What was new for you about UBD? What questions do you have? What are you unsure about? Where in your life outside of education have you used a UBD concept?
Before reading these articles, I honestly don’t believe that I’ve really learned anything about UbD. I might have heard about it when someone mentioned it, but I never knew anything about it in great detail. After reading about it, it really opened my eyes to a new way of organizing and preparing for lessons and units. I haven’t had much experience making lesson plans, and I’m sure everyone has their own way of doing it, but I can see that UbD is definitely a great way of preparing a unit. It seems to be more work, but it is more beneficial to everyone in the end because it is not just following the content and learning skills; it is much more focused. Through class, I’ve been realizing more and more that there should be a clear reason for everything we do, because otherwise we are wasting our time and our students’ time. Therefore, we should know what we’re working toward from the beginning, figure out how we will know that we’ve reached that goal, and plan out how to work toward it. It seems like more work in the beginning, but makes everything much easier along the way because if you start with a question, then everyone knows what their working toward, and so students are not just showing up to class and following along; they have a goal. Also, through answering an essential question, we can teach the content and skills that we need to teach along the way. In this way, students are learning what they need to learn as set out by the curriculum, and learning skills and asking questions that can transfer and help them in other areas of their lives. In the Wilhelm chapters, I remember ranking teaching strategies and learning experiences from favorite to least favorite, and the ones that were my favorite were the ones where the students remember learning skills and asking the bigger questions, but they don’t necessarily remember the facts and the content of the class. Facts can be looked up, especially now with smartphones and Google, what can’t be looked up is how think critically about a topic, and scratching underneath the surface of a question. It is these skills I want my students leaving my classroom knowing and understanding, not the date of end of the Civil War, and I think UbD can help achieve that.
I think it was Einstein who said anything that can be looked up is not worth remembering, and I find that that idea embodies the argument you have laid out here, Emma. I agree with you whole-heartedly; it is much more important for students to recognize the factors that lead to the Civil War, the effects that the War has had on America, and that those effects can still be felt to this day, than it is for students to memorize the date of the Battle of Gettysburg. We, as educators, should not attempt to force our students into becoming living encyclopedias of our subjects (however tempting it may be to do so) because doing so is not only impractical, it's unnecessary- there simply isn't an everyday need for most students to be masters of every facet of our subject. However, students will eventually have to be well-rounded, competent citizens in a democratic society, and making sure they are ready for that reality IS necessary. That's where UbD and all those larger ideas come into play.
That's a great quote by Einstein Chris! Never has that been more true than in today's world where we carry access to Google everywhere we go in the form of our phones. Emma, I think those of us who aspire to teach social studies/history have the best curriculum to use UbD. I'm such a strong proponent of indirect instruction in our concentration, and it certainly seems that this method will work very well when designing units or lessons in our field. The best learning always comes from within, and if guided correctly, that is what we are striving to achieve. I feel that this method is directly for us, as I'm not sure this will help anyone memorize the Pythagorean Theorem. The most important thing we can teach students is how to think for themselves, and how to critically examine everything they read, see, and are taught. Especially in history, where what we teach, on any given day, may or may not be true depending on the vantage point you witnessed it from.
Matt, I agree with you that as future history teachers, indirect instruction and UbD is going to work well for us. Ultimately, the children we teach are going to go out in the real world, and memorizing facts is not going to be of any use to them. We need to mold them into critical thinkers who can look for deeper meanings and make connections. By starting with a big picture, or a question we want answered, I think designing our lessons will be more well rounded. I think students will see why we are doing certain things, and want to reach the end of the lesson and learn the answer to that question.
