Over the past few weeks I have received a few interesting queries on Twitter, and Labor Day weekend seems like a nice time to respond to them and reflect on the school year ahead.
Two of the questions concern the relationship between inquiry and UbD:
Q1: Do you consider UbD to be inquiry learning?
Q2: How do we reconcile UbD with inquiry, PBL and other open-ended divergent goals? How well do teacher-designed “essential questions” fit with approaches such as Make Just One Change where work is driven by student questions?
Let’s take the 1st question first since it is more straightforward. The aim of “understanding” requires student inquiry. That inquiry may be tightly controlled or very open-ended: socratic seminar vs. highly-directed teacher-led discussion, for example. But some student inquiry leading to student inference is an essential and non-negotiable part of learning for understanding. Why? Because understanding is dependent upon drawing inferences by oneself – as well as testing and justifying those inferences – if only to question or verify claims made by the teacher, other students, or authors. Otherwise, it is rote learning with no thinking behind it.
However, understanding requires both content acquisition and attempts to apply learning to new situations (transfer). So, strictly speaking, I don’t think UbD “is” inquiry learning any more than soccer or reading is (even though both require inquiry for success). Inquiry is necessary but not sufficient; it is a key strategy to be used as part of achieving understanding, and there are varied approaches to such inquiry.
The second question is trickier and raises important questions about educational aims. If the aim of education is to produce autonomous and inquisitive students, then it seems plausible to argue that student inquiry (and thus, student questions) should drive curriculum. Thus, a teacher design that chooses the questions and shapes the learning based on the questions is heading in a different more closed direction.
I think it’s a false either-or. There are no doubt teachers using UbD (and essential questions specifically) whose sole aim is to get students to come to pre-set understandings, knowledge and skill. Thus, the questions may be rich and the work may involve some inquiry, but – bottom line – the goals are convergent: “I want as teacher to ensure that you as students learn THIS with understanding.” We can see how this would work in a high school history or science class with fairly circumscribed Understandings and related assessments.
An open design in UbD. However, the design need not be so closed or convergent to be a valid UbD design. For example, the essential question in history might be: What questions offer the greatest insight into this period? A related understanding, rather than being a specific idea concerning history that I want all students to grasp, might instead be “No right answer exists, but some answers are better than others because they are more supportable by evidence and argument.” Now, the unit is framed, but the outcomes are not prescribed, and inquiry can fruitfully proceed in various ways.
I would argue, in fact, that thinking through projects, KWL’s and other student-generated work in a UbD way is a better approach to design than leaving everything open. Because then we and the students will have to have thought through in advance the criteria of success – the difference between effective and ineffective projects – instead of sending the message that anything you do as an inquirer is fine as long as it is a good-faith effort. (And PBL is not open-ended anyway. Some solutions are better than others, just as some Understandings are better than others.)
I used to say to my English students: “You need to understand that there are no correct final answers to any question of literary interpretation. But some answers are better than others. One purpose of this course is to understand how both statements can be true at the same time.”
Gradual release. Why should the teacher frame courses by essential questions? For the same reason that the soccer coach should design most practices: the framing is a function of expertise and experience. It is my job as teacher to know the vital, penetrating, and interesting questions. That does not preclude student-generated questions. On the contrary, by the teacher modeling what good questions are and how interesting work can be guided by good questions, the student is more likely to become a better autonomous questioner in the end – assuming we build our courses so that, over the long haul, the gradual release of teacher responsibility kicks in.
And that gradual release idea is the essence of backward design in UbD – and a great place to reflect this weekend. How am I designing the year to make it most likely that students become increasingly autonomous as questioners and arguers (in the Common Core sense) – while still learning and understanding content of value? Viewed this way, there is no dichotomy at all between UbD and inquiry-based pedagogy.
PS: Our most recent book – Essential Questions: Doorways to Understanding – offers numerous tips and approaches on how to honor these ideas.
15 Responses
Hi Grant,
A late request.
The ideas in your 09 Friday May 2014 Granted And (“A modest proposal for when Common Core testing collapses”) deserve a larger audience. Please consider sending that column to the NY Times Op-Ed page.
Bill Sowder
Good idea. I’ll have travel time this week to edit it….
