I ran across this on my Facebook page a week or so ago, and the message really resonated with me.
I kept this message in the back of my mind as I met for my second problem-based learning meeting with my colleagues Kevin, and Kelli. I am hoping to add an additional colleague from our dual track high school to make this a Tri-High project. The above message has caused me to reflect on the following questions: Where exactly am I stuck? If I had not started this problem-based learning journey would I ever realize the degree to which I am stuck? I see myself as being stuck because I know that my classroom is not a student-centered teaching and learning environment. I am stuck because I cling to the mindset that good classroom instruction requires strong teacher driven instruction with minimal student choice. I don’t want to leave the impression with my readers that I am a chalk and talk teacher because I am not. I use cooperative groups, ongoing formative assessment, and differentiated instruction; but if you were to ask me to what degree is my coaching and scaffolding teacher lead versus student driven, my honest answer would be 90:10.
I must admit that I am still having a hard time with the fear of the unknown, and I am finding this process a tad stressful. I’m not a person who takes leaps of faith. . . . EVER. I realise that relinquishing a large percentage of control is not at all going to be easy for me, and I’m not totally convinced this is necessarily a good thing for all students. In the same breath, Kelli has never said that this model is for all learners nor has she ever said that I won’t have to be prepared for Plan B if some students just do not flourish. Thus, I question WHY does my mind constantly throw up red flags? There is no covert operation taking place because I initiated this process. Again, I am making the assumption that students will recoil against this type of learning environment, which I have no hard data to support. I have not considered that fact that students might just dive in and not look back.
From our second meeting, I am really excited by the types of problems that we have sketched out for the Gr. 11 Canadian History course. These problems focus on inequities facing Aboriginal learners, Canada and Immigration, and finally Canadian conflict. I do believe that many students will be engaged based on how the problems are designed, and learning will NOT be focused on recognition and recall. Their learning is definitely going to be pushed to the upper levels of Blooms’ taxonomy. During the meeting, Kevin and I discussed how we will navigate our planning around the curriculum’s use of enduring understandings. We created a OneNote binder in which we sat down and started sketching out content that students would need to explore and began discussing the types of process skills that we want students to walk away with.
This brings me to my next problem, developing CLEAR and MEASURABLE learning targets. The Province of Manitoba’s Gr. 11 Canadian History curriculum has been formulated around enduring understandings (EUs). There are MANY EUs in our curriculum. The concepts of EUs comes from Wiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design (Ubd) planning approach. I am HUGE advocate of this approach. Although I have worked with Ubd for almost fifteen years, I struggle with developing assessments around EUs. I have developed EUs from outcomes, but my assessments focused more on measuring the outcomes versus the EUs. Basically, the EUs got pushed to the side. I have been creating assessments that link to the finite knowledge and skills embedded in outcomes. I find myself wanting to use the following deconstruction tool to deconstruct what the EUs are asking of kids to demonstrate. I feel the need to put in the EU and then work backward but my gut tells me that I’m missing the boat. I am starting to doubt how well I do actually understand Ubd, or maybe I need to realize that this is the next level in my learning journey. I always advocate that learning is a journey and not a destination. I am good at giving advice but maybe not so great at taking it.
Without clear and measurable learning targets, I feel that I can not move forward. Since I do not have any Ubd experts that I know of in my province, I took a wild card shot and contacted Dr. Jay McTighe. What have I got to lose? I sent off an email last night and low and behold, he responded. He said that he would be able to chat regarding my question today. Holy crap! I don’t know if I could be any more excited if Mark Messier, Bjorn Borg, or Daniel Craig responded back. If you are reading this and wondering who these men are, Google them! Maybe this problem-based and personalized learning approach does have merits for adult learners!
In his email, I received this blog link which I have found extremely helpful, and I’m starting to see some glimmers of light through the grey haze in my processing. The blog is called Performance Tasks. com. After looking at some of the posts, I am now starting to see a key roadblock in my application of Ubd. First, the blunt fact is that I haven’t been creating performance task assessments and therefore, I am hypothesizing, this is a key reason why I struggle with using EUs. I have been creating assessments that link to the finite knowledge and skills embedded in curricular outcomes. I am fluid and competent in planning backwards from outcomes, but I am not confident in using EUS to develop open-ended performance tasks that will take student learning to a much deeper level. I still have this NAGGING question of what am I missing? I do not believe that Ubd is about a willy-nilly exploration of whatever a student wants to look at. I can’t wait to discuss this with Dr. McTighe, and I am hoping to walk away with a much clearer picture
My next epiphany from reading Dr. McTighe’s blog is around the assessment of performance-based tasks. He outlines four different types of rubrics and the DIFFERENT PURPOSES that they serve. I found this read really interesting. His rationale around analytical and holistic rubrics has really made me think about where I need to go with my assessment tools.
I just finished my conversation with Dr. McTighe. What a kind man and a great educational ambassador! I now feel that I can get back on my problem-based learning journey. Here is what I learned and relearned about the Ubd process, which problem-based learning is directly tied to. First, one needs to focus developing curriculum around the big transferable ideas that can be integrated within and between curricula. I knew this because I have honestly read the Ubd text and workbook from cover to cover many times, but I recognize that I really didn’t understand it. I had an “aha” moment when he was talking to me about this. Things started to click with what he was saying. Growth is like peeling back the layers of an onion.
I find that our Gr. 11 Canadian History Enduring Understandings are very content driven versus big ideas driven. For example, if we want students to understand that power in the hands of a majority doesn’t necessarily ensure that the needs of all citizens will be equitably met and this reality results in the manifestation of deeply rooted social, economic and political problems that our present day society needs to not only address but collectively solve, then our EUs should be woven around the concept of power versus EUs woven around content concepts.
I explained to Dr. McTighe that Manitoba’s Gr. 11 Canadian History curriculum had approximately 50 plus enduring understandings. He felt that this amount was much too high. If I could have reached through the telephone line and hugged him, I would have. What a relieve! I wasn’t totally crazy. I was trying to madly process every ounce of what he was telling me. Things started clicking for me and then I tossed out an idea to see if I was understanding his coaching correctly. What if Kevin and I were to sit down and review all of the enduring understandings in the curriculum and then from this review we would pull out the big transferable ideas that we want kids to uncover. Once we have our transferable ideas for both process and content, we would then create essential questions that our enduring understandings would evolve from. I would hope that we could condense some of the ones that are presently in our curriculum. He felt that this would be a good place to start. As a team, we would have a clear picture of the content and process that would connect to the big ideas, EU and EQs from which we could build our performance-based tasks around. Dr. McTighe also advocated for us to post our essential questions in the rooms so that students could constantly use them to guide their learning.
I can’t wait to talk to Kevin, Kelli, and Linda in the next few days to share my thought and ideas. I think that we can easily connect our big transferable ideas to the problems that we have created. We now just need to look at EQs and EUs. Well, my brain is hurting tremendously, so I am going to close off for this entry. Exciting day and tons more learning to take place.
Best Wishes,
Ingrid
Teaching & Learning Notebook 