Personally, I don’t think having a syllabus and improvising are at odds. As I see it, the syllabus specifies the topics to be covered, lists articles and books that students should read and describes assignments, grading standards and the like. But this doesn’t prevent other activities from being inserted where appropriate. I’ll give several examples for courses I taught this fall. One topic on my syllabus dealt with the Brown vs Board of Education. Students read several articles about segregated southern schools before the passage of Brown. One of the articles mentioned Rosenwald Schools. I found several articles about Rosenwald, who was one of the men who owned Sears stores and a philanthropist who donated funds to all-black segregated schools to build better school houses. I also found pictures of Rosenwald Schools from the past and Rosenwald School structures that are currently being used for other purposes. I showed this material in class. We also discussed the role of philanthropists in public schools as both a historic and a contemporary phenomenon. And one of the questions on the mid-term asked students to discuss Rosenwald Schools, describe how they came to be, and then compare the role of the Rosenwald, as philanthropist and contemporary philanthropists.

In another class the dealt with linguistics, I was trying to illustrate the role that language prejudice plays in US life. Except for the most stigmatized varieties of American

English, many US students aren’t as aware of the role that various accents have on their everyday judgements of people even though this is a topic on the syllabus. One of the best sources to help students become aware of this prejudice are television commercials that illustrate how advertisers exploit language prejudice to sell particular products. Two of the commercials— one for Grey Poupon, the other for Polaner All Fruit— both available on YouTube are masterful a illustrating this point. Even though this was not not on the syllabus, I showed both of these commercials in class and we discussed why they worked, that is what attitudes they conveyed, and how advertising people may know more about us than we know about ourselves.

I could provide other examples of improvisation, things that I decided to do spontaneously that weren’t on the syllabus that were appropriate at the moment and that rather than detracting from the topic at hand, expanded on it and helped elucidate some point. I am always looking for ways to enrich the material we are scheduled to cover in class and this requires improvising.

Claus, I don't think it has to be one or the other. Like you, I am working with university level students in the arts. What I aim for is to set up structured environments, within which students explore an area of inquiry that contributes to their formation, in the context of a wider plan of studies. There are some basics that the entire group should work on together, but individual projects are chosen by students according to their interests and needs. Some flexibility is necessary within the plan, but without a structure a group can loose sight of the goals. So I guess my answer is both: improvise within the plan, after creating a structure that allows for a moderate degree of flexibility.

In my limited but intense experience, the syllabus should be followed in general as a structure to maintain the progression of understanding, with allowance for tangents which seem fruitful. The syllabus is a guard against dissipation of the structure of the content contained in it -- a guard against some overly extroverted students' egos or impulses to take control. It enables the professor to encourage free association and the free flow of thought but also to re-direct attention when it loses steam or strays into irrelevance. The spine need not be rigid to support the torso, but a spine is certainly essential. 

Hi 

I hope that following article be useful, plz check out.

Regards

This is an excellent question, Claus. The creators of the syllabus have, so to speak, established a Foucaultian discourse. It is accredited and privileged, even thought its content might be very good or very bad.

As a teacher, it would be morally irresponsible  to do my "own thing", and teach to another syllabus. My students would then be ill-prepared for assessment, and would probably fail tests and examinations. Whenever possible, the best solution, I believe, is to opt for the "right" (educationally and ethically) syllabus.

When this is difficult, I insert "critical detours" into rigid syllabi that keep to the beaten path, but also allow a degree of critical elbow room. Finally, It is easier to be more flexible in some subject domains than in others. For example, when teaching safe and effective surgical procedure, it is essential to keep to the correct protocol (in this case, a syllabus, of sorts). However, when critiquing social policymaking, a more open discussion is available, and rightly so. Best wishes, Paul

Both

I teach Critical Thinking in Academic Writing to Chinese students, and I do both; I have a fixed syllabus, but my content remains flexible. It has to - some students grasp the concepts more effectively than others, so I need to be flexible.

More recently, a colleague of mine and I created a new course for students dealing with grammar issues, which allowed me to deal with more issues in their Introduction to Academic Writing Class. With this new freedom I have been able to implement what I call a flexible syllabus - that is, I have planned in "blank" weeks that will enable me to deal with student issues in the class; if there are no issues, I can give them class-time to research or write.