I had to go back to Working with Understandings to figure out what UbD stood for.
I fear that ,particularly in math, your ideas and analysis are too difficult for at least some of the desired audience (that bit of political correctness took some doing!).
Anyway, a damn good read.
Indeed the math folks are typically the toughest UbD customers. None the less, I think we’re making some good inroads in the US via UbD (and the new Common Core Practice Standards which are fully congruent with UbD, so to speak). You might also be interested in my other posts on math – Search on “algebra” for example…
I would like to thank you for your thoughtful insights on teaching. I was introduced to Understanding By Design when I was a 2nd year teacher – I was 48. I feel that I have become a better teacher as I try to utilize the design model. I teach 3rd grade, and I’ve taught 1st and 2nd and have used it in all three grades. I’m not your typical respondent – I don’t have this amazing academic eloquent vocabulary, I’m of average intelligence – but I thank you.
You are so kind! Makes my day. This is the only reason I do this work: to help teachers improve at their craft. It has NOTHING to do with vocabulary and everything to do with being a model learner. Thank you.
I have had your book Essential Questions downloaded on my iPad for some time, but have yet to read it. This post has motivated me to move it up to the top on my to-read pile.
Hi Grant – Thank you for your thougthful post on this topic. At our school we have essential agreements to use UBD when planning for learning. We also have an agreement that a guided inquiry approach to learning is an effective way for students to get to the Enduring Understandings and Essential Questions we intend. We believe it’s important that teachers are absolutely clear about what they want students to understand and be able to do. BUT that doesn’t mean that kids can’t add their own questions and wondering.
We take the approach of “Tuning In” the students to the Enduring Understandings to get students thinking and wondering. We also use this time to find out what students will bring to the table through prior knowledge and experiences. We allow students to think about what Essential Questions they would like to inquiry into, and how they think they might learn more about those questions. You may ask, “But what if the student’s don’t ask the EQ that were designed?” Answer? Because you have already planned out the unit, you can also suggest to the students they also inquiry into your questions. From our experience, the students usually end up coming up with better questions than we did, which is one beautiful results of guided inquiry. Another fun questions for kids is asking them how they think they might learn about their questions. This can lead to all kinds of interesting activities from experiments, research, Skype calls, talking to experts etc. Again because you have planned the unit using UBD you will also have some suggestions that would be helpful for them to learn what is intended.
If anyone would like some resources on the approach we use feel free to contact me at dmachacek@jisedu.or.id. I love to learn and collaborate.
Dan: This sounds great! It seems to strike an intelligent balance between teacher expertise and an open/flexible design that encourages student questions and research. Can you share some examples of how it works in practice? What is an example of how an EQ and EU unfolded in class so that students took more ownership of the unfolding?
Happy too.
Example: Grade 6 SS Unit
Compelling Question/Unit title: How do people cope with unequal access to resources?
Concept/Big Idea: Equality
EU: Students will understand necessary resources for quality of life are in limited supply and are not equally distributed.
EQ’s:
What are the basic needs for quality of life?
How do inequalities in basic needs occur?
How have individuals, communities and governments tried to satisfy basic needs?
STANDARDS & BENCHMARKS [Learning Goals]
– A key cause of inequality is lack of access to resources and power
– Individuals, organizations and governments impact levels of injustice, both positively and negatively
– Resources can be allocated in different ways, affecting individuals, communities and the environment
KNOWLEDGE (Learning Outcomes):
Students will
– Identify basic needs for quality of life and how these are distributed across the world
– Explain inequalities in access to resources, with particular reference to water.
– Describe how individuals, organizations and governments have worked to satisfy the need for water in the past and present
– Evaluate selected policies and projects for provision of water in chosen locations.
Recommend and apply actions to address unequal access to resources.
SKILLS:
Research skills: Analyse, Create, Reflect
Writing skills: Formal Voice
Reading skill: Non-fiction reading strategies
Tuning In:
We take students to a local village where the families are severely impoverished and earn about $2 on a good day. Students learn how they get access to clean water, use the items the find picking trash to build homes, compost, and learn about basic hygiene and generally about the overall living conditions.
