Understanding by Design: Teaching for Understanding

Understanding by DesignWhat teaching style do you favor? How do you present material in your class? When I was student teaching (many years ago now), I recall that we were required to observe another teacher in our supervising teacher’s department. I observed the man who happened to be chosen Teacher of the Year for his school by his colleagues. Actually, it was probably my supervising teacher who recommended I observe him. Matter of fact, I also observed the department head, who was an intimidating woman, both to her colleagues and students (she required English department members to hand in lesson plans, and I recall after one particularly didactic department meeting, the other English teachers clustered in the parking lot to “discuss” the meeting). The Teacher of the Year’s class was taking a notebook check the day I observed. He apologized for not being “up in front of the room,” but also added that he wasn’t up in front of room a lot because he “really didn’t believe in that.” What he was trying to say is that he viewed his role as a teacher as that of a facilitator or coach. In other words, he favored a constructivist approach to teaching. The department head was definitely more of a direct instructor. When I observed her class, she was standing in front of it, speaking. She called on students to provide answers.

One thing I like about Wiggins and McTighe is that they see value in various approaches to teaching; however, what they emphasize is that a good teacher needs to figure out when each approach is best. This can be difficult, however, because of our biases as teachers:

Teachers who love to lecture do too much of it; teachers who resist it do too little. Teachers who love ambiguity make discussions needlessly confusing. Teachers who are linear and task-oriented often intervene too much in a seminar and cut off fruitful inquiry. Teachers who love to coach sometimes do too many drills and overlook transfer. Teachers who love the big picture often do a poor job of developing core skills and competence. (242)

The most important quotation of the chapter, at least in my view, is that “[w]hen choosing instructional approaches, think about what is needed for learning, not just what is comfortable for teaching” (242). Teachers tend to use one instructional approach at the expense of all others, and to be honest, I have seen some hostility among teachers regarding this issue. Teachers who prefer direct instruction tend to see teachers who favor constructivism as irresponsible, unknowledgeable, lazy, and at worst, dangerous. It is not unheard of to hear that constructivists are the downfall of education as we know it, and don’t you know, education was so much better before these hippie yahoos came along and changed it all. On the other hand, I see constructivists characterize teachers who favor direct instruction as dour, boring, and punitive. In other words, they are the entire reason why kids hate school, and if they just weren’t teaching, why think of all we could change! In fact, I think we call all admit there are times when we want to learn things ourselves using a constructivist approach, and I don’t know about you, but I have certainly listened to some fascinating lectures.

The point of the chapter is not necessarily to advocate one method of instruction over another, but to emphasize that what method you choose needs to be based upon what your desired results are. All of a sudden the necessity for backward design “clicks.” How can you figure out whether lecture or a Socratic seminar would be best if you don’t know what you want the students to understand? In the words of Bob the nutrition unit designer, “What is the best use of our limited time together?” This should be the mantra of teachers planning instruction.

The two pages of formative assessment techniques are well worth some study (248-249). I like the index card summary idea. One of my colleagues uses hand signals with good results. Actually, her approach is slightly different from that of the book. She asks students to hold up one finger for one answer, two for another, and three for a third. It’s a very quick way to engage all the students and see who understands and who doesn’t. I tend to rely too much on discussion, which means if you talk a lot in class, I know what you know. I need to utilize methods of “hearing” from silent students more often (and not necessarily calling on them more often, although that would help; students are sometimes intimidated and afraid to say “I don’t get it”). I want to put a question box in my room, too. I think I already use oral questioning and follow-up probes to good effect, but there is always room for improvement.

I tend to teach grammar using direct instruction, and I am thinking that perhaps a constructivist approach would work better. But you know what? It would be harder to teach it that way. On the other hand, I think the students would understand it better. I know I am completely guilty of “marching through the textbook” when I teach grammar. No wonder I wind up complaining students didn’t learn what I taught. Teaching grammar next year is going to take some thinking.

Work Cited: Wiggins, Grant, and Jay McTighe. Understanding by Design. Expanded 2nd Edition. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2005.

[tags]Grant Wiggins, Jay McTighe, UbD, Understanding by Design, instruction, constructivism, assessment, curriculum, planning[/tags]

British Educators: I Want You

If you teach literature and composition in the United Kingdom, I would like to work with you on a collaborative online project. I am teaching a semester of British Literature and Composition this fall. We will be reading selections from Beowulf, The Canterbury Tales, and Arthurian legend, as well as the entirety of Macbeth.