So for me, I believe it is possible to have a strict syllabus and flexible in-class content.

Great question and discussion. I would agree with all, though I would like to clarify a bit.  Teaching is always contextual. It is hard to discuss dependence on a syllabus because the discussion would depend totally on the strength of the syllabus itself - although reading through the thread, I feel there is a blurring of syllabus and the curriculum.

Starting with the syllabus, student learning outcomes, written well as specific objectives, connected to the activities of the course - those specifically assessed for the learning outcomes - are indeed the scaffolding for the course. The actual teaching within the classroom is deep planning but also part improvisation in presentation - that is also a separate issue I will leave there. So the syllabus itself is not the curriculum, but the guide for the activities within the curriculum and specifically designed to guide by teacher and student in a contract of what will be learned. Students need the structure of knowing when and how they will be assessed in the course, and what they will be expected to learn.  Of course, that can be leading the horse to water, but that is for another post.

Please don't confuse the syllabus - an OUTLINE at best - with the curriculum - the actual activities designed for learning. NEITHER of these should be confused with the actual teaching taking place within the classroom, which takes the scaffolding of the syllabus, the well-designed curriculum, and brings it to fruition in a variety of ways, always dependent on the human beings within the context of the classroom. For example: I use a syllabus for a class I have taught over 10 times, and it is the same, with the same curriculum and materials, but each individual class is very dependent on the students in front of me - I teach to who is there and what is needed to get us from point A to point B. 

In music, specifically in musical instrument, this is not a problem, since there is some credibility in video recordings of performances of students.

In medicine teaching we can not make an improvisation. So, we follow thw syllabus.

Teaching is about facilitation of learning done by the learner. The learner learns skills,knowledge and attitudes that are proposed in the curriculum. The syllabus is derived from the curriculum. The focus of teaching is on how the learners should acquire what is generally in the curriculum and specifically in the syllabus. Thus a syllabus is a guide of the content that is focused on at a particular point in time.

In the humanities, we can afford to improvise. I create my own syllabi, which provide the skeleton for the course. And then, given the students' needs, I improvise. I try to develop a creatively-evolving classroom that excites my students about learning. Perhaps some of that is because, personally, I am nearing retirement and find myself questioning what lies at the core of my courses, what I most want to remain with my students in five or ten years or, hopefully, all their lives. That has shifted somewhat. But the improvisation is a kind of intuitive process.

I have some further thoughts, Claus. I think that it is important to avoid, as far as this is feasible, "subject balkanization", by which I mean delineating over-stringent boundaries between different subject domains. After all, we live in a world that is best understood through the use of holistic epistemologies that traverse subject singularities. 

That said, from a practical point of view and for the benefit of the students as regards assessment of their progress, there is the risk that too much creativity might lock horns with rigidly determined syllabi. In that regard, the needs of the students to do well in examinations must take due precedence.  Best wishes Paul

In business subjects, it is necessary to cover the topics listed on the syllabus. However, if there is time, some additional discussion can take place on other topics. The problem with not covering all of the topics is that students will not be prepared for the classes that follow. The faculty in the classes that follow will expect content knowledge from the previous classes.

You ask a complicated question.  The problem is, courts have found that syllabi are essentially contracts with the student.  I HATE that, but it really means that any modification that we make after the fact can potentially cause a legitimate grievance.

To this end, I am always sure to let the students know (both verbally and in writing on the syllabus) that things may shift around.  However, some things probably cannot - especially grading schemes and unless there is a major event that requires shifting (e.g., the floods we had a couple of months ago here in SC), test and term project dates should probably be set in stone.

I agree with you Adam. There are many potential pitfalls in this area. In essence, I think some sort of bounded"syllabus" is necessary for beginning learners. Otherwise they can easily get stuck in what Max Weber famously referred to as the realm of the vaguely felt. By "beginning learners", I do not only refer to children. Say, for example, I learnt from scratch to become a pilot with British Airways. This would necessarily entail keeping to the script of certain tried, tested (and not found wanting) syllabi of sorts. I have in mind safety protocols that should not be deviated from. For all that, once the basics are in place, there is surely room for measured (and, indeed, adventurous) creativity and exploration. Best wishes, Paul

Definitely improvisation. I'm professor of History of Medicine in a medical school and I 'm convinced of the importance of adapting syllabi to daily events.