An interesting thing happened as I was reading the material on UbD, I found that, completely by accident, this is actually how I designed my unit for 406, and also how I designed my indirect instruction lesson for that course. I may be somewhat of an idealist, but I believe that the most important thing we can teach students is how to think for themselves. That is, how to critically look at the information we are given. Understanding, as it is referred to in the text, to me encompasses approximately the three top levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. This should be the goal in all subjects, but more so in Social Studies and English, as they are not exact sciences. The most helpful thing I read was in module A, where it say "start with a hook and immerse the student in a genuine problem/issue/challenge. To me this makes perfect sense, why wouldn't you want to design a unit or lesson the same way that you design a successful movie. In the movies they call it an "attention getter." The idea is to grab the audience (in this case, student's) attention from the very beginning and suck them right into the story. I have long told people who tell me "I hated history class" that it should be much like story time if it's done right. My main question related to UbD is in regards to time. I feel like this is a great way to capture real knowledge for the student, but given the standards we have to teach by, I can see how teachers will disregard this model in the interest of squeezing in a little more test prep, especially in those areas where there livelihood depends on it. There doesn't seem to be enough time to teach each unit in this form in 180 days. Since test prep, among other things, is a necessary evil so to speak, how does a teacher decide what is truly the most important thing(s) they are going to teach this year?
I remember enjoying your lessons Matt. You were very methodical and organized, as well as open with what you were trying to show us; I found that it was a nice reprieve from a number of lessons that I had on similar subjects while I was in public schools. I don't know why so many teachers apparently feel compelled to either not have a "point" while teaching or feel like they need to disguise the point of their lessons so that it isn't readily apparent to students. I think that the method of teaching doesn't maximize the potential of students, which is why I found UdB so refreshing. I agree with you when you talk about teachers feeling pressured to "cover" material for the sake of saying they covered it, and figuring out what to leave out will definitely be a hard task for all of us. That's what we're in school for, though; figuring all this out. Hopefully we'll be okay!
I have also always thought of history like a story, and I think that we can definitely capture more students' attentions by portraying that way, because there is no point to teaching a lesson if the students are not actually paying attention. No one wants to be the monotonous teacher in Ferris Bueller, plus starting with an "attention getter" gets students more excited to learn, more engaged and makes the overall atmosphere of the class better. However, in regards to time, I think that by working towards that main essential question we can fit in everything we need to for that unit. We can change up the ways in which we teach the content and the activities the students need to do to complete the lessons and therefore cover the knowledge and skills that are required by the standards while still working toward that overarching question. Also, I believe that we teach students to think, then we don't need as much test prep because they are already much more prepared than those students who are unfortunately taught toward the test.
Although I was unfamiliar with the term UbD, the central ideas behind the theory aligned with my own personal thoughts and views on education that I have slowly formed not only in college, but throughout my academic career. It is, after all, the way I have been trained at every job I have ever had; you are told what the end results of your training will be and what will be expected of you, and then you begin the training process with periodic assessment. I have always appreciated the middle school model of every discipline incorporating unit "themes" into their courses, with each teacher broaching those themes in a variety of ways specific to their subject at roughly the same time. I have always found that connecting material to broader ideas or current concepts/events make it much easier for students to grow comfortable with the material. Especially in subjects like English or Social Studies, having students understand the underlying themes that we as educators are attempting to teach them through our materials will be much more useful to them in the future than knowing the specifics of an individual novel or historical event; I liked the quote from the first chapter where a teacher bluntly stated that if our students don't need to know it as adults, it's nonessential material. I feel like, despite my agreement with this notion, this concept goes against the sentiment of the vast majority of the teachers I had growing up in school, despite UbD being a relatively old concept. Until my senior year, when I was taking all AP courses, it didn't feel like there was an "end-goal" in the courses I was taking, that teachers were just going through the motions laid out for them without considering how we were to make sense of everything. I wish that this theory had been more widely implemented in my own schooling, as I know far too many people who grew very disenchanted with the current model of teaching because it lacked the very thing UbD calls for all educators to have in their lessons; a point. I want my students to recognize that there is a point to all this, that there is an end goal. I refuse to be a "busy-work" teacher. Although I feel very strongly about this theory in terms of my own subject, I was a little skeptical of its argument concerning its use in the "skill-oriented" subjects, like math and physical educator. I think it's very possible for teachers of both subjects to engage students in meaningful ways- even those students who dislike those subjects- but I don't see how either subject could have meaningful connections to broader themes the way the humanities do, at least not without some serious effort on the part of the teacher themselves.