I am not sure how to connect to UK teachers. If readers can help me out, I’d love to get your advice.

I am thinking of a blogging or wiki project.

[tags]United Kingdom, education, British literature, UK, wiki, English, blogging[/tags]

Where are All the Other Subjects?

I am really excited about the possibilities at the UbD Educators wiki, and I am thrilled with the discussions taking place over there. I have had some very helpful feedback that has allowed me to create what I think is a solid UbD/Web 2.0 unit.

But all the teachers over there are English teachers.

Now, it could be that my blog mainly appeals to other English teachers, and I would understand if it did. I do tend to read the blogs of other English teachers and technology specialists, myself. However, I also invited other teachers through the Carnival of Education, and Dan Meyer, who teaches math, was kind enough to give us a plug, too.

If you teach a subject besides English, please come on over, and don’t be daunted if you are the only one at first. I think we English teachers would be happy to give you feedback about units outside our subject matter, and in fact, you might even get great feedback that way simply because we don’t teach your subject. In other words, we can perhaps help you see the unit from the point of view of your students. The centerpiece unit in Understanding by Design is a unit on nutrition, and I have to say I thought it looked really engaging. In addition, we can all certainly help you look at your unit from a UbD standpoint. We would love to have you in the conversation, so please join us!

[tags]UbD, Understanding by Design[/tags]

Tagging

After hearing Vicki’s sensible arguments for tagging today, I have been wondering about tagging on this blog. I use a very easy tagging plugin called SimpleTagsPlus. I can use it to create Technorati, Flickr, or del.icio.us tags based on keywords I enter using certain code before and after the tag(s).

I have only been tagging my posts with Technorati tags. Would it be useful to tag them using del.icio.us, also? I use del.icio.us to save bookmarks all the time, but I hadn’t thought of tagging my posts using del.icio.us.

Does anyone use Ultimate Tag Warrior to tag WordPress posts? What do you think of it?

I want to get serious about making it easy for people to find what they need at my blog. I think the search feature I have is pretty good — I’ve always been able to find what I need to find, anyway. Would a tag cloud be of help to anyone? Or is it one more busy gizmo in the sidebar?

[tags]del.icio.us, tagging, technorati, flickr, wordpress, plugin[/tags]

EduBloggerCon 2007

I have been home from EduBloggerCon 2007 for about a half hour. First of all, the most exciting aspect of the conference was the opportunity to be around so many educators who are interested in and actively using Web 2.0 technologies in their classrooms. I am used to being very alone in this area, and I have to say that it was somewhat of a shock to my senses to hear so many educators talking about wikis, tagging, RSS, blogging, and myriad other applications. I think I realized for the first time that a great many educators actually are interested in Web 2.0. I have to admit I kept visualizing how energizing it would be to work in a school with these other educators.

The main feeling I was left with was just that — energy and excitement about the possibilities of bringing Web 2.0 into the classroom. I also met quite a few people I’ve only interacted with online, as well as some folks who are definitely going into my aggregator and blogroll.

I was fairly quiet at the conference today, and I hope no one interpreted that silence as disinterest. I was simply overwhelmed. In fact, I had never heard of ISTE before the conference today, and I had only heard of NECC a few days ago. I realize that if I am indeed serious about going into educational technology in the future, I probably need to check into joining ISTE and going to NECC when I have a chance in the future. I was sorry I couldn’t attend NECC, as it’s in Atlanta, but coming up with the registration fee on such short notice would have been too difficult.

Here’s the group picture (try right clicking the link, then opening it in a new window or tab so you can go back and forth) courtesy of Tim Stahmer. I am in the middle in the red (long gray hair!) standing to the right (as you see it) of Dave Warlick, whose face is more well-known than mine.

I want to especially acknowledge Steve Hargadon for organizing the whole thing (and for being so friendly when we were introduced), Sheryl Nussbaum-Beach for sort of taking me under her wing and making sure I met people, and Megan, Vinnie, Elizabeth, and Kevin for the great conversations.

I’ve been blogging here for nearly two years (two years on Monday!), but I realized today that the real conversation has just begun. It was the first time I had the opportunity to be around so many like minds.

[tags]edubloggercon07, web 2.0, technology, education, necc, iste[/tags]

Classroom 2.0

Steve Hargadon, who led this session, mentioned that the wiki associated with Classroom 2.0 hasn’t taken off as he hoped and wanted to “create an action plan for developing good repositories of lesson plans and training for the use of technology and Web 2.0 applications in the classroom.” Vicki Davis took notes: Classroom 2.0.