I believe that a curriculum is the best answer - identifying what students need to learn rather than what they should be taught. Teachers may choose different things to teach but achieve the same goals. We must be careful that teachers don't get too caught up teaching the syllabus rather than teaching the students; sometimes the goal to 'get through the course' can result in superficial learning of 'content' rather than deep learning of 'concepts' - particularly in subjects like Mathematics and Science. Many inexperienced teachers are unable to make this distinction - they need advice from more experienced teachers on how to 'zoom out' from the syllabus and consider the deep learning and reasoning required (that good teachers can facilitate) rather than the little bits of content that can be learned from the web.

thanks for all the answers. they are evidence of the very different contexts in which we teach. One has a given syllabus, one can or must create his/her own, and so on.

Just to make one point cleare (I hope): improvisation does not mean just to discuss an issue a little bit longer. Improvisation is needed when you realize that a significant part of your class has not realy understood the key concepts of what you were teaching. At this point there is no sense in stricly sticking to the plan, one has to find new methods and didactics to teach. Otherwise they will have no chance in understanding the rest of the course. So improvisation means that you are teaching an issue again in another way, you start to improvise over a theme so to say. It is sometimes necessary to get to the heart of the "concepts" we teach, no matter if in the humanities or in mathematics or science.

The syllabus is the contract between the school and the student and from that point of view, it has to be followed rigidly, and any assessment that produces grades for a student, must test student's level of mastery of the syllabus objectives.

However, the learning experiences are the teacher's to create and a teacher should have the liberty to be as creative as is necessary to provide students with meaningful learning experiences - the aim being for students to master the syllabus objectives. 

The syllabus is a shackle, but not the classroom environment that the teacher creates.

Just as one should not confuse a given course's syllabus with a program's curriculum, one must also be aware of the difference between a syllabus and a lesson plan.  The flexibility of "improvisation" as

I am an engineer, so as expected I vote for a strict syllabus.  However, engineers solve problems and sometimes there are variations in the solution - as is the case in my syllabus.  A strict syllabus speaks to organization and we are all "graded" by how organized we are.  I add in a couple (2 or 3) adjustment days to cover things that might happen that take me out of the classroom, such as an important meeting or a personal emergency.  I also add them to put just a little flexibility in the syllabus so students know that we may get a little behind and to allow for a day where we discuss other aspects of the subject that are not planned in the syllabus.  Sometimes students are working and bring in a "real" problem and we all discuss how it would be solved - critical thinking and problem solving opportunities are more than welcome. 

The issue is surely about balance. There are some fairly well established truths, particularly in medicine, that work pretty well. Yes, time will surely modify - perhaps entirely replace - these truths., one day. However, to view knowledge as constantly changing is unwise. If that were so, teaching and education would be chaotic and there would be no basis for elucidating the most convincing position. Veracity is not a short shelf life attribute. If it were, chaos would trump reason. Much of what we have learnt from Plato, Newton and Gøthe still has enduring resonance today, even, as I have intimated, the development of new ways of seeing is fundamental to progress. So, to repeat myself, "balance" (e.g., Newton´s laws are still relevant, but will surely be refined). Paul

I think is an excellent question, because is a problem for a teachars when they want to innovate in the classrroom. I think it's necessary to understand the pupuils' common ideas, but with a program to work in future.

I must admit that I could not teach exactly the same set of topics in two consecutive years. The emphasis on a particular portion of the course is automatically generated by the students’ interactions (feedback). As a result some deviation from the syllabus could not be avoided. Moreover due to my long experience I found in some cases modification in the sequence in which the different portions should be presented becomes necessary. However, syllabus should be treated as a guideline and it is better that we cover most of it.

Hi Ali,

I don't agree with a strict syllabus at all. The problem these days with SOME teachers is that they teach for BREADTH OF COVERAGE and not DEPTH OF LEARNING.

Trying to complete a syllabus only results in breadth of coverage and surface approach to learning: it stays on the surface and quickly vanishes. Teaching meaningfully allows for depth of knowledge and deep approaches to learning: knowledge stays, and is retrieved at any given moment during task completion.

The best way to go is IMPROVISATION. I say this because many educational experts have lobbied for an EMANCIPATORY CURRICULUM (Fraser & Bosanquet, 2006; Hattie, 2009; Biggs & Tang, 2011).

