Design-Down, Deliver-Up Model

  The philosophy surrounding the Design-Down, Deliver-Up model is in harmony with goal-based design, because both of these schools of thought start with the big-picture ideas of curriculum development. These ideas include considering the culture and philosophy of the school, the learning that should be occurring, and the roles of technology and hands-on activities. In addition to sound curriculum design, the curriculum leaders in the school system should have vision, paired with planning.

Vision, for curriculum planners, means knowing the direction in which the school community should be headed. Vision requires an understanding of the school culture, goals for the future as set forth by the school board, and regard for the school’s history. Vision can’t be effective without considering the mission of the school as well. The mission of the school is closely related to the desired graduation outcomes.

The Design-Down portion of Design-Down, Deliver-Up begins with consideration of student learning outcomes at the conclusion of the course. Those outcomes are translated into program goals and objectives, such as state standards. These objectives are often referred to as “what the student will be able to do”, or student outcomes. Teachers measure student success using many different measurement tools, but the goal is always mastery of goals and objectives. It all begins, from the student’s perspective, with authentic, meaningful tasks that engage students. 

Deliver-Up also begins with those same authentic tasks that have a direct impact on student success. The student grows as a result of the authentic tasks, and this growth satisfies the program objectives and goals. The well-rounded, educated student who is ready for the next step in lifelong learning is the goal and vision of American schools. 

Assessment is a necessary component in measuring how well the curriculum is serving the needs of  teachers, students, and the district. I believe in a growth mindset, so I would plan to assess the students with a district benchmark in the early fall to obtain baseline data. The students would then be assessed with two more district benchmarks, in winter and late spring. The goal of the district benchmarks would be to show student growth, and address any common gaps or low standards that might need to be addressed again or in a different way. Teachers would be free to assess informally and formally as they felt necessary in order to determine which areas and standards were underperforming. I would encourage reading teachers to perform running records three times per school year as well, to measure student oral fluency. This information is valuable to bring forward to parent conferences or ARD meetings as another measure of student growth and ability.