Understanding by Design is a
“curriculum-planning framework” that is intended to help teachers
plan lessons and units so that students will be more likely to
comprehend and retain the “big ideas” of the curriculum (3). It
is based on eight key tenets that promote flexibility, making meaning
of learning, autonomous learning, authentic performance of students
(capacities to “explain, interpret, apply, shift perspective,
empathize, and self assess”), planning from desired results,
ensuring understanding rather than conveying knowledge, and reviewing
and adjusting plans and units to ensure effectiveness (4). The focus
of much of what I read is on planning and coordinating teaching
strategies outwards from the ultimate goal of getting students to
understand the “big ideas” of the curriculum.
I think UbD is a great tool to keep in
mind when writing out lesson plans. Keeping students focused on the
“big ideas” is a great way to organize your teaching throughout a
unit/semester/year. Encouraging understanding rather than promoting
retention of facts to be regurgitated on a test makes for a more
enjoyable and effective education. I can distinctly remember one of
my high school history classes where the teacher spent the entire
lesson conveying facts via bullet points left to right on the chalk
board. From the time the class started he would talk and write until
the entire board was full. Then he would erase the left side, fill it
again, erase the right, fill it again, and repeat until the closing
bell. When he would ask questions nobody would volunteer answers,
mainly because we had been scribbling so furiously to keep up with
the notes that we hadn't really been paying attention to the
material.
That particular teacher's focus solely
on information led to a shortcoming in understanding. While that
class may have helped me become a more efficient note-taker, I gained
very little understanding of nineteenth century France. There was
little understanding of core concepts and principles, and I never
really did anything with the content-- with the exception of
recalling it on an exam. The UbD methods discourage that type of
teaching, and would have encouraged Mr. [X] to take a little time
away from his Cross Country team to construct better unit and lesson
plans.
The planning UbD requires is a three
stage backwards design starting from the desired results. Teachers
must decide what their “long-term transfer goals” will be, work
backwards from there to how progress towards those goals may be
measured, and then finally to planning effective lessons and
“learning experiences” to achieve understanding (8). Planning
lessons this way forces a teacher to focus only on material and
activities that will promote understanding and work towards the
previously established goals. Extraneous material can be cut-out of
lessons and classroom time can be more productive. Module F of UbD
helps guide teachers down this more focused path with descriptions of
essential questions and understandings.
Essential questions are intended to
spark the intellect of your students and to really get them thinking,
talking, or writing. They are not easily answered with “finite”
responses, but are intended to ignite discussion, debate, and
interpretation. An ideal essential question will pull students back
towards the “big ideas,” “provoke deep thought, lively
discussion, sustained inquiry, and new understanding [, and promote]
rethinking” (73). These open-ended questions are useful in
promoting the principles of UbD, and work towards framing better
lessons.
Overall, I think I will benefit from
taking these principles into classrooms in the future. They may seem
like common sense, but too often teachers get hung up on slugging
through all the required content. Standardized testing can also
function as an obstacle to understanding, as they require students
and teachers to focus on the information and short-term goals, rather
than ensuring understanding or gong beyond prescribed standards.
No comments:
Post a Comment