The goal of education is LEARNING. The vehicle used to accomplish this goal is TEACHING (Lunenburg & Irby, 2006). In this light, teachers should do EVERYTHING in their power to ensure that student learning outcomes are maximised and achieved.

Regards,

Kerwin.

The syllabus is there for a reason. It should define the expectancies and objectives of the learning. Therefore, I would say let the syllabus be the guide and do your best to land on the full expectancy of it. If not, the students could be deprived of the learning the syllabus defined. That said, there are surely many ways to get to the end result. Innovation, flexibility, and improvisation are means to get to the end intent of the syllabus. 

I agree with Anup's comment that syllabus should be a guideline and I would add not a straight jacket (off the shelf lessons plans can end up being adhered to rigidly by teachers at the expense of not allowing students to demonstrate how much they already know; as a result, students can often be exposed to 'boring' previously covered knowledge that leads to demotivation and lack of engagement).

This leads to Kerwin's valid point.

Galloping through a set spec may be unavoidable at times, but should never be at the cost of not including the live audience for whom it is intended: the strategic approach to teaching and learning must be the guiding light.  I personally find the combination of knowing students well, developing dialogue and negotiating the next move very useful.

I agree with Thomas´s point that there must be a body of knowledge to be covered. Otherwise, anything goes. To use a deliberately absurd example, I could choose not to teach statistics relating to promising health interventions for patients with chronic pain, and simply say, Let´s talk about what you want to talk about. If I did so, I would feel that I had failed in my responsibility as a teacher. That said, there is scope - limited to be sure - to venture outside conventional wisdom in order to consider other options, or other syllabi, so to speak. Ultimately, however, as a scientist, I am prepared to act on promising evidence, but always with a critical eye. And I would expect my students to adopt a similar position. Best wishes Paul. This discussion is very invigorating, by the way. 

Not to head this conversation in too different a direction (and I agree with Paul - thanks for asking the question, Claus): I am curious as to folks' sense of the difference between teaching and informing. I could read the line "teach statistics relating to promising health interventions for patients with chronic pain" (absurd example or not) as sharing info - and that makes me think that students could also gain that information via independent reading, watching a video, or possibly working their way through some software that details those statistics for various interventions. I am really simplifying this, but what might move the lesson/class time from informing to teaching? Or maybe there is not much difference? I think the answer to this question directly impacts my thinking about strict syllabus or improvisation.

Yes, Linda, the distinction between teaching and informing - granted varying degrees of overlap - is important. Some subjects lend themselves more than others to informing and look, see and copy, while other subjects invite critique and discussion. Specific surgical techniques "versus" a critique of James Joyce´s The Dubliners come to mind, respectively. So there is no size fits all answer; rather, at least in my opinion, a readiness and a capability to know when instructive protocols are relevant and when creative debate and discussion are more appropriate. Best wishes, Paul

I agree George. That said, improvisation in mathematics is only possible in the teaching of the discipline, not in the content of what is taught. Rare exceptions can, of course, arise; for example, when a brilliant scholar develops a mathematical theorem that adds to or even replaces an existing model. Best wishes, Paul

There is a lot to be said for improvisation--a lot more than stated in this article I wrote 40 years ago (see attached).  I, and other faculty, at the Western Institute for Social Research (www.wisr.edu) continue to aim to improvise, but based on broad guidelines/values/scripts.

Improvisation would be based on the competency of the teacher so, I do agree with my colleagues to a degree.  A novice teacher would probably error on improvisation...but not an expert teacher...the knowledge of curriculum and instruction should definitely inform improvisation. 

I believe that flexible and appropriate improvisation is appropriate. Of course, we must not "To break" the curriculum. Experienced teacher always has some time reserve.

In my experience, you can drive a Mack truck through pretty much any course of study. To a great extent, the joy I get from teaching IB visual arts (for instance) is to create challenging design problems which students solve in the form of an idea expressed in painting, or sculpture or mixed media or photographic form. For me, extracting the best from the syllabus and turning it into a challenging design problem (backed by lots of process) is a key to improvisation and innovation.

I don't think it is a question of one or the other since they are interrelated.  The Syllabus is providing the Student with the specific objectives and how meeting those objectives will be assessed.  The improvising comes with "how are you going to help the student achieve the objectives.

