curriculum-review-pedagogy

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Pedagogical Review & Alignment Verification

教学法审查与对齐验证

Conduct expert review of curriculum to ensure pedagogical soundness, constructive alignment, and evidence-based practices.

针对课程开展专业审查，确保教学合理性、建构性对齐及循证实践。

When to Use

适用场景

Review completed curriculum materials
Verify objective-activity-assessment alignment
Validate Bloom's taxonomy application
Check backwards design principles
Ensure learning science integration

审查已完成的课程材料
验证目标-活动-评估的对齐性
确认Bloom's taxonomy（布鲁姆分类法）的应用
检查逆向设计原则的落实
确保学习科学的融合

Required Inputs

所需输入

Curriculum Artifacts: Design, lessons, assessments to review
Review Focus: Full review or specific aspects
Standards (optional): Framework to validate against

课程工件：待审查的设计方案、教案、评估内容
审查重点：全面审查或特定维度审查
标准（可选）：用于验证的参考框架

Workflow

工作流程

1. Gather All Artifacts

1. 收集所有工件

Load and analyze:

Learning objectives (from design)
Lesson plans (from develop-content)
Assessment items (from develop-items)
Assessment blueprint (from assess-design)

加载并分析：

学习目标（来自设计环节）
教案（来自内容开发环节）
评估题目（来自题目开发环节）
评估蓝图（来自评估设计环节）

2. Verify Constructive Alignment

2. 验证建构性对齐

Check Objective ↔ Activity Alignment:

For each objective, verify:

✅ Learning activities directly support the objective
✅ Cognitive level of activities matches objective's Bloom's level
✅ Students practice the exact skill they'll be assessed on
❌ No activities that don't map to objectives
❌ No objectives without supporting activities

Check Objective ↔ Assessment Alignment:

For each objective, verify:

✅ Assessment directly measures the objective
✅ Assessment Bloom's level matches objective
✅ Assessment format appropriate for skill type
❌ No objectives without aligned assessments
❌ No assessments that don't map to objectives

检查目标 ↔ 活动的对齐性：

针对每个目标，验证：

✅ 学习活动直接支撑目标
✅ 活动的认知层级与目标的Bloom's层级匹配
✅ 学生练习的技能与评估技能完全一致
❌ 不存在未映射到目标的活动
❌ 不存在无活动支撑的目标

检查目标 ↔ 评估的对齐性：

针对每个目标，验证：

✅ 评估直接测量目标达成情况
✅ 评估的Bloom's层级与目标匹配
✅ 评估形式适合技能类型
❌ 不存在无对应评估的目标
❌ 不存在未映射到目标的评估

3. Review Bloom's Taxonomy Application

3. 审查Bloom's taxonomy应用

Analyze each objective:

✅ Uses appropriate action verb for intended level
✅ Level appropriate for educational grade
✅ Distribution across levels matches expectations
❌ Avoid "understand" without observable indicator
❌ Avoid using high-level verbs for low-level tasks

分析每个目标：

✅ 使用了符合预期层级的动作动词
✅ 层级与教育阶段适配
✅ 各层级分布符合预期
❌ 避免使用“理解”却无可观测指标
❌ 避免对低阶任务使用高阶动词

4. Validate Backwards Design

4. 验证逆向设计

Check that curriculum follows:

✅ Objectives written first
✅ Assessments designed to measure objectives
✅ Instruction designed to prepare for assessments
✅ Clear path from start to end of unit

检查课程是否遵循以下原则：

✅ 先确定目标
✅ 设计评估以测量目标
✅ 设计教学以准备评估
✅ 单元从开始到结束有清晰路径

5. Assess Learning Science Integration

5. 评估学习科学融合情况

Review for evidence-based practices:

Retrieval Practice: ✅/❌ Frequent low-stakes quizzing Spaced Repetition: ✅/❌ Concepts revisited over time Interleaving: ✅/❌ Mixed practice, not blocked Elaboration: ✅/❌ Students explain concepts Concrete Examples: ✅/❌ Abstract ideas grounded Dual Coding: ✅/❌ Visual + verbal representations

审查循证实践的应用：

检索练习：✅/❌ 频繁的低 stakes 小测验 间隔重复：✅/❌ 概念随时间重复出现 交叉练习：✅/❌ 混合练习，而非按主题分块 细化阐述：✅/❌ 学生需解释概念 具象示例：✅/❌ 抽象概念有实际依托 双重编码：✅/❌ 结合视觉与语言表征

6. Check Cognitive Load Management

6. 检查认知负荷管理

Verify appropriate difficulty progression:

✅ Prerequisites addressed before new content
✅ Complexity builds gradually
✅ Adequate practice before assessment
✅ Scaffolding provided where needed
❌ Not too much new information at once
❌ Not skipping foundational steps

验证难度递进是否合理：

✅ 先解决前置知识再引入新内容
✅ 复杂度逐步提升
✅ 评估前有充足练习
✅ 必要时提供支架支持
❌ 不会一次性引入过多新信息
❌ 不会跳过基础步骤

7. Generate Review Report

7. 生成审查报告

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Pedagogical Review Report: [TOPIC]

