for myself a clearer teaching philosophy and a real excitement for
course design.
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for
college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (eds.) How experts differ from novices. In How
people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (pp. 19-38). Washington, D. C.: National
Academy Press.
Hirsch, Jr., E. D. (2000). You can always look it up…or can you? American Educator, pp. 1-5.
Willingham, D. T. (2007). Critical thinking. Why is it so hard to teach? In American Educator,
pp. 8-19.