When students return from the 20 minutes on site, there are some guiding questions on big boards around a common area. What did this trip make you think about? What questions are you wondering about? How might you go about learning more about your questions? What experience(s) have you had with unequal access?
Finding Out:
Some student driven, some teacher driven/explicit teaching/mini-lessons – student get lots of practice and feedback
Students learn research skills. – writing closed and open ended questions, brainstorm ways of locating information: Examples students come up with: visit more sites, interview people from this site and others (skill), Skype interviews with contacts at the World Bank, Using internet databases, Books from library, Definition of basic needs and quality of life which leads to other examples of inequities. Use Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to spark conversation. BrainPOP videos creating a visual (pyramid) of least to most for quality, dissect survival elements
Sorting out:
Questions to ask students – where students consolidate where they are at with their learning. Lots of opportunities for formative assessment and specific and timely feedback.
What am I noticing?
What patterns am I seeing?
What connections am I making?
What source of information is working best for me?
How is my thinking changing?
What does this mean?
What’s making sense? What isn’t?
Are there still questions I care about?
Do I have (new) questions?
How can I share my discoveries?
This is where the visible thinking strategies come into play: http://www.visiblethinkingpz.org/VisibleThinking_html_files/03_ThinkingRoutines/03c_CoreRoutines.html
Note this may take some kids back to “Finding Out” or possibly “Tuning In” based on what kids are saying, thinking and doing. (Important to look at student work at this point to make a decision on where to go next)
Going Further:
What new investigations should I do?
What do I need/ want to learn more about?
Team may choose to do some dynamic grouping or interest area groupings or may be an opportunity to do some reteaching or reinforcement teaching.
Reflecting:
This is done anytime throughout the learning. Good opportunity to get students to reflect on learning dispositions. Example: Resourcefulness, Resilience, Reflecting, Relating – Reference: Building Learning Power – Guy Claxton
Taking Action – Transferring learning – opportunities to apply what they have learned. Opportunities to take global issues and take some kind of action
Writing letters, raising awareness, making presentations, starting a service club, videos, blogs, posters, social media etc.
This will require students to learn more skills: Technology, writing letters, presentation, effective communication, elevator speeches, etc. Again lot so of opportunity for feedback and student to learn about solving complex global issues.
This thinking and design is credited to work of Kath Murdoch who has provide many years of professional development for our teachers.
Here is a link to the resources she provides.
http://kathmurdoch.com.au/index.php?id=3
Planning Powerful Units of Inquiry – http://kathmurdoch.com.au/fileadmin/_migrated/content_uploads/PlanningPowerfulUnitsOfInquiry2011.pdf
Kath Murdoch Blog: http://justwonderingblog.com
Make me think that I need create a blog with to capture this learning experience… maybe something I need to work on this year. 🙂
I hope this was helpful and clear enough for people to get the idea.
Fabulous! Very clear, indeed, and obviously doable when laid out this way. I look forward to your blog 🙂
Were you at the school when my old friend Niall was Head? Great guy…
We started here in 2009. I believe he left a few years prior. Yes, he left a good legacy here at JIS, I wish I would have had the opportunity to meet him.
This is a great tension– between the teacher’s responsibility to lead questioning and the students’ responsiblilities to formulate their own questions and have the teacher follow the students’ direction.
Teachers of course don’t like to give up the power to students to ask the questions. Not to come off too pschological but this control impulse springs from a certain insecurity and egocentrism that is endemic to the profession. This insecurity is heightened since there is now an expectation that teachers establish teacher-centric learning targets and teacher-centric evaluation metrics for everyting students do. Yet if the students drive the questions, then it seems that the targets and evaluation metrics must also be products of student input. But when does adult intervention make sense in this slippery slope?
I’m not sure we really want a reality where the kids are in charge So we forge ahead trying to find that magical balance. This is exactly the kind of discussion that needs to be happening in curriculum teams.
Watch my socratic seminar in the ASCD video on EQs! I think it’s clear that kids are in charge – but it was my question.
Thank you very much for addressing these questions. I’ve found that most often, The structured and guided elements in well designed units of inquiry focus on raising the learners’ awareness and abilities to determine what makes a question ‘essential’.