“Teaching Practices”

Assignment 1- Spring (2019)

Dedicated to Mr. Ali Ahmad

Done By:
Maha Ak. Hissy (30730754)

Depth vs. Breadth in Education

 One useful approach to organizing and describing learning is to think about the breadth and depth of
the learning. Breadth of learning refers to the full span of knowledge of a subject. Depth of learning
refers to the extent to which specific topics are focused upon, amplified and explored. Each approach
has its strengths and weaknesses. Breadth without depth leads to a superficial understanding of how a
subject works, and such knowledge may not stick. Depth in only a narrow field without breadth gives a
narrow view of subject, and may also give one a false sense of expertise in all areas of knowledge.

When writing curriculum, many teachers start by selecting which standards will need to be taught
during a given unit. This is certainly no easy task, and the end result is often a lot of information that
students will need to master. From here, teachers may synthesize that information into enduring
understandings and essential questions to frame the purpose of the unit and guide inquiry. It is good to
strike a balance between the two approaches, but one of the conflicts faced by probably every
classroom teacher is the one between the amount of material one has to teach (& the students to learn
about) and the time available.

For example, textbooks, and requests from colleagues to make sure that the first-year course
adequately prepares students to take second-year papers, students coming in with a range of
backgrounds & prior experiences of science and a 12-week studying in which to accommodate it all.

I prefer to teach less content, less detail but have more of a focus on identifying (& dealing in depth
with) big or key ideas, I would probably encourage students to think critically about what they’re
learning, and to gain an understanding of how those ideas & concepts relate to each other. And of
course I’d like all students to view science for example as fascinating, fun, useful, & relevant to them in
their daily lives.

Presumably students spending a month or so on a single topic can really come to a good understanding
of the area, mastering key concepts & able to understand how it all fits together (taking a deep learning
approach, in other words). In classrooms where there’s a drive to cover everything, it could well be that
many students cope with the huge volume of material by using learning approaches that could be called
rote learning techniques, for example, that don’t really aid a thorough understanding. (All this, of
course, assumes that the tertiary assessment practices these students are encountering reward those
taking the ‘deep’ learning approach to their studies…) And those with the learning skills developed by
taking a deep learning approach to one topic can then apply those to the new material they learn in the
following year, enhancing their learning outcomes there as well.

I guess focusing on teaching methods that encourage ‘deep’ learning reflects my own philosophy that
there is simply too much information potentially available. In the old days, it was probably quite possible
to teach a subject such as any one of the sciences in fairly comprehensive breadth. But since then,
particularly with the advent of modern technology, there’s been something of an explosion of
knowledge. I know some students are quite daunted by the (volume of content) of a textbook.

The real art of writing content and skills lies in finding the balance of depth versus breadth- there will
never be enough time for everything, so prioritization and balance are key. The more focused and
specific your list is, the more focused and specific your teaching will be.