April 5, 2013
The third chapter of Understanding by Design is one of the most provocative as it focuses on the very definition and range of meanings of the word “understanding”. It is a rather nebulous term and many educators use it to convey different ways of “understanding”. So what does mean? Does it mean to internalize knowledge? To grasp the core essence? To be able to make connections later on?
(Gardner, 1991) “The test of understanding involves neither repetition of information learned nor performance of practices mastered. Rather it involves the appropriate application of concepts and principles to questions/problems that are newly posed. “
The book’s authors stress the importance of clarifying this term not for the sake of semantics but because conceptual clarity is important. What is interesting about “understanding” as they define it is that it is different from knowledge (regardless of how vast it is) AND performance.
read more »
April 2, 2013
*As mentioned in my previous post, I am reading Understanding by Design and will post the most interesting bits here as a way to remember and reflect.*
“In the absence of overarching questions, students are left with rhetorical questions in a march through coverage or activities.
Questions not only focus learning, they also make all subject-knowledge possible. If students are to understand what is known, they need to simulate or recreate some of the inquiry by which the knowledge was created. Such an approach is, after all, how the pioneer came to understand the unknown: asking questions and testing ideas.
i.e. Why is it true that a triangle always has 180 degrees? How can we know for sure?
Types of questions (examples):
- Essential question: Must a story have a moral, heroes and villains?
- Unit question: Is Huck Finn a hero?
- *Entry-point questions for understanding
*Learners need concrete and meaningful experiences, problems, applications, and shifts of perspective to enable an important question to arise. Plunking a big idea at the beginning of a unit may not always stimulate student inquiry because typically the student does not know enough or care enough about the issues involved to see the need or value in addressing such question.
i.e. abstract discussion on property rights —is made accessible and intriguing by using the saying “Finders keepers, losers weepers” and building role-play around the idea.
Giving the answer straight away bypasses inquiry and deep understanding. “
April 1, 2013
This is the title of one interesting chapter in G. Wiggins’ and J. McTighe’s book Understanding by Design that had me thinking (like all chapters, but I will post as read).
“Our work as designers is complicated by the gap between expert and novice. What we as adults understand and appreciate seems of self-evident value and interest. But to the student the same idea can seem opaque, abstract- without meaning or value.
(Thus)… in addition to knowing our subject we need to know the students – know what will need uncoverage from THEIR point of view. “
I won’t elaborate much but I think it is one of the most difficult tasks we have as teachers. The very breadth (and presumably depth) of our knowledge can act as a barrier to understanding the struggle a student might experience or the lack of interest some students show. It is challenging to assume what might trigger curiosity, to anticipate what might be too complex or confusing to a wide range of learners, and to set all this against curricular requirements.