What do you think would make it easier for teachers to find ways to use Web 2.0 technologies in the classroom?

[tags]edubloggercon07, ebc07cr20, classroom 2.0[/tags]

Global Connections and Flat Classroom Ideals in a Web 2.0 World

One of the things that jumps out at me as I hear various stories (we are in a circle introducing ourselves) is that Flat Classroom Ideals are perfectly suited for UbD curriculum and unit planning. Many of the teachers mention that the curriculum as it currently stands in their schools impedes the introduction of the kinds of projects Julie Lindsay and Vicki Davis were able to construct.

What makes an effective international project? Julie and Vicki are interested in responses to this question.

Vinnie Vrotny says students need to “actively collaborate within in the same window of time.” How would this work with two (or more) groups spread across time zones?

Vicki mentions that a lot of the work they are going to have to do will necessarily be “asynchronous” simply because of time zone differences. Everyone seems to feel some synchronous collaboration is necessary.

Kristin Hokanson mentions the need for administrative support. Vicki says administrators need to “pull over to the side and let them pass” — administrators must get on board with Web 2.0 technology.

Take a look at the wiki Vicki created during the session: Global Connections.

One thing that strikes me upon reflecting over this session is the sheer excitement about teaching and learning I am seeing among teachers who are actively using Web 2.0 technologies in their classrooms. Having experienced it to a small degree myself, I cannot wait to try to be much more involved in the future.

[tags]edubloggercon07, ebc07gcfc, UbD[/tags]

Google Earth for Teaching

I’m in the second session of Edubloggercon. Our focus is using Google Earth for teacher curriculum and student projects.

Tom Woodward of Bionic Teaching described a project based on Whirligig. He mentioned he would like to see Google Earth integrated into the curriculum, specifically geography and history. It can be an “interactive 3-D notebook” that can really help students see places and events. He also mentioned using Swivel.

I had never heard of SketchUp until it was mentioned in this session. Vinnie Vrotny shared Fred Bartels’ work with SketchUp.

Lucy Gray mentioned her Google Earth Meme.

I’m interested in figuring out ways to integrate Google Earth into English. Any English teachers out there using it? How?

[tags]edubloggercon07, ebc07ge [/tags]

Expanding the Circle: Facilitating the Introduction of Educators to Web 2.0

I am Edubloggercon 2007 here in Atlanta, and I am in the first session — Expanding the Circle. How can we draw educators, reluctant or otherwise, into using Web 2.0 tools? Some educators are not just reluctant, but outright hostile about using these tools.

Some teachers do not see the value in using these technologies. Julia Osteen pointed out that in many cases, using Web 2.0 conflicts with some teachers’ beliefs about teaching. It doesn’t fit their style.

A huge issue for educators is time. When I presented a session on using blogs and wikis to my own colleagues, one of the first questions they asked me was how much time I spent doing this each day. The question inferred that these technologies take up so much time — is it really worth it, Dana? I gathered that they had already concluded they didn’t have time.

Steve Hargadon mentions that we are dealing with a wide variety of audiences — administration, teachers, parents, and students.

Tim Stahmer mentions that we can introduce teachers by showing them how many of the practices they are already buying into, i.e. journaling, are perfect for Web 2.0. He also adds that many teachers are afraid of allowing students to comment on their blogs. Is this insecurity?

Jim Gates asked how many of us have blogs blocked in our schools? Tim Stahmer mentions that Blogger is blocked in his. I don’t have as much of a problem with issues like this, as I teach in a private school, and I believe that many of these blanket blocking issues seem to crop up in larger schools and school districts, whereas smaller schools (like mine) still enable access to these sites. MySpace and Facebook are blocked at my school, mostly because the sites are seen as a distraction. Actually, when our educational technology teacher sent us an e-mail informing us of some blocking, he asked that we e-mail him if any sites we used were blocked. I found that Bloglines and my hosting provider were both blocked, so I e-mailed him, and he allowed access. Of course, I realize that with larger schools and districts, this involves much bureaucratic red tape. I think we initially blocked access to some sites when the big MySpace scare happened last year (and to be truthful, my husband contributed to our administration’s decision to block these sites because of a presentation he gave about being safe online to our students and faculty).