I had similar experiences to yours in school. I remember being in European History and learning about the English royalty, then the French royalty, and then the Russian royalty, and I still don't fully know why. It may be the reason some people think that history, and other humanities courses, are unimportant, because they do not see the point. As teachers of the humanities we are struggling through a society that is heavily focused on STEM, and even though STEAM becoming popular, some people just don't understand how the arts and humanities are as important as math and science. UbD definitely gives us a way of illustrating that, because if we use UbD, we can establish that "end-goal," and help both our students and ourselves understand why we teach the things we teach, and what higher order thinking and understanding our subjects can lead to.
That is a great point you made in regards to on the job training in the "real world." I have a more cynical friend who teaches algebra and he has stated on more than one occasion, publicly and privately, that the purpose of school is to create better employees in the work force, and not necessarily the attainment of knowledge. He also states that the reason we learn the higher grade levels of math is to teach students the importance of "order of operations", a concept that is imperative to all grade levels of math at the secondary level. I'm not sure I agree with him, but I am sure he would agree with your point. The other point you made about making sure there is an end point to each lesson is very good. The more classes I take, the more I have started to notice that the courses I seem to struggle in are the ones that don't seem to have an obvious goal. Some of the courses I've taken it's been 6 weeks into the class before I realize exactly (and it's almost never EXACTLY) what the teacher expects me to be taking out of the lesson. Some teacher's are very good at laying out their expectations, while others you may have to figure it out on your own. It is always easier for me, and I would guess most students feel the same, if I know exactly what I'm supposed to grasping. The sooner I figure it out, the better I always do.
Chris, I also feel as though I have always done better in a class, job, and even sports where there is an obvious end goal. I think that as a future educator, the idea of always having a reason for something is really important. I do think with certain subjects and concepts, memorization is a good method, but not with material or information that can be accessed at the press of a button or that requires deeper thinking. I think when we can induce analysis of material or encourage students to think for themselves, we are giving them the opportunity to become a more engaged student, and better learners.
I wasn't very familiar with the concept of UbD before reading these texts. I think it is very logical system. I do remember in high school having to connect different assignments to a set of standards and having to write about how the standards were met in the assignments for the digital portfolio. Though this does make an end goal clear to the students, I got the impression that these standards were tacked onto the assignments instead of the other way around, indicating most of my teachers were probably not using UbD. I think I'd like to plan units using UbD.
Before reading this, I had some experience with UbD that I didn’t even realize. In my MLED 320, we wrote lesson plans and constructed a unit. I had started off with a big picture question that I wanted answered, and slowly broke it down, trying to decide what was important enough to try and cover. The dwindling down of information can be very tough, but I think it helps us get back to the big picture. One thing that I also read and really appreciated was the idea of teaching for understanding. So often, and even in my own school experience, teachers tend to teach facts and ideas that can just be recalled for an assessment. While this information is important, is it really necessary to simply memorize facts or dates? I wish they had told us why we were learning about certain things, or the reasoning behind it. To understand the material and make deeper connections with it is honestly more important to me as a student and as a future teacher. One quote that really stood out to me in the reading was “Authentic learning experiences shift a student from the role of a passive knowledge receiver into a more active role as a constructor of meaning.” I think when students have intimate experiences with the material, they tend to remember it better, become more engaged, and construct their own meaning with it. When students can make connections with their world to the material, learn to think outside the box or just think for themselves, they tend to understand it better and hopefully remember and enjoy the material. And isn’t that the ultimate big picture?
