Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Understanding by Design


Understanding by Design is an educational curriculum-planning tool developed by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe.  It is based on backward design that intends to teach for understanding.  In the most general sense the backward design that Understanding by Design is based on involves creating a curriculum based on what you want the learner to ultimately take away from what they are taught in the long term.  Wiggins’ and McTighe’s Understanding by Design (UbD) has been trademarked and published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.  UbD is a rather popular handbook on in American education, with teachers and universities alike utilizing and teaching the program. Teachers and curriculum writers are thought of as coaches of understanding and the “backward” development process ensures that text books and lessons are used as resources not the curriculum itself.
            More specifically, UbD relies on the concept that learners will ultimately exhibit the 6 aspects of understanding, which are that of explaining content, interpreting content, applying content to different situations and contexts, considering different perspectives, using knowledge to empathize, and having self-knowledge about what one knows and how one learns.  With that as a rather abstract and subjective ideal, the backward design, otherwise known as backwards planning or development, is rooted in an adaptation Bobbitt and Charters’ task analysis model.  Very simply put, a task analysis model of curriculum starts with what is thought to be most important for students to know by identifying more specific tasks needed to learn academically or a task. 
            The backward design model itself entails 3 stages.  The first stage is to identify the desired outcomes- the program goals.  This stage has 3 more specific sub levels, the first of which is to consider goals in terms of content standards; in New Jersey educators and curriculum writers would be the hold the NJ core curriculum content standards as the overall general goal.  The second level would be to then consider the content, that which includes any skills, concepts, facts, ways of thinking, etc that needs to be understood and mastered. Thirdly, stage one involves a more detailed account of the content that will be taught, i.e. what actual subject matter and courses.  As the text notes, the understanding that should occur at this sub-level should be the enduring understanding matters- the main ideas that’s resonate after details are forgotten.
            Stage two of the backwards design is the evaluation and assessment development so to provide a means to provide evidence of learning and understanding. This is where performance is measured through implementing assignments and projects, tests and quizzes, discussions, etc in order to gauge that the goals and content standards are being met.  The third and final stage of the backward design model is the development of individual learning activities.  This stage is where the lesson plans are developed and particular facts and skills are taught for each subject area.  Appropriate materials and the best instructional methods should be considered here in this stage.
            Throughout the development of a curriculum using the UbD model, it seems practical and realistic that the idea of understanding can be subjective to an extent and parts of a curriculum can and should be tweaked and revised to better allow for full understanding as the curriculum is being developed; It does not seem to be a very rigid, one-size fits all template.  The UbD framework works best with the concept of essential questions being answered throughout the development of the curriculum.  Those essential questions should be rather easy to pick out if a curriculum is well written and likewise answers should be able understood by students if properly developed and implemented in an environment conducive to learning.  This idea is what the creators of UbD call teaching for understanding.
            Although this model has its benefits, the creators Wiggins and McTighe warn about not mistaking their Understanding by Design program as a cure-all for underachieving curriculums nor it a philosophy of education, but rather a system to be used with whatever educational philosophy of the educators.  The authors also claim that their design is conditional, meaning that if the aim of the educators is to have students gain a fuller understanding of knowledge and material then this model is suitable.

No comments:

Post a Comment