Sorting the puzzle together

Backward design, as an introductory chapter to Understanding by Design provides detailed guidance about the process of planning and designing courses and classes, and the respective post reflection that this procedure ought to have.

The chapter starts by a review of what teachers can and can not do when designing a course. It is compulsory to follow the guidelines provided by the authorities in order to achieve what students should know and be able to do. Also, we need to consider the different students' needs and how to reach all students in the classroom. Yet, do teachers take into account them? Do school authorities know about them, and talk about them with their staff? How are they considered in the year planning? The key issue here is that there is little (if so) room to analyse the guidelines and put them into practice in order to satisfy students, school and authorities' needs.

On the other hand, teacher own reflection about the teacher and learning process is almost absent. Teachers do not reflect in / on / about their planning and classroom practices. Therefore, the actual result is never revisited and the vicious circle starts rolling again.

Now that classes are almost over and December and January are used to evaluate the year results and plan the next academic year, it is the right time to sit and reflect on how effective the classes and results were, and go further than the numbers. How much of that 7 represents understanding? Yet, how willing will be teachers to do this kind of analysis? Do school authorities know how to do it?

When doing the year planning or a class plan, do we actually decide the objectives of every single activity? Do we have a plan B, and C? How do we actually expect it to consolidate and reach understanding? It seems that most classroom practices are basically drilling to cover contents in a fixed period of time and - crossing fingers - students will get the gist out of it.

Finally, I would like to refer to the emphasis on methodology and evaluation. One of the aspects which is being taken into account is universities' accreditation is evidencing students' learning. Therefore, course programs have to have explicitly how that is planned and what teachers plan on doing with students' achievement. It encourages formative assessment and action research become main actors into the students' learning process. More than having more things to mark, it is reflecting on what students have done regarding the course objectives and the expected outcomes which have been drawn.

This involves that all actors of the teaching and learning process commit 100% into it, in order to sort the puzzle together.

Mind your words and goals

Rubrics play a key role when validity and criteria are discussed. To produce a good rubric takes a long time of trial and error, and it is related to the establishing of goals. Without clear goals which are known by students, we cannot anticipate to obtain good results. First lesson: establish clear instructions and a transparent system of evaluation when it is not an objective test, and if it is, even clearer.

Holistic rubrics do not look into detail students process, but just the final product. Yet, analytical rubrics show clearly of what it is expected and delivered. In addition, an advantage is that they give feedback to large classes without the actual oral feedback. Thus, students develop autonomy when reading what their outcome was and why.

One of the main constrains of rubrics is that their quality can be questioned after the evaluation has taken place. For that reason, their elaboration has to be very careful.
It would be ideal that teachers meet in July or December meet to discuss, analyse and improve their rubrics in order to progress in the quality of their rubrics.
The latter is better to be done in teams of teachers, in order to unify the criteria. Thus, more validity in the processes is reached.

An everyday example of assessing understanding and gathering evidence are reading comprehension tests with open questions. On the one hand, quality of understanding is assessed, but also quality of performance. In language development, there are little chances of taking students’ work in order to find out their weakest points.
Another aspect is performance assessment as a great opportunity to gather materials to be analysed and obtain the whole picture of the process.

Teacher beliefs are also relevant. Students’ outcomes are very much related to teachers’ expectations of students, and motivation. The latter is usually the only reason for students to participate when there is a reward. If there is no reward or prize, students do not do anything. Thus, there is no understanding.

Putting in somebody else's shoes

Chapter 5 provides practical and straight-to-the-point procedures so as to make the most of assessment of the learning process and the expected understanding.

Only written tests as means of assessment are too limited to realize understanding. Yet, by broadening the range of activities which pursue the same objective and provide evidence of understanding, the teaching and learning process is enriched. Our role of teachers as task designers is to be adapted to assessors, assuming a role that we might not be that familiar with.

Hence, learning by doing is highly effective in our students. Wiggins points out the ‘doing of a problem’ as means of assessment, through undergoing different processes and experimenting. Albeit, this kind of activities have to be carefully planned in order to go through different thinking skills and be able to raise evidence of the processes. When the latter has been achieved successfully, there is understanding.

As guidelines, the three basic questions help to organize our work as assessors by questioning the kinds of evidence we need to find; questioning student responses in order to determine if the expected results were accomplished; and if the evidence gathered allows us to conclude students’ knowledge, skill, or understanding.

In so far as GRASPS and the six facets (explain, interpret, apply by, see from the point of view of, empathize with, reflect on) build understanding through the efficient collection of evidence, and can be used as a rubric to measure the level of understanding of a learner process. On the one hand, GRAPS provides the purpose, the setting and the expected steps of the process to be followed. On the other hand, the six facets put forward the progression from various points of views which raise evidence of the procedure.

To wrap up, the question now is if we teachers know how to do this, and actually put this into practice in the classroom? How willing are teachers to go beyond the simple tasks and putting into the assessors’ shoes?