Before reading these articles, I honestly don’t believe that I’ve really learned anything about UbD. I might have heard about it when someone mentioned it, but I never knew anything about it in great detail. After reading about it, it really opened my eyes to a new way of organizing and preparing for lessons and units. I haven’t had much experience making lesson plans, and I’m sure everyone has their own way of doing it, but I can see that UbD is definitely a great way of preparing a unit. It seems to be more work, but it is more beneficial to everyone in the end because it is not just following the content and learning skills; it is much more focused.
ReplyDeleteThrough class, I’ve been realizing more and more that there should be a clear reason for everything we do, because otherwise we are wasting our time and our students’ time. Therefore, we should know what we’re working toward from the beginning, figure out how we will know that we’ve reached that goal, and plan out how to work toward it. It seems like more work in the beginning, but makes everything much easier along the way because if you start with a question, then everyone knows what their working toward, and so students are not just showing up to class and following along; they have a goal. Also, through answering an essential question, we can teach the content and skills that we need to teach along the way. In this way, students are learning what they need to learn as set out by the curriculum, and learning skills and asking questions that can transfer and help them in other areas of their lives.
In the Wilhelm chapters, I remember ranking teaching strategies and learning experiences from favorite to least favorite, and the ones that were my favorite were the ones where the students remember learning skills and asking the bigger questions, but they don’t necessarily remember the facts and the content of the class. Facts can be looked up, especially now with smartphones and Google, what can’t be looked up is how think critically about a topic, and scratching underneath the surface of a question. It is these skills I want my students leaving my classroom knowing and understanding, not the date of end of the Civil War, and I think UbD can help achieve that.
I think it was Einstein who said anything that can be looked up is not worth remembering, and I find that that idea embodies the argument you have laid out here, Emma. I agree with you whole-heartedly; it is much more important for students to recognize the factors that lead to the Civil War, the effects that the War has had on America, and that those effects can still be felt to this day, than it is for students to memorize the date of the Battle of Gettysburg. We, as educators, should not attempt to force our students into becoming living encyclopedias of our subjects (however tempting it may be to do so) because doing so is not only impractical, it's unnecessary- there simply isn't an everyday need for most students to be masters of every facet of our subject. However, students will eventually have to be well-rounded, competent citizens in a democratic society, and making sure they are ready for that reality IS necessary. That's where UbD and all those larger ideas come into play.
DeleteThat's a great quote by Einstein Chris! Never has that been more true than in today's world where we carry access to Google everywhere we go in the form of our phones. Emma, I think those of us who aspire to teach social studies/history have the best curriculum to use UbD. I'm such a strong proponent of indirect instruction in our concentration, and it certainly seems that this method will work very well when designing units or lessons in our field. The best learning always comes from within, and if guided correctly, that is what we are striving to achieve. I feel that this method is directly for us, as I'm not sure this will help anyone memorize the Pythagorean Theorem. The most important thing we can teach students is how to think for themselves, and how to critically examine everything they read, see, and are taught. Especially in history, where what we teach, on any given day, may or may not be true depending on the vantage point you witnessed it from.
DeleteMatt, I agree with you that as future history teachers, indirect instruction and UbD is going to work well for us. Ultimately, the children we teach are going to go out in the real world, and memorizing facts is not going to be of any use to them. We need to mold them into critical thinkers who can look for deeper meanings and make connections. By starting with a big picture, or a question we want answered, I think designing our lessons will be more well rounded. I think students will see why we are doing certain things, and want to reach the end of the lesson and learn the answer to that question.
