Understanding by Design and Differentiated Instruction
Excerpt from:
McTighe, J. & Tomlinson, C. (2006) Integrating UBD and DI. Alexandria, Viginia. Association for Supervision and Curriculum. (pgs 3-10)
The Logic for Combining UbD and DI
Understanding by Design and Differentiated Instruction are not only mutually supportive of one another but in fact “need” one another. The reason is straightforward. In effective classrooms, teachers consistently attend to at least four elements: whom they teach (students), where they teach (learning environment), what they teach (content), and how they teach (instruction).
If teachers lose sight of any one of the elements and cease investing effort in it, the whole fabric of their work is damaged and the quality of learning impaired.
Understanding by Design focuses on what we teach and what assessment evidence we need to collect. Its primary goal is delineating and guiding application of sound principles of curriculum design. It also emphasizes how we teach, particularly ways of teaching for student understanding. Certainly the model addresses the need to teach so that students succeed, but the model speaks most fully about “what” and “how.” In other words, Understanding by Design is predominantly (although not solely) a curriculum design model.
Differentiated Instruction focuses on whom we teach, where we teach, and how we teach. Its primary goal is ensuring that teachers focus on processes and procedures that ensure effective learning for varied individuals. Defensible models of differentiation will necessarily address the imperative of differentiating quality curriculum. Nonetheless, differentiation is predominantly
(although not solely) an instructional design model. If we had at our grasp the most elegant curriculum in the world and it missed the mark for students with learning disabilities, highly advanced learners, students with limited English proficiency, young people who lack
economic support, kids who struggle to read, and a whole host of others, the curriculum would fall short of its promise.
On the other hand, if we were the most effective disciples of flexible grouping, interest-based instruction, responsive environments, and a host of instructional strategies that allow us to attend to learner variance but used those approaches in the absence of powerful curriculum, our classrooms would fail to equip students with the ideas and skills necessary to make their
way in the world. Simply put, quality classrooms evolve around powerful knowledge that works for each student. That is, they require quality curriculum and quality instruction. In tandem, UbD and DI provide structures, tools, and guidance for developing curriculum and instruction based on our current best understandings of teaching and learning.
That the two models stem from current best understandings of teaching and learning—and that they are not only compatible but complementary— will become more evident as the book progresses. At the outset of that exploration, it is useful to share some “axioms” and “corollaries” that demonstrate some ways the two models interface. The axioms are fundamental principles of Understanding by Design. The corollaries demonstrate the way in which Differentiated Instruction works to ensure that each student will have access to and support for success with the axioms. Together, the axioms and corollaries illustrate some ways in which UbD and DI work in tandem toward shared goals.
Axiom 1
The primary goal of quality curriculum design is to develop and deepen student
understanding.
Corollaries for Axiom 1
• All students benefit from and are entitled to curriculum that develops
and deepens their understanding.
• Given variance in student ability, experience, opportunity, language,
interest, and adult support, they will grow at different rates and require varied
support systems to develop and deepen their understanding.
Axiom 2
Evidence of student understanding is revealed when students apply (transfer)
knowledge in authentic contexts.
Corollaries for Axiom 2
• Such authentic applications will reveal varying degrees of proficiency
and sophistication in students’ knowledge, understanding, and skill.
• The most effective teachers use the evidence of variance in student
proficiency to provide opportunities and support to ensure that each student
continues to develop and deepen knowledge, understanding, and skill from
his or her current point of proficiency, interests, and learning preferences.
Axiom 3
Effective curriculum development following the principles of backward
design (described in Chapter 3 and explored throughout the book) helps
avoid the twin problems of textbook coverage and activity-oriented teaching
in which no clear priorities and purposes are apparent.
Corollaries for Axiom 3
• All learners benefit from and should receive instruction that reflects
clarity about purposes and priorities of content.
• Struggling learners require focus on the truly essential knowledge,
understanding, and skill of a unit to ensure that their efforts are most efficient
and potent in moving them forward in reliable ways.
• Advanced learners need challenge predicated on what is essential in a
discipline so that their time is accorded value and their strengths are developed
in ways that move them consistently toward expertise in the
disciplines.
Axiom 4
Regular reviews of curriculum and assessment designs, based on design
standards, provide quality control and inform needed adjustments. Regular
reviews of “results” (i.e., student achievement) should be followed by needed
adjustments to curriculum and instruction.
Corollaries to Axiom 4
• Results of reviews will inevitably show variation among students in
essential knowledge, understanding, and skills.
• Results-based adjustments to curriculum and instruction should be
targeted to the individual as well as to the class as a whole.
• Results-based adjustments will require flexible use of time, teacher
attention, materials, student groupings, and other classroom elements to
ensure continued development and deepening of students’ understanding.
Axiom 5
Teachers provide opportunities for students to explore, interpret, apply, shift
perspectives, empathize, and self-assess. These six facets provide conceptual
lenses through which student understanding is assessed.
Corollaries to Axiom 5
• All students should be guided and supported in thinking in complex
ways.
• It is not the case that struggling learners must master the basics before
they can engage in thinking. Rather, evidence clearly suggests that for most
students, mastery and understanding come through, not after, meaningful
interaction with ideas.
• Nonetheless, students will differ in the level of sophistication of their
thinking and understanding at a given time.
• Teachers should be prepared to provide opportunity and support to
continually develop students’ understandings and capacities as thinkers.
Axiom 6
Teachers, students, and districts benefit by “working smarter” and using
technology and other vehicles to collaboratively design, share, and critique
units of study.
Corollaries to Axiom 6
• Students also benefit when teachers share understandings about students’
learning needs, classroom routines, and instructional approaches to
ensure that each student develops knowledge, understanding, and skills as
fully as possible.
• A routine part of collaboration in academically diverse classrooms
should occur between teachers and specialists who have expert knowledge
about student needs and instructional approaches most likely to respond
effectively to those needs.
• Technology should be used to address varied learner needs and to
assist the teacher in keeping track of student growth toward important curricular
goals.
Axiom 7
UbD is a way of thinking, not a program. Educators adapt its tools and materials
with the goal of promoting better student understanding.
Corollaries to Axiom 7
• Differentiated instruction is a way of thinking, not a formula or recipe.
Educators draw on, apply, and adapt its tools with the goal of maximizing
knowledge, understanding, and skill for the full range of learners.
• Effective differentiation guides educators in thinking effectively about
whom they teach, where they teach, and how they teach in order to ensure
that what they teach provides each student with maximum power as a
learner.