Finally, this Calvin & Hobbes's strip summarises how important evidence and explicitness in our classroom are:

Choosing the correct target

When teachers start designing our annual planning, there are several aspects to be taken into account. One of them, are those goals we expect our children to achieve at the end of the academic year. However, they are usually higher and therefore not plausible to be targeted.

Thus, the main issues which arise are how we choose the aims, and what we do in our classrooms to have our children achieve them.

First of all, we have to bear in mind the goals which the government states in their programs, so we can outline what it is expected for every level and the means to do so.

Then, as part of the means, it is definitely a must to teach our children how to learn and assess the process of learning at all times, providing effective and permanent feedback. Evidencing understanding to our children is also a way to encourage them in the understanding process. On the other hand, integration of contents becomes a need among the different areas of learning and with EFL. Having our children make connections promote higher thinking abilities and transference: evaluation, analysis, application, and even creation through the big ideas.

Big ideas, as defined by Wiggins, are definitely the best tool to have our students understanding, considering their pedagogical power.

Big ideas have to be tackled and brought down to earth, in order to be manageable by both teachers and students. Students are to know the process, the different steps, the causes and effects which belong to different areas of learning, in order to fulfill the expected outcomes proposed in a learning unit and/or activity.

Wiggins also mentions representative challenges as a means to reach understanding. Supporting and boosting learning to explore new contents from the inside, following even unknown processes. The latter have to be clear and explicit in terms of what it is expected and how it has to be pursued. In addition, assessment, if included, has to be explicited beforehand.

All in all, Wiggins puts forward a test for teachers in both macro and micro level. The former, when seeing the scope of what we desire and look for in our learners at the end of a process - based on a bigger scope: what it is desired by the authorities: the policy makers and curriculum designers. On the other hand, the micro level, which is the classroom practice. What do we want our students to do in a class? Are our goals clear and attainable? How do we guide, provide and encourage students to go through the right track to do so? Finally, what is our role to do so?

Lots of Questions....

Chapter 5: Essential Questions: Doorways to Understanding

In this chapter, the author makes us reflect about essential questions enhance better learning and real understanding.
Wiggins is very clear about the importance of questions, since they stimulate thought, spark more questions as they reach the big ideas, and offer real transfer possibilities. In addition, they present students the possibility of bridging a gap between the content and their reality, engaging them with the subjects.
Regarding the lessons, Wiggins suggests that teachers’ planning should start from the answers which want to be reached. Thus, a family of questions lead to the aimed answer and demand the building of the knowledge by the students themselves. The phrasing of essential questions is a complex process which has to consider the purpose of the questions, the audience and the impact which they aim at. Consequently, topical and overarching questions have to be phrased in such a way that critical thinking and inquiry are elicited.
Whilst motivated students are to learn how to formulate essential questions, their own questions reach different set of learners, and elicit different learner styles. Last, but not least, students perceive the building of their own knowledge. Regarding the latter, the teachers’ role is fundamental as the classroom is a space which provides the confidence to inquiry and phrase questions. As a consequence, the discussion is fruitful, and arrival to important understandings is reached.
As a reflection about teaching training, I can only recall a couple of teachers who were able to state essential questions and make the class an opportunity to inquire and develop critical thinking skills. It is certainly an issue which, if done, would entail learner centred lessons, students’ engagement, and better learning, which - at the end of the day - is the main goal everyone is looking for.

This is what I understand

Understanding by Design - G. Wiggins

Chapter 2: Understanding Understanding

When we think of school education, there is a series of lacks which are evidence at the level of classroom teaching and the quality of students’ learning.
True understanding is the final product of a well planned process which has been carefully developed and thought by a teacher.

Understanding is about going beyond the information given.

Considering Bloom’s taxonomy regarding cognitive skills, the main issue which arises is that students are usually asked in the first two categories, i.e. knowledge and comprehension, which do not consider high order thinking. Therefore, their results reflect knowledge, which is short-termed. However, when higher order thinking is required, i.e. application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation and creation (the latter has been added lately), learners usually struggle to success if there has not been a guided process in order to achieve them.
Consequently, teachers can pursue the achievement of the desired understanding by engaging students’ previous knowledge, applying it within known and unknown situations. Learn by doing.

Understanding thus involves meeting a challenge for thought.
It implies the ability to ask and answer many why-questions. Hence, there is an avoidance of randomly correct responses. When students themselves are able to perform the latter successfully, the goal is attained. Nonetheless, it is a cyclical process, i.e. it has to be restarted as many times as necessary by all the educational participants.

We cannot cover concepts and expect them thereby to be understood; we have to uncover their value – the facts that concepts are the result of inquiry and argument.

The main concern is to know and be aware of the mental process to reach a product, i.e. understanding. Children are to be able to provide evidence of the output and intake of the means, and so do teachers. It is certainly a conjoined task.