Understanding by Design (UbD)
Understanding by Design (UbD) focuses on deep learning through backward design.
Educators first identify desired learning outcomes, then create assessments to measure these goals.
Instructional activities are planned last to ensure alignment with objectives. UbD also emphasises essential questions to promote critical thinking, helping students connect knowledge to real-world contexts for lasting understanding.
UbD Overview
The Understanding by Design (UbD) framework, as outlined by Wiggins & McTighe (2011), is based on seven core principles:
- Purposeful curricular planning enhances learning, with UbD guiding but not prescribing the process.
- UbD emphasizes curriculum and teaching that deepens student understanding and facilitates the transfer of learning.
- Student understanding is demonstrated through authentic performances, measured by six facets: explanation, interpretation, application, perspective, empathy, and self-assessment.
- Effective curriculum design starts with long-term goals and works backward, ensuring clear priorities and avoiding reliance on textbooks or disconnected activities.
- Teachers are coaches of understanding, focusing on meaningful learning and successful transfer rather than just delivering content.
- Regular reviews of curriculum enhance its quality and foster professional discussions.
- UbD encourages continuous improvement, with student performance driving adjustments to curriculum and instruction to maximize learning.
- Purposeful curricular planning enhances learning, with UbD guiding but not prescribing the process.
Flower Darby, in her book Small Teaching Online, uses the analogy of a road trip to explain backwards design. The graphic below outlines the steps of backwards design
Implications of the UbD Model for instructional design
The Understanding by Design (UbD) model has significant implications for instructional design, influencing how educators and designers approach curriculum development, assessments, and instructional strategies.
Below are key implications:
Backward Design
Commencing with clear learning outcomes and working backwards to align assessments and activities.
Focus on Understanding
Emphasising deep learning and knowledge transfer, moving beyond rote memorisation.
Authentic Assessment
Encourages real-world, performance-based assessments rather than traditional tests.
Alignment
Ensures learning objectives, instructional activities, and assessments are fully aligned for effective teaching.
Flexibility
Adaptable to various educational contexts, allowing customisation for diverse learner needs.
Continuous Improvement
Promotes ongoing reflection and refinement of courses based on feedback and learner performance.
Learner-Centered
Prioritises engagement, critical thinking, and autonomy, fostering a more active learning environment.
Strengths and limitations
In my instructional design context, I’ve found the Understanding by Design (UbD) model to have the following strengths and limitations.
Strengths
Backward Design Aligns with PD Goals
UbD’s focus on backward design ensures that PD sessions are aligned with specific outcomes, such as improving teaching strategies or student engagement, making sure all activities and assessments are directly tied to real-world, professional goals.
Focus on Understanding and Transfer
The model’s emphasis on deeper understanding and applying knowledge aligns well with the goal of helping teachers apply new strategies in their classrooms. It encourages designing PD that moves beyond surface-level training to focus on real-world application and skill transfer, which is crucial for K-12 teachers.
Adaptability
UbD’s flexibility allows for tailoring PD to a wide range of teacher needs and contexts, whether addressing beginner or advanced teaching strategies. This flexibility is particularly valuable when designing programs for diverse K-12 teachers across different subjects and grade levels.
Clarity and Structure
UbD provides a clear structure for course development, helping to articulate and prioritize learning goals for both trainers and participants. This aids in creating coherent PD sessions that keep teachers focused on the outcomes.
Limitations
Time-Consuming Planning
Implementing UbD can be resource-intensive, particularly in terms of time. Designing PD around backward design, with its detailed focus on outcomes and assessments, can be challenging given the time constraints of delivering frequent or ongoing professional development.
Complexity for New Designers
UbD can be overwhelming for instructional designers who are new to the framework, especially when trying to align every element perfectly. This complexity could slow down the design process, especially for time-sensitive PD rollouts.
Resource Requirements
Effective implementation of UbD often requires significant resources, such as time for reflection, access to robust assessment tools, and support for teachers to follow up and apply the learning in their classrooms, which may not always be available in all non-state schools.
Limited Guidance on Specific Strategies
While UbD excels at providing a framework, it offers limited guidance on specific instructional strategies or tools. This may require additional resources to translate UbD’s principles into actionable, practical steps for teachers in the classroom.
LDT100x
Learning Theory
LDT200x
Instructional Design Models
LDT300x
Digital Media Design
LDT400x
Capstone prroject