Why so dualistic? life is not an either/or--evolve to the both/and!

The answer is "yes and no to both." As pointed out by William, the syllabus is a tool for meeting certain objectives. A good teacher always has a plan B, and even a C, so that strategies are already in place for deviating from the syllabus when necessary to meet objectives. Instead of "improvisation," I suggest that the last resort is "modifications based on previous experience and professional assessment of the situation."

One point regarding "improvisation" that deserves more emphasis is that STUDENTS should have the opportunity and encouragement to improvise--learner-centered education engages students in reflecting on such questions as "what are MY objectives for myself in this course, or indeed beyond the course?"  "What is my learning style and how can I build on my strengths to become more successful in learning?" "What do I need to do differently than will help me to learn more deeply--and, in terms of what's meaningful to me, both within and outside of the objectives and guidelines of the course syllabus?"  As faculty we can try to become more attuned to what we can do to facilitate these types of conscious improvisation and engagement by our students.

Improve your curriculum so that it requires and support faculty members in improvisation. This is exactly the intention with the ¨conceptual one-pager¨ we are experimenting with in medical education for rural preceptors program. 

It´s online modules on a number of topics. The modules provide readings in flipped-classroom style. (However) they are also supported by a one-pager infographic summary of the concepts from the readings, for reference during the session and as a printed job aid posted in the work place. 

The one-pager allows the facilitator to improvise with the concepts, depending on the interest and experience of the group. It is a seminar that draws on participants to relate the concepts to their lived experience as practitioners. 

I am all for improvisation and do it alot. It makes the lesson so much mire interesting for me, which I find that the students pick up and become much more involved.  In order to be able to improvise well, one needs to have expertise in subject matter being learned. Secondly, the presentor of this subject matter must not cross ethical boundries making sure that this improvisation doers not go too far and miss the point of what is being discussed. Thirdly, it is most important to close these improvised sections into some type of structured summary or task so as to be able to assess the level of understanding of the topic.  (The task itself may have some form of improvisation)

I think regular revision of the syllabus as well as the way the contents in the syllabus is delivered is important. Depending on the interest and the enthusiasm shown by the students a particular portion of the syllabus could be devoted longer time. In fact, I have been teaching Mechanics, Waves and Oscillations for our first year undergraduate students and we were following a very well known text book. However, we found that most students were disinterested in attending the lectures. We figured out that most of the topics that we were teaching was very well dealt with in the high school curriculum though they would not have done these topics with a rigor at which we were teaching. We decided to change the syllabus and have introduced some advanced topics in Mechanics. The students are finding the course more interesting and challenging now. I think that challenging students intellectually in the class room may be an  effective way of teaching and getting them engaged.

Personally, I don’t think having a syllabus and improvising are at odds. As I see it, the syllabus specifies the topics to be covered, lists articles and books that students should read and describes assignments, grading standards and the like. But this doesn’t prevent other activities from being inserted where appropriate. I’ll give several examples for courses I taught this fall. One topic on my syllabus dealt with the Brown vs Board of Education. Students read several articles about segregated southern schools before the passage of Brown. One of the articles mentioned Rosenwald Schools. I found several articles about Rosenwald, who was one of the men who owned Sears stores and a philanthropist who donated funds to all-black segregated schools to build better school houses. I also found pictures of Rosenwald Schools from the past and Rosenwald School structures that are currently being used for other purposes. I showed this material in class. We also discussed the role of philanthropists in public schools as both a historic and a contemporary phenomenon. And one of the questions on the mid-term asked students to discuss Rosenwald Schools, describe how they came to be, and then compare the role of the Rosenwald, as philanthropist and contemporary philanthropists.

In another class the dealt with linguistics, I was trying to illustrate the role that language prejudice plays in US life. Except for the most stigmatized varieties of American

English, many US students aren’t as aware of the role that various accents have on their everyday judgements of people even though this is a topic on the syllabus. One of the best sources to help students become aware of this prejudice are television commercials that illustrate how advertisers exploit language prejudice to sell particular products. Two of the commercials— one for Grey Poupon, the other for Polaner All Fruit— both available on YouTube are masterful a illustrating this point. Even though this was not not on the syllabus, I showed both of these commercials in class and we discussed why they worked, that is what attitudes they conveyed, and how advertising people may know more about us than we know about ourselves.