DeleteAn interesting thing happened as I was reading the material on UbD, I found that, completely by accident, this is actually how I designed my unit for 406, and also how I designed my indirect instruction lesson for that course. I may be somewhat of an idealist, but I believe that the most important thing we can teach students is how to think for themselves. That is, how to critically look at the information we are given. Understanding, as it is referred to in the text, to me encompasses approximately the three top levels of Bloom's Taxonomy. This should be the goal in all subjects, but more so in Social Studies and English, as they are not exact sciences. The most helpful thing I read was in module A, where it say "start with a hook and immerse the student in a genuine problem/issue/challenge. To me this makes perfect sense, why wouldn't you want to design a unit or lesson the same way that you design a successful movie. In the movies they call it an "attention getter." The idea is to grab the audience (in this case, student's) attention from the very beginning and suck them right into the story. I have long told people who tell me "I hated history class" that it should be much like story time if it's done right. My main question related to UbD is in regards to time. I feel like this is a great way to capture real knowledge for the student, but given the standards we have to teach by, I can see how teachers will disregard this model in the interest of squeezing in a little more test prep, especially in those areas where there livelihood depends on it. There doesn't seem to be enough time to teach each unit in this form in 180 days. Since test prep, among other things, is a necessary evil so to speak, how does a teacher decide what is truly the most important thing(s) they are going to teach this year?
ReplyDeleteI remember enjoying your lessons Matt. You were very methodical and organized, as well as open with what you were trying to show us; I found that it was a nice reprieve from a number of lessons that I had on similar subjects while I was in public schools. I don't know why so many teachers apparently feel compelled to either not have a "point" while teaching or feel like they need to disguise the point of their lessons so that it isn't readily apparent to students. I think that the method of teaching doesn't maximize the potential of students, which is why I found UdB so refreshing. I agree with you when you talk about teachers feeling pressured to "cover" material for the sake of saying they covered it, and figuring out what to leave out will definitely be a hard task for all of us. That's what we're in school for, though; figuring all this out. Hopefully we'll be okay!
DeleteI have also always thought of history like a story, and I think that we can definitely capture more students' attentions by portraying that way, because there is no point to teaching a lesson if the students are not actually paying attention. No one wants to be the monotonous teacher in Ferris Bueller, plus starting with an "attention getter" gets students more excited to learn, more engaged and makes the overall atmosphere of the class better. However, in regards to time, I think that by working towards that main essential question we can fit in everything we need to for that unit. We can change up the ways in which we teach the content and the activities the students need to do to complete the lessons and therefore cover the knowledge and skills that are required by the standards while still working toward that overarching question. Also, I believe that we teach students to think, then we don't need as much test prep because they are already much more prepared than those students who are unfortunately taught toward the test.
DeleteAlthough I was unfamiliar with the term UbD, the central ideas behind the theory aligned with my own personal thoughts and views on education that I have slowly formed not only in college, but throughout my academic career. It is, after all, the way I have been trained at every job I have ever had; you are told what the end results of your training will be and what will be expected of you, and then you begin the training process with periodic assessment. I have always appreciated the middle school model of every discipline incorporating unit "themes" into their courses, with each teacher broaching those themes in a variety of ways specific to their subject at roughly the same time. I have always found that connecting material to broader ideas or current concepts/events make it much easier for students to grow comfortable with the material. Especially in subjects like English or Social Studies, having students understand the underlying themes that we as educators are attempting to teach them through our materials will be much more useful to them in the future than knowing the specifics of an individual novel or historical event; I liked the quote from the first chapter where a teacher bluntly stated that if our students don't need to know it as adults, it's nonessential material. I feel like, despite my agreement with this notion, this concept goes against the sentiment of the vast majority of the teachers I had growing up in school, despite UbD being a relatively old concept. Until my senior year, when I was taking all AP courses, it didn't feel like there was an "end-goal" in the courses I was taking, that teachers were just going through the motions laid out for them without considering how we were to make sense of everything. I wish that this theory had been more widely implemented in my own schooling, as I know far too many people who grew very disenchanted with the current model of teaching because it lacked the very thing UbD calls for all educators to have in their lessons; a point. I want my students to recognize that there is a point to all this, that there is an end goal. I refuse to be a "busy-work" teacher. Although I feel very strongly about this theory in terms of my own subject, I was a little skeptical of its argument concerning its use in the "skill-oriented" subjects, like math and physical educator. I think it's very possible for teachers of both subjects to engage students in meaningful ways- even those students who dislike those subjects- but I don't see how either subject could have meaningful connections to broader themes the way the humanities do, at least not without some serious effort on the part of the teacher themselves.
