For any course with multiple teachers, balancing a core curriculum with the inevitable uniqueness of each section’s class environment can be challenging, requiring department-wide coordination and communication. Questions of fairness and equity, especially with grading, can quickly arise among students taught by different teachers. This is especially the case for courses widely regarded as extremely difficult, like US History* and Biology*. In recent years, though, there has been a push to address some of these concerns by laying out the curriculum across school divisions in clearer terms through course storyboards.
This movement is led by Assistant Head of School for Academics Dr. Pamela Greenblatt.
“Course storyboarding began about [four] years ago as a means for having a shared approach to curriculum mapping across the three divisions and to have a shared language for discussing curriculum across the school,” Dr. Greenblatt said. “Prior to that, our curriculum was documented, but the approach varied by teacher and division.”
Although one might assume that course storyboarding creates complete standardization, where course material is taught the same way at the same time, they serve a different purpose.
“Broadly speaking, course storyboards are meant to help ensure that students in the same course are working toward shared learning goals, or what students should know, understand, and be able to do, while still allowing teachers flexibility in how they teach,” Dr. Greenblatt said.
“Mr. Lengel’s [style] was completely different [from my previous teachers].” – Ranvir Gill ’26
Another guardrail for avoiding unequal expectations for different sections of a course is careful communication between teachers about grades and assessments.
“ In terms of grades, we work pretty carefully together to make sure that the average is either identical or very close to each other,” History Department Chair Ms. Hannah Turlish said. “ [For] the cumulative semester test that we both administered, we talked with each other about the raw score average and then made an agreement to have our scale be consistent. That doesn’t mean I had more A’s or fewer A’s, it just means that the averages were similar.”
In Biology*, this approach is taken a step further.
“Ms. Cleffi and I create our assessments together and then review a grading rubric and decide on the amount of points each question will be so that we grade the questions similarly,” Biology teacher Ms. Lewis said. “We also trade assessments and papers to make sure we grade assessments equally.”
Naturally, the level of standardization possible in courses is also heavily influenced by the level of subjectivity inherent in the course.
“ I think it’s easier in science and math [for standardization] because there is the correct ,” Biology teacher Ms. Cleffi said. “I feel like [in] the humanities, it’s a little bit more subjective.”
These systems do not address the other unique aspects of the classroom environments that arise between different teachers, however. In many ways, though, this is not problematic and is even a strength.
“I would really bristle if I had a dictated curriculum where I could not bring in my particular interests,” Ms. Turlish said. “ I would like to think that the school would be delighted to have a teacher who is most passionate about fashion, history, art history, women’s history, sports history, etc. That is what makes a department healthy, and to say, ‘you all should teach the same stuff,’ is actually taking away our areas of expertise. You’re all learning certain things that are common, but how it’s done, with my encouragement as department chair, [is] up to the teacher in terms of how to deliver the material.”
These differences largely do not affect the core curriculum, however.
“ I know a lot about the Civil War,” Mr. Lengel said. “ Maybe in discussion, I can go a little bit deeper there [and Ms. Turlish] can go a little bit deeper over here. I don’t think [this affects] the U.S. History survey curriculum, but it does allow for the department itself to get a wider grasp.”
The largest area where these differences come into play is in the specific classroom environments and experiences.
“You get a case about some period in history with details that you learn as you go through that case study, and that’s how you learn over time.” – Anantvir Othie ’27
“Mr. Lengel’s [style] was completely different [from my previous teachers],” Sixth Former Ranvir Gill said. “Mr. Lengel prefers to have a sort of class where it’s more student-led and discussion-led. I find it a lot more entertaining and more engaging as a student because I have an active part in my own education, and it’s helping me, kind of piece by piece, get to the final conclusion.”
Other students also noted the conversational nature of Mr. Lengel’s teaching style.
“His case study method, instead of being notes on a board, is [mostly] conversations,” said Fifth Former Anantvir Othie. “You get a case about some period in history with details that you learn as you go through that case study, and that’s how you learn over time.”
Students in U.S. History* sections taught by Ms. Turlish noted other methods they found unique that aided their learning experience.
“[Ms. Turlish] used trailers for historical movies to help us learn specific topics we covered in class and with Foner, and [she] also had us watch a movie,” Sixth Former Will Bradford said. “[Her] usage of film really helped me understand certain topics and is something that [I think] is unique to her.”
Similarly, students in different sections of Biology* noted distinctive aspects of their classroom experiences that they found beneficial.
“[Ms. Cleffi] always did a lot of active recall,” Sixth Former Peter McElhone said. “She spent the first 15 minutes of class going over what we did in the previous class.”
Others agreed on the helpfulness of this practice.
“[Ms. Cleffi] went around the room and asked each one of us a question on the topic we covered the class before,” Bradford said. “This method of teaching was very helpful to me as it helped me review, and also was a good way for confusing things to be cleared up from the class before.”
In Biology* sections taught by Ms. Lewis, students described another enjoyable style of teaching.
“ Ms. Lewis is [unique] because we used to be able to ask questions in chemistry, but I feel like [it was limited],” Fifth Former Benas Antanavicius said. “Ms. Lewis [answers] half the class’s questions, and that really lets people learn about what they want to learn.”
While concerns about differences between teachers and classes persist, the uniqueness and experience that each teacher brings to their class often helps students with different learning styles succeed, and the school-wide effort to provide structural guidelines through course storyboarding ensures that although students might take different paths, the end goal for learning is shared.
You must be logged in to post a comment.