I could provide other examples of improvisation, things that I decided to do spontaneously that weren’t on the syllabus that were appropriate at the moment and that rather than detracting from the topic at hand, expanded on it and helped elucidate some point. I am always looking for ways to enrich the material we are scheduled to cover in class and this requires improvising.

As a teacher of Geography, I have to teach the syllabus at GCSE or the students will fail. The students know this. At A level I have more flexibility as the topics are wide enough and involve enough issues that are current, for me to adapt to cover what is in the news and thus more effectively engage students.

My research is about how we get buy in when students are "forced" to study subjects which provide them with little interest by Government policy that is not necessarily supported by senior managers in school. Will this lead to higher "achievement"?

I think everyone has made good suggestions, and although faculty improvisation is valuable, I think that we often overlook the importance of actively encouraging students to improvise.  It is all too easy for students to become accustomed to being told what to do, and to not reflect deeply on what they want to learn and why.

Isobel raises an important issue; namely, teaching to the curriculum. There must be a balance. I might neglect the curriculum (a prescribed discourse of sorts) and replace it with improvised teaching. But to do do so, would be a disservice to my students. They would fail the exam. I also note John´s comments. I sympathize with his point regarding improvisation. However, when a syllabus is a big part of the picture, improvisation should occur within, for example, pedagogic teaching styles rather than by adding or removing prescribed subject content. I am not entirely happy with this dilemma. However, if I improvise effectively but stray long from the curriculum, my students will surely encounter serious difficulties. In short, they would face a disconnect between my improvised choice of subject matter and what the curriculum specifies. Best wishes Paul

The two are vital.

So both/and is the way to go.

I consider the syllabus like a budget, out of date as soon as it is complete. 

topics are critical for professionally approved courses like i frequently teach in accounting but sometimes one must take advantage of teaching moments or just stop and take stock. I stopped my class at 11 am on Sept 11 to discuss the event. we resolved that why was more critical than the quantitative facts, 

I had to stop a class when in 2009 a team of students recommended that GM was a buy just before they went cap in hand to Washington and Ottawa looking for bailouts. and the debts exceeded the assets....called bankruptcy. 

but as educators we can not abandon the opportunities to teach something that is related to what we are doing and serve the future interests of the young people we are charged with assisting in their development. 

I most agree with Elliot. I like to equate my lessons to Jazz Music or a jam session. There is the underlying base and theme which is worked on and changes form according to the contributions of all the participants. My role as the teacher is to conduct the "stream of conscousness" that developes during the activities and discussions. Quite often we may come to the same conclusions as in earlier sessions, or come to newer and more exciting ones. The curriculum is there as the starting point. 

It is important to improvise according to the students' needs. This is something which really happens with the education of your children, which is comparable to teaching in class. Love, patience and big doses of flexibility is what you need even if you don't stick to syllabus thoroughly.

No sólo necesitamos paciencia y grandes dosis de flexibilidad, sino también conocer cómo se cosntruye el conocimiento en relación al problema que nos guía el desarrollo de la actividad

Un saludo

One of the main points in this context is tempo and pace of teaching. What do you do when you realize that some of your students have problems following you? Slower the tempo, start to improvise or just go ahead? (I guess I should open a new thread with this question)

I would like to remind everyone that this thread (A WONDERFUL DISCUSSION) is confusing several issues. As Davison Zireva says above, and I have posted previously, a syllabus is an outline of what will be covered.  It is NOT the curriculum, though it may outline or describe the curriculum of the class. The curriculum are the actual activities designed for learning. NEITHER of these should be confused with the actual teaching taking place within the classroom, which takes the scaffolding of the syllabus, the well-designed curriculum, and brings it to fruition in a variety of ways, always dependent on the human beings within the context of the classroom. For example: I use a syllabus for a class I have taught over 10 times, and it is the same, with the same curriculum and materials, but each individual class is very dependent on the students in front of me - I teach to who is there and what is needed to get us from point A to point B.

