• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Ub d inservice  8.20.12
 

Ub d inservice 8.20.12

on

  • 584 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
584
Views on SlideShare
584
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
27
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Talk about the difference between knowing and understanding. Talk about Madelyn and what she says and what the conversation was at a vertical team meeting. Talk about covering the content and activity based themes. Talk about building around big ideas and understandings instead of disconnected facts. The big ideas are based on the TEKS (standards)
  • Refer to page 1 of UbD in a Nutshell – right side Number teachers 1-8. Have teachers read silently the right column of the first page. Then discuss and choose just three words that explain what the statement meant. Have teachers write the 3 words on separate pieces of paper and then show the words. Discuss what each means.
  • Just talk about this for a short time. Explain why what we have been doing is not working. Refer to the left side of page 1.
  • Have the teachers refer to the handout of the template. Point out the components on Stage 1
  • Break teachers into three groups: Group 1 will read a question is essential if it… Group 2 will read an understanding Group 3 will read transfer and knowledge & skill All groups will read Stage 1. Together they will summarize

Ub d inservice  8.20.12 Ub d inservice 8.20.12 Presentation Transcript

  • Understanding by Design Highlights of the Work of Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe
  • Understanding by DesignUbD is a way of thinking more carefully aboutdesign, it is not a program.Teach for understanding“Backward Design” Clarify results and evidence of them before designing lessons.
  • Understanding by DesignRemove “covering the material”Remove activities for the sake of activities.The work is focused on questions and bigideas, related to the Standards.
  • 3 Stages of “Backward” Design1. Desired results2. Assessment evidence l y t he n Then and on3. Plan learning experiences & instruction.
  • Stage 1 Desired resultsFour components1. Content standards (TEKS)2. Understandings  What are the big ideas?  What specific understandings about them are desired?  What misunderstandings are predictable? Key: Focus on Big Ideas!
  • Stage 1 Desired resultsFour components3. Essential questions  What provocative questions will foster inquiry, understanding, and transfer of learning?4. Knowledge and skills / transfer goal  What key knowledge and skills will students acquire?  What should students be able to do as a result of this unit?
  • Stage 2 - Assessment Evidence What are key complex performance tasks indicative of understanding? What other evidence will be collected to build the case for understanding, knowledge, and skill. How will students self-assess?
  • Stage 2 is the essence ofbackward design & alignment “Measure what we value; value and act on what we measure.” Link assessment types to curricular priorities
  • Stage 3-Plan learningexperience and instruction A focus on engaging and effective learning, “designed in” What learning experiences and instruction will promote the desired understanding, knowledge and skill? How will you best promote the deepening of insight and interest? How will you prepare students for the performance(s)?
  • Organize by W.H.E.R.E. W = Where are we headed? and why? (from the student’s perspective) H = How will the student be ‘hooked’? E = What opportunities will there be to be equipped and explore key ideas. R = How will we provide opportunities to rethink, rehearse, refine and revise? E = How will students evaluate (so as to improve) their own performance?