Our session ended on an open note, and it’s clear these issues are not resolved. Like Steve Hargadon said at the beginning of the session, however, I think many of us feel obligated to try to draw educators into Web 2.0 technologies because we ourselves have been transformed by them. I know my teaching practices have been transformed by the interactivity, feedback, and networking I have been able to do with other educators. I would like to draw my students into Web 2.0 even more next year.

[tags]edubloggercon07, ebc07ec[/tags]

Understanding by Design: Planning for Learning

Understanding by DesignI’d be willing to bet most teachers’ favorite part of planning is brainstorming creative ways to evaluate students. As Wiggins and McTighe noted earlier in Understanding by Design, we are often eager to skip all the way to Stage 3 — planning activities, assessments, and projects. I like that the authors do not necessarily argue against direct instruction, nor do they debate (at least not in this chapter — next chapter, we’ll see) about particular teaching methods (such as lecture versus Socratic seminar or other myriad variations). They argue instead that any type of instruction, like any other facet of the learning experience, needs to have a purpose leading to desired understandings:

Regardless of our teaching strengths, preferred style, or comfortable habits, the logic of backward design requires that we put to the test any proposed learning activity, including “teaching,” against the particulars of Stages 1 and 2. (192)

I think sometimes I like to stand in front of the class to hear myself talk. Well, not really, but I remember how freeing it felt this year to introduce alternative ways of structuring my class that kept me out of the front of the classroom so much. It’s telling, isn’t it, that the first thing my supervising teacher did after my first full day of instruction in her classroom was to offer me a cough drop? The thing is, when I haven’t planned as well as I should have, I typically fall back into that pattern of standing in front of the room and telling students what I know. And perhaps some of them learn some things, but I would definitely like my classes to be more engaging on a regular basis.

I have been refining a historical fiction assignment at the UbD Educators wiki for a few days, and I have received excellent feedback about the assignment. Wiggins and McTighe argue that the best designs are “engaging and effective” (195). In evaluating the historical fiction project through the characteristics of the best designs (196-197), I find that:

  • The project has a clear performance goal. Students will create a wiki designed to inform an audience about the historicity of a selection of historical fiction.
  • I definitely think it is hands-on. I will, in fact, not be doing much “teaching” aside from showing students a few basics about wikis (I also want them to kind of stumble around on their own and figure out how to do things).
  • I definitely think the project focuses on interesting and important ideas. Through this small lens of looking at historical fiction, I am asking students to evaluate what they see in print — to become critical about what they read.
  • I am not sure it has a real-world application in terms of looking like a real problem, but I do think it is a meaningful project.
  • What more powerful feedback system exists than a wiki? I can offer feedback right on the wiki page about how the students are proceeding as they go and guide them if they are going astray.
  • I think a multitude of ways to approach this project exist, and students are encouraged by the design of the project to approach the project in a variety of ways while ensuring they include a few required elements.
  • One area I find lacking is models. I am sure I can find some similar wikis to show students, however. In terms of modeling, with my SMART board, that will be easy. I can go through steps (like editing pages) right in front of them and demonstrate.
  • Students will also have time set aside for focused reflection in literary circles/book club meetings to discuss the novels and time to work together in the lab. It would not surprise me a bit if they wound up using Facebook to reflect and discuss, too.
  • Variety in methods? Well, they can do a variety of things with the assignment, but I did set certain requirements. Grouping? They will ultimately be choosing their groups based on which novel they want to read. I am savvy enough to know that some kids will pick the same book so they can work together. Variety of tasks? Yes, they do have to complete a variety of tasks in order to make a final project. However, this is ultimately a mini-unit that is somewhat outside the regular curriculum; therefore, I will not be setting other tasks such as quizzes or journals.
  • I do think that the wiki could be somewhat daunting an environment for taking risks. Students are putting themselves “out there” where others can look. Perhaps they can choose wiki sites that allow protection against unauthorized viewers until they feel “done.”
  • This project definitely puts me in the facilitator or coach role.
  • I do think the project requires a certain amount of immersion, at least more so than a typical classroom experience.
  • The project allows for students to see the big picture and be able to move back and forth between the parts and the whole.

Regarding the authors’ acronym WHERETO, I really think this mnemonic device would work better if the elements were simplified and began with the letter they represent. For example, “W — Ensure that students understand WHERE the unit is headed, and WHY” (197). Why not simply phrase it “W — WHERE are you going and WHY?”

I agree with Wiggins in McTighe that “[a]ll too rarely do students know where a lesson or unit is headed in terms of their own ultimate performance obligations” (198). I do think it will be helpful to tell students from day one what the ultimate goals are so they have them in mind as they work.

In terms of hooking students, I found the following true and disheartening:

[M]any students come to school somewhat unwilling (and not always expecting) to work hard. And they typically misunderstand that their job is to construct understanding as opposed to merely take in (and give back) information that teachers and texts provide. (2o2)

In fact, I have lamented this particular problem several times as I wrote my reflections on this book. We need to “make the knowledge gained usable in one’s thinking beyond the situation in which learning has occurred” (202).

I liked the idea of hooking students by “[p]resenting far-out theories, paradoxes, and incongruities” to “stimulate wonder and inquiry” (204). After all, the mystery genre is wildly popular among readers. Everyone likes a bit of a puzzle.

Clay was wondering if the book’s authors would address digital literacies:

In fact, with the advent of technology it has become possible to target lectures to emerging student interest and need, in a “just in time” way. Students can do a WebQuest, or go to a Web site for a lecture when certain background information is needed, so that class time can be better spent on a teacher-facilitated inquiry and coaching of performance. (205)

Of course, I have already argued that we might not see a great deal of Web 2.o practices in this book because 2006-2007 seems to have been the year that Web 2.0 “broke” into the collective consciousness and inspired various educational applications. I can’t help but think that Wiggins and McTighe have to be very excited about Web 2.0 and its implications for learning.

On pp. 214-215, the authors describe an inductive approach to learning a task that I think I can tweak and apply to a study of The Odyssey with the larger questions of

  • What can we learn about the roles of women as compared with those of men (I have never had a class yet that didn’t get really indignant at some point about Odysseus’s repeated infidelities in comparison with Penelope’s unwavering faithfulness)?
  • What can we learn about the notion of hospitality in ancient Greece (and the larger Mediterranean and Middle East) compared to our own?
  • What did the Greeks value in a hero? How is that different from what we value in a hero?
  • How does the structure of the epic facilitate storytelling?

I’m sure I could think of others, but I think I could construct a good unit just based on those four.

As a hook for my historical fiction unit, I can’t help but recall an episode of Terry Jones’ Medieval Lives in which he examines Richard I, Richard II, and Richard III of England. History has largely maligned Richard III, but Jones pointed out several very positive changes that resulted from his reign. I remember reading (I think it was connected to Sharon Kay Penman’s novel The Sunne in Splendour) that Henry VII had as much to gain from the the deaths of the Princes in the Tower as Richard III did. But history remembers Richard III as the great villain. So great, in fact, that no King Richard has since followed. We probably owe a great deal of our view of Richard to Shakespeare’s portrayal of him in Richard III. And let’s face it, Shakespeare, living during the reign of the last Tudor, would have had plenty of incentive to put Elizabeth’s grandfather in a positive light. I might be able to work up a bit of a story to illustrate how historical fiction can impact the way we view historical personages through this example.

So let’s take a look at my historical fiction project through the WHERETO framework.

  • W — The ultimate goal is clear. Students will seek to determine what one can learn from historical fiction, how reading it is different from reading history texts or historical documents, and how reliable historical fiction is.
  • H — I think perhaps the King Richard III story might do for a hook if it is presented in an appropriate way.
  • E — Students will engage in and explore the big ideas through literature circle/book club discussions and research of historicity, culminating in presentation of what they learn.
  • R — Students will revise and reflect as they learn more through research and receive feedback.
  • E — Students can complete a self-evaluation in the conclusion or I can make it a separate piece. In fact, that might be better; if students have to publish their reflections, they might feel uncomfortable. I feel comfortable reflecting honestly about myself online, but I realize my students might not.
  • T — My students are all tracked. This is a college prep class. I think a wide variety of approaches will enable students to tailor the assignment themselves, but the homogeneity of my students will perhaps render tailoring for different levels a nonissue. Of course tailoring for personalization will be important.
  • O — I think the sequence of learning activities will work well toward building the desired understandings. In fact, I envision this activity being a semester-long inquiry with little work inside a class (literature circle meetings perhaps every 3 to 4 weeks, class time to familiarize students with wikis). Aside from that, students can do the work outside class. In fact, they can even do the group work part of the assignment online on a hidden page of the wiki.

Work Cited: Wiggins, Grant, and Jay McTighe. Understanding by Design. Expanded 2nd Edition. Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 2005.

[tags]Grant Wiggins, Jay McTighe, UbD, Understanding by Design, curriculum, assessment, planning[/tags]

Issues, ideas, and discussion in English Education and Technology