My syllabus is the road map of learning that leads to the goal of answering an essential  question.  At times I find students  may require another  path to learning to address an unexpected  teachable moment,   reteaching,  or differentiation strategies to meet learning ability/ style . Improvisation is an artform -,a great way to help a community of learners make meaning in a joyous  manner.  In  my opinion,  dealing with teaching challenges when encountered in an improvisational manner heightens students' awareness and motivation to learn.  Improv is more than being funny, it is about using creative actions to add  humor,  cause dissonance to provoke thinking,  and provides an opportunity to drive  rigor and relevance in an active classroom. 

Like a roadmap, a syllabus outlines an intended path to a final destination.  Detours  and unexpected problems are inevitable (such as  a flat tire!) and  can  be addressed as a learning experience. We just need to remember to get our students back on the road to learning to ensure  they have met the learning outcomes in a measurable fashion. 

I agree with Vanna.  It is though, imperitive that one is totally fluent in the subject matter. One can use his or her expertise creatively only if this fluency exists. Unfortunately, most teachers either do not have enough deep understanding in their subject matter to feel free enough to improvise and divert from their lesson plans. Often this is exaggerated by the lack of self confidence and/or pressures to fulfill curricuum dictates. In many education systems, divirtion from lesson plans are regarded as luxury and frowned upon. This most saddens me.

I'm a teacher in one of several univerties where the word ''syllabus" means course notes. As there are no books for teachers, nor for students, every instructor makes his/her own "syllabus". Indeed, this was until recently an academic  traditioan in countries like France and Belgium. I should be honest to say that in the case of these European tradition, this was in addition to textbooks. Back to our case of syllabus, universities have been instructed in theory to get them write up " course plans". But this has not been followed through with help as to how to do if effectively through faculty seminars or Teaching assistants orientations our courses. It is an area of real weakness. Some US colleges involved in cooperative agreements with African universities should not overlook to include what may appear as something granted. 

Mukeba Lufuluabo, Universite Pedagogique Nationale, Democratic Republic of Congo

My personality and teaching style are definitely on the looser and more flexible side. However, I teach in a teacher education program that is very structured due to accreditation and licensure requirements. That forces me to be a bit more structured than I would naturally, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Any given day it may look and feel like I'm working off the cuff and there is a very conversational tone, however, I always have my learning objectives in the backdrop, shaping and steering where we are going and what we are covering. Based on my personal experience, I guess my contribution is to say the type of class/program you teach in may have something to do with it and I imaging for most of us its a matter of what feels like the right blend instead of an either-or proposition.

Paul M. Wright - Northern Illinois University

HI Claus, I like to use a variety of different teaching techniques; however, as Paul Wright points out (have learning objectives visible or in the background). We have been experimenting with Heutagogy with postgraduates and that has been rewarding allowing them to steer their own education path - as long as the criteria is meet for the course. 

Learner centricity is key and wrapping around the learning materials to suit the individual needs, I find that I try to vary my teaching techniques and approaches to engage in life cycle is vital. This for me, could be blended, on-line medium, or just flip-charts and group base exercises. 

I think like you said "start to improvise" if it is important or you can add more detail that would enable challenge or support an individual.

Rob.

I think it's very imoprtant to lerarning with the pupils's experiences; so we  must to explain the world of childs in their words.

An interesting question, and one that has been answered in various ways by the notable people before me. I think you need to qualify what you mean by improvise. Your question insinuates that it is at the other end of a continuum from 'sticking to a plan. My understanding is that we all improvise, all the time, we just do it with vocabulary and actions with the circumstances and interactions of our day. Our'plans' still become fulfilled. The use of the term improvisation comes down to lack of understanding and distortion of the processes involved. In jazz, improvisers have a rules of structure, vocabulary and syntax, that vary between and within sub-genres. What may seem totally made up on the spot is actually a finely honed blend of learned , crafted vocabulary with the in the moment activity created with the collaboration of  fellow conspirators. We all know our curriculum, our essential pieces of information that needs to be inculcated in our students via the higher education mechanism of dissemination. The way we allow our personalities to make the subject come to life, the way we interact and negotiate with our classes over the information is ripe for imaginative, improvisatory illumination. Its what makes much education worth exploring. 