Review Date: [Date] Reviewed By: Curriculum Review System Artifacts Reviewed: [List]

Executive Summary

Overall Rating: [Excellent | Good | Needs Revision | Poor]

Key Strengths: [2-3 items]

Critical Issues: [Priority improvements needed]

Recommendation: [Ready for implementation | Minor revisions | Major revisions]

Overall Rating: [Excellent | Good | Needs Revision | Poor]

Key Strengths: [2-3 items]

Critical Issues: [Priority improvements needed]

Recommendation: [Ready for implementation | Minor revisions | Major revisions]

Constructive Alignment Analysis

Objective-Activity Alignment

Objective	Activities	Alignment Score	Issues
LO-1.1	Intro lecture, guided practice	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.2	Reading, discussion	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.3	Independent problem set	⚠️ Moderate	Needs more scaffolding first

Alignment Summary: [X/Y objectives fully aligned]

Gaps Identified:

[Objective without adequate activity support]
[Activity that doesn't map to objective]

Recommendations:

[Specific fixes needed]

Objective	Activities	Alignment Score	Issues
LO-1.1	Intro lecture, guided practice	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.2	Reading, discussion	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.3	Independent problem set	⚠️ Moderate	Needs more scaffolding first

Alignment Summary: [X/Y objectives fully aligned]

Gaps Identified:

[Objective without adequate activity support]
[Activity that doesn't map to objective]

Recommendations:

[Specific fixes needed]

Objective-Assessment Alignment

Objective	Assessment	Alignment Score	Issues
LO-1.1	MC items 1-5	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.2	Short answer 1-3	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.3	Problem set	❌ Poor	Assessment is Remember level but objective is Apply

Assessment Validity: [Comments on whether assessments measure what they claim]

Recommendations:

[Specific assessment revisions]

Objective	Assessment	Alignment Score	Issues
LO-1.1	MC items 1-5	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.2	Short answer 1-3	✅ Strong	None
LO-1.3	Problem set	❌ Poor	Assessment is Remember level but objective is Apply

Assessment Validity: [Comments on whether assessments measure what they claim]

Recommendations:

[Specific assessment revisions]

Bloom's Taxonomy Review

Distribution Analysis:

Remember: X% (target: Y% for this level)
Understand: X% (target: Y%)
Apply: X% (target: Y%)
Analyze: X% (target: Y%)
Evaluate: X% (target: Y%)
Create: X% (target: Y%)

Issues:

⚠️ Too many Remember-level objectives for grade 10
✅ Good balance of Apply and Analyze
❌ LO-2.3 uses "understand" without observable indicator

Recommendations:

Revise LO-2.3 to: "Students will demonstrate understanding by..."
Add 2 more Analyze-level objectives
Reduce Remember objectives from 5 to 3

Distribution Analysis:

Remember: X% (target: Y% for this level)
Understand: X% (target: Y%)
Apply: X% (target: Y%)
Analyze: X% (target: Y%)
Evaluate: X% (target: Y%)
Create: X% (target: Y%)

Issues:

⚠️ Too many Remember-level objectives for grade 10
✅ Good balance of Apply and Analyze
❌ LO-2.3 uses "understand" without observable indicator

Recommendations:

Revise LO-2.3 to: "Students will demonstrate understanding by..."
Add 2 more Analyze-level objectives
Reduce Remember objectives from 5 to 3

Backwards Design Validation

✅ Objectives First: Clear learning goals established ✅ Assessments Aligned: Assessments measure objectives ⚠️ Instruction Gaps: Unit 2, Lesson 3 doesn't prepare for assessment ❌ Summative Focus: Heavy on final exam, lacking formative checks

Recommendations:

Add formative assessments in Weeks 2, 4, 6
Revise Unit 2, Lesson 3 to include practice with analysis tasks

Recommendations:

Add formative assessments in Weeks 2, 4, 6
Revise Unit 2, Lesson 3 to include practice with analysis tasks

Learning Science Principles

Principle	Present	Quality	Evidence
Retrieval Practice	⚠️	Moderate	Only 2 quizzes; needs more frequent checks
Spaced Repetition	✅	Strong	Concepts revisited in Weeks 1, 3, 5
Interleaving	❌	Poor	All practice is blocked by topic
Elaboration	✅	Strong	Multiple explain/justify prompts
Concrete Examples	✅	Strong	Real-world applications throughout
Dual Coding	⚠️	Moderate	Some visuals but could add more

Recommendations:

Add weekly retrieval practice quizzes
Interleave practice problems (mix topics)
Include more diagrams and visual representations

Principle	Present	Quality	Evidence
Retrieval Practice	⚠️	Moderate	Only 2 quizzes; needs more frequent checks
Spaced Repetition	✅	Strong	Concepts revisited in Weeks 1, 3, 5
Interleaving	❌	Poor	All practice is blocked by topic
Elaboration	✅	Strong	Multiple explain/justify prompts
Concrete Examples	✅	Strong	Real-world applications throughout
Dual Coding	⚠️	Moderate	Some visuals but could add more