ReplyDeleteI had similar experiences to yours in school. I remember being in European History and learning about the English royalty, then the French royalty, and then the Russian royalty, and I still don't fully know why. It may be the reason some people think that history, and other humanities courses, are unimportant, because they do not see the point. As teachers of the humanities we are struggling through a society that is heavily focused on STEM, and even though STEAM becoming popular, some people just don't understand how the arts and humanities are as important as math and science. UbD definitely gives us a way of illustrating that, because if we use UbD, we can establish that "end-goal," and help both our students and ourselves understand why we teach the things we teach, and what higher order thinking and understanding our subjects can lead to.
DeleteThat is a great point you made in regards to on the job training in the "real world." I have a more cynical friend who teaches algebra and he has stated on more than one occasion, publicly and privately, that the purpose of school is to create better employees in the work force, and not necessarily the attainment of knowledge. He also states that the reason we learn the higher grade levels of math is to teach students the importance of "order of operations", a concept that is imperative to all grade levels of math at the secondary level. I'm not sure I agree with him, but I am sure he would agree with your point. The other point you made about making sure there is an end point to each lesson is very good. The more classes I take, the more I have started to notice that the courses I seem to struggle in are the ones that don't seem to have an obvious goal. Some of the courses I've taken it's been 6 weeks into the class before I realize exactly (and it's almost never EXACTLY) what the teacher expects me to be taking out of the lesson. Some teacher's are very good at laying out their expectations, while others you may have to figure it out on your own. It is always easier for me, and I would guess most students feel the same, if I know exactly what I'm supposed to grasping. The sooner I figure it out, the better I always do.
DeleteChris, I also feel as though I have always done better in a class, job, and even sports where there is an obvious end goal. I think that as a future educator, the idea of always having a reason for something is really important. I do think with certain subjects and concepts, memorization is a good method, but not with material or information that can be accessed at the press of a button or that requires deeper thinking. I think when we can induce analysis of material or encourage students to think for themselves, we are giving them the opportunity to become a more engaged student, and better learners.
DeleteI wasn't very familiar with the concept of UbD before reading these texts. I think it is very logical system. I do remember in high school having to connect different assignments to a set of standards and having to write about how the standards were met in the assignments for the digital portfolio. Though this does make an end goal clear to the students, I got the impression that these standards were tacked onto the assignments instead of the other way around, indicating most of my teachers were probably not using UbD. I think I'd like to plan units using UbD.
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this, I had some experience with UbD that I didn’t even realize. In my MLED 320, we wrote lesson plans and constructed a unit. I had started off with a big picture question that I wanted answered, and slowly broke it down, trying to decide what was important enough to try and cover. The dwindling down of information can be very tough, but I think it helps us get back to the big picture.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that I also read and really appreciated was the idea of teaching for understanding. So often, and even in my own school experience, teachers tend to teach facts and ideas that can just be recalled for an assessment. While this information is important, is it really necessary to simply memorize facts or dates? I wish they had told us why we were learning about certain things, or the reasoning behind it. To understand the material and make deeper connections with it is honestly more important to me as a student and as a future teacher. One quote that really stood out to me in the reading was “Authentic learning experiences shift a student from the role of a passive knowledge receiver into a more active role as a constructor of meaning.” I think when students have intimate experiences with the material, they tend to remember it better, become more engaged, and construct their own meaning with it. When students can make connections with their world to the material, learn to think outside the box or just think for themselves, they tend to understand it better and hopefully remember and enjoy the material. And isn’t that the ultimate big picture?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete