I like the basic idea of backward design and the reasoning as to why teachers should use it. Teaching with the end in mind and beginning instruction with this goal at the forefront is a good thought. I actually like creating lessons in this format. It gives me the chance to really reflect on the lesson and the reasons why I am teaching it in the first place. So often we teach something because it is in the book or because the standards say to and not because we are actually thinking about what will be important for young learners to know when they are adults.
The only criticism I have of UbD is that it is very time consuming and I cannot imagine creating lessons in this format for everything that I teach. I think that it is good practice to think about your end results and what you want to accomplish before you begin, however, I do not think that it is realistic to imagine every lesson being planned in this manner down to the smallest details. The only question that I have is if there are districts that actually expect teachers to follow UbD strictly when planning lessons?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Beleive it or not, my middle schooldoes. They have also been using it for a few years and it hgas become embedded in their praice. (At least the goals and big ideas part).
We use this type of design together in my gifted department. We design the essential questions and leave the activity and assessment up to the individual teachers. We come together as a district with our children and share the products we've made and talk about our learning. I think any lesson plan writing is hard at first but moves quickly as we get used to the process.
I agree that the process is time consuming yet very effective. Perhaps you could use a gradual process where you redesigned one or two units a year using this process. After a few years you would the entire curriculum covered using all of the reflection and creativity you enjoyed in this activity.
Post a Comment