Recommendations:

Add weekly retrieval practice quizzes
Interleave practice problems (mix topics)
Include more diagrams and visual representations

Cognitive Load Assessment

Lesson-by-Lesson Analysis:

Lesson 1.1: ✅ Appropriate load

Single new concept
Builds on known prerequisites
Adequate practice time

Lesson 1.2: ⚠️ High load

Three new concepts introduced
May overwhelm students
Recommendation: Split into 2 lessons

Lesson 2.1: ❌ Excessive load

Five new vocabulary terms
Two new procedures
No scaffolding provided
Recommendation: Pre-teach vocabulary, add worked examples, reduce content

Lesson-by-Lesson Analysis:

Lesson 1.1: ✅ Appropriate load

Single new concept
Builds on known prerequisites
Adequate practice time

Lesson 1.2: ⚠️ High load

Three new concepts introduced
May overwhelm students
Recommendation: Split into 2 lessons

Lesson 2.1: ❌ Excessive load

Five new vocabulary terms
Two new procedures
No scaffolding provided
Recommendation: Pre-teach vocabulary, add worked examples, reduce content

Differentiation Quality

✅ Advanced Learners: Extensions provided ⚠️ Struggling Learners: Some scaffolding but needs more ❌ ELL Support: Minimal language supports ⚠️ Accessibility: Basic accommodations but missing UDL principles

Recommendations:

Add graphic organizers for struggling learners
Include vocabulary pre-teaching for ELLs
Implement UDL principles (multiple means of representation/engagement/expression)

Recommendations:

Add graphic organizers for struggling learners
Include vocabulary pre-teaching for ELLs
Implement UDL principles (multiple means of representation/engagement/expression)

Engagement Strategies

✅ Hooks: Compelling lesson openings ✅ Real-World Connections: Authentic applications ⚠️ Student Choice: Limited opportunities ❌ Collaboration: Mostly independent work

Recommendations:

Add choice boards for practice activities
Include more partner and group work
Consider project-based learning option

✅ Hooks: Compelling lesson openings ✅ Real-World Connections: Authentic applications ⚠️ Student Choice: Limited opportunities ❌ Collaboration: Mostly independent work

Recommendations:

Add choice boards for practice activities
Include more partner and group work
Consider project-based learning option

Overall Recommendations

Priority 1 (Must Fix Before Implementation)

[Critical issue 1]
[Critical issue 2]

[Critical issue 1]
[Critical issue 2]

Priority 2 (Should Fix Soon)

[Important improvement 1]
[Important improvement 2]

[Important improvement 1]
[Important improvement 2]

Priority 3 (Nice to Have)

[Enhancement 1]
[Enhancement 2]

[Enhancement 1]
[Enhancement 2]

Next Steps

Address Priority 1 issues
Re-review after revisions
Proceed to bias and accessibility review
Finalize for delivery

Artifact Metadata:

Artifact Type: Pedagogical Review Report
Topic: [Topic]
Overall Rating: [Rating]
Next Phase: Address issues, then Review (Bias & Accessibility)

undefined

Address Priority 1 issues
Re-review after revisions
Proceed to bias and accessibility review
Finalize for delivery

Artifact Metadata:

Artifact Type: Pedagogical Review Report
Topic: [Topic]
Overall Rating: [Rating]
Next Phase: Address issues, then Review (Bias & Accessibility)

undefined

8. CLI Interface

bash

undefined

bash

undefined

Full curriculum review

/curriculum.review-pedagogy --design "photosynthesis-design.md" --lessons "lessons/.md" --assessments "assessments/.md"

Alignment check only

/curriculum.review-pedagogy --focus "alignment" --artifacts "curriculum-artifacts/"

Quick quality check

/curriculum.review-pedagogy --quick --design "design.md"

Help

/curriculum.review-pedagogy --help

undefined

/curriculum.review-pedagogy --help

undefined

Composition with Other Skills

Input from:

```
/curriculum.design
```
```
/curriculum.develop-content
```
```
/curriculum.develop-items
```
```
/curriculum.assess-design
```

Output to:

User for revisions
```
/curriculum.review-bias
```
(if pedagogy passes)
```
/curriculum.review-accessibility
```
(if pedagogy passes)

Input from:

```
/curriculum.design
```
```
/curriculum.develop-content
```
```
/curriculum.develop-items
```
```
/curriculum.assess-design
```

Output to:

User for revisions
```
/curriculum.review-bias
```
(if pedagogy passes)
```
/curriculum.review-accessibility
```
(if pedagogy passes)

Exit Codes

0: Success - Review complete, excellent quality
1: Review complete, major issues found
2: Cannot load required artifacts
3: Invalid review focus

0: Success - Review complete, excellent quality
1: Review complete, major issues found
2: Cannot load required artifacts
3: Invalid review focus