I can remember my first year as a teacher all too well. I began my career at a small charter school, teaching math, social studies, and a STEM elective class. Three different preps for a first-year teacher who had just left his accounting job and earned his alternative teaching certification. I was handed a textbook and a list of Texas state standards that my fifth and sixth graders were expected to master by the end of the year. I learned very quickly that well-planned instruction design is required to achieve effective learning. 

​

I am now venturing into new territory. Although I have spent years crafting units, projects, and lessons for middle schoolers, this will be the first time that I carefully design a learning unit for teachers. Currently, I have been examining backward design as a part of my Innovation Plan, where I plan to help teachers facilitate blended learning and Project-Based Learning as they create their own significant learning environments for students.

​

In the past few weeks, I have been exposed to some revolutionary tools used to plan learning courses. Using Fink's (2003) 3 Column Table and Wiggins & McTighe's (2008) One Page Model of Understanding By Design, I have been able to identify desired goals for learners, then create and align the practical activities that will help achieve those outcomes. Both of these models serve the general purpose of thoroughly dissecting a course of learning. In their own way, they both begin the design with the end in mind, keeping the focus on learning. 

​

However, there are major differences between these two approaches. The UbD model is more suitable when working with objectives that are easily measurable, due to its focus on competencies. When specific standards are required, this design process allows the teacher to focus on what the students need to learn and then align essential questions, knowledge skills, activities and more. The 3 column model provides more of a broad stroke as a unit's design begins with a BHAG (Big Hairy Audacious Goal). Oftentimes, this does not focus on what students need to learn, but rather what type of learners teachers want them to become. All learning outcomes, assessments, and activities must align with the BHAG, forming a connected unit of design. 

​

While the UbD template has helped me think through the details of my Innovation Plan, I feel that it also may be a hindrance. I will be working alongside adult learners creating units for their students. Most of the activities center around collaborative dialogues and discussion, which may take us in divergent directions. For this reason, the broader I am able to design this unit for teachers, the more effective it will be. Although I plan to incorporate some aspects of UbD, the 3 Column Table will be more effective in achieving the overall goal I have established for educators. At the same time, I know the needs of the teachers I will be working with and these teachers always lesson plan with great detail. I plan to integrate the UdD model by suggesting the teachers use Wiggins & McTighe's template to design the blended learning and Project-Based Learning unit they plan on implementing. The structure the UbD model provides will be a great tool to introduce backward design to our campus.

​

Below is the UbD for the same unit I created using the 3 Column Table; I chose to combine the first three learning goals of this table, including the foundational goals, application goals, and integration goals. I actually had a much more difficult time using this design method due to the reasons mentioned earlier. Even so, as I move forward with my role as an instructional coach, I plan to blend these two models, relying more heavily on the 3 Column Table, adapted when necessary to meet the needs of the educators of whom I am supporting.