• Dear Leon, I understand the term improvisation as you defined it. It comes out of an in-depth understandung of teaching and improvisation, not from a lack of understanding. Some people understand improvisation as "making it up on the spot without any plan". This is not what I indended in the first place. My question was: when do you start to stop following your syllabus and start playing a variation of a tune instead of going to the next. Which variations can and shoud be used in certain cases and in which tempo should we play? Of course we all improvise every time, but not in the same amount. Improvisation in jazz is also dialogue and communication. These are the questions that I intended to raise and discuss, too many maybe for one thread, but it started an interesting and rich discussion already. best

My recommendation is this: give one or two articles to read for each lesson. Give one or two questions that the students must answer according to that article for that lesson. Then you can teach anything you want (you should connect it of course) but the students will learn everything they need regarding the reading materials. Give some of the grade for completing these tasks (you can do this assignment online or hand-in, in pairs, groups or for each students). This was the students will be learning all semester. I know it sounds a little hard but students appreciate harder courses and see them as better, as long as they feel the grade reflects their investment. The discussions in class become much more lively too.

Editors: Leon R. Tsvasman & Martin A. M. Gansinger

Proposed titles:

Foundations of Improvisation. Compendium for Best Practice.

The Large Handbook of Improvisation. Best Practice, Concepts and Foundations.

Aim: to contribute to the emancipation/legitimation/acceptance of the improvisational principle in socially relevant areas such as education, culture, politics, and economy – using the innovative and interdisciplinary approach of a concise compendium focused on extemporaneous concepts and practices

Need for publication: contribution to the improvement of interdisciplinary grounded, improvisation-based forms of communication, organization, and learning in accordance with an increasingly interconnected/participative/media-supported society

Usability:

● independent learning for better personal orientation in relevant areas of practice and individual creative activity

● didactic relevance regarding the possible incorporation of extemporaneous techniques and improvisational practices in the context of innovative working- and learning-environments: interactive teaching, group tasks, project-related tasks, presentations etc.

● application of derived improvisational principles in the fields of management, economy, culture, and politics: providing concepts for differentiated perspectives on organizational, operational and performative tasks

Unique Selling Point: high didactic and economic relevance, based on a unique conceptual approach using a constructivist-inspired, cybernetically justified, epistemological structure that has already been utilized for ‘‘Das grosse Lexikon Medien und Kommunikation’’ (Ergon, 2006):

● Definition of term ● Positioning ● Inherent aspects ● Practical context ● Ethical, political, economic, didactic aspects ● Outlook and perspectives

Contributors: Next to a number of self-authored lemmata within the range of their own expertise and disciplinary borders, the editors rely on a network of valuable contributors from various fields, consisting of authors for ‘‘Das grosse Lexikon Medien und Kommunikation’’ and others

Content samples: Acting Actuality Allopoiesis Attention Anticipation Autopoiesis Awareness Cognition Consciousness Consistency Experience Extemporarity Extempore speech Implicit knowledge Improvisation Incorporation Integrated learning Interaction Interdependency Intersubjectivity Intuition Knowledge Leadership Learning Mediality Mediation Memory Memory-based learning Meta-reflection Music Orality Orientation Objectivity Perception Potentiality Presence Processual action Project-based learning Relevance Repetition Responsibility Selection Specialization Subjectivity Spontaneity Standardization Technology Thematic improvisation Time Workflow

Core audience/market: Due to the establishment of large scale relations between different fields of study the book serves a complementary purpose for interdisciplinary oriented scholars open-minded for input, inspiration or merging of expansive ideas from neighbouring areas. The handbook bears the strong potential to serve as a fundamental resource for universities and various faculty catalogues. Stringent bundling of existing schematizations of extemporaneous aspects and strategies in Communication, Cultural Studies, Music, Theatre, Poetry, Pedagogy, Management, Psychology, Cognitive Research, Anthropology, Epistemology, Cybernetics, Philosophy allows for a diversified core audience of academics, university libraries and students from various disciplinary backgrounds in Anglophone countries and the global market.

Wider readership: Due to the explicit focus on interconnections and cross-sections between the various disciplines’ approach to integrate and discuss extemporaneous aspects, there is a considerable potential to equally draw interest among circles outside of the specialized, scientific scope. Explorations into possible application in fields like education, management or creative industries as well as meta-perspectives disclosing undetected patterns of extemporaneous influence on habitual behaviour, artistic performance and even use of new media technology can be considered as issues of general interest, appealing to a wider readership.

Interesting Discussions