The phrase "scope and sequence" either makes me want to start daydreaming about literally anything else OR makes me super impassioned about creating efficient, research-based, sequential curriculum.
Being an international school teacher, I've both written and taught dozens of curricula at this point. Each time I get to a new school and am handed whatever the last teacher left behind plus the school's general structure/educational philosophy I end up wondering if there isn't a more efficient way?
Most of my experience has been that, in general, teachers before me do not leave helpful documents about their lesson and unit plans. Or if they do, there isn't much sense of scope and sequence. Or if there is, there isn't scope and sequence developed for smooth transition with the levels above and below.
I think the most efficient system would be to start with the widest most general view to "build the skeleton" and then work in more and more detail, leaving the classroom teacher with autonomy to make choices from within that framework. But this skeleton is sadly lacking at most schools I've worked at. Why is that? It can be as simple as what content needs to be taught in each grade or as complex as what skills/characteristics need to be mastered in each grade.
I have a personal teaching objective. It is that students leave my classroom with better critical thinking, divergent thinking, and SEL practices. I also hope that they have become more adept at asking better questions. These aims can be accomplished within any framework, so I easily adapt myself to each school I staff on. And yet, it would be really lovely to be able to apply my objectives within an organized, school-wide scope and sequence!
What is your experience with this? Have you ever worked at a school that has been able to ask the big questions of their curriculum and both get it in writing and get it in action?