Fink’s 3 Column Table exercise pushed me to think of precisely what outcomes I wanted to see as a result of my invitation to innovate advising. I have not been following any specific curriculum and have never considered myself a teacher (more of a mentor or facilitator), so defining outcomes was a challenging exercise for me. That exercise allowed me to research the learning outcomes expected of advising and my institution’s mission.
The UbD Template did not just push me. It tried to drown me! I was a sinking ship trying to understand how backward design would work for me. I struggled to identify the big overarching goal that had real-world application beyond just the real-world circumstance of a learner’s current program. UbD made me work harder than I thought possible to drill down what I want my advisees to learn and apply long after I am their advisor. Both exercises (3 Column Table and UbD) pushed me into uncharted territories. I do not have a curriculum to follow. I do not teach a mandatory course. I lamented that students have no real reason to even care about what I have to share with them beyond enrollment. Then reading Chapter 4 of Understanding by Design, specifically about Facet 3: Application. I just laughed at myself and this entire process as I read, “We show our understanding of something by using it, adapting it, and customizing it. When we must negotiate different constraints, social contexts, purposes, and audiences, we reveal our understanding as performance know-how, the ability to accomplish tasks successfully, with grace under pressure, and with tact” (G. Wiggins & McTighe, 2005, p. 93). Authentic learning strikes again! The ADL Program pushes me to evaluate where I can try and make a difference for my students, my colleagues, and my profession. This exercise challenges me to figure out why they should care to participate.
Reflection
I believe the frame of reference created by completing the 3 Column table first helped me to think broadly about the learning I would like to see my learners embrace. I appreciated the outcomes-based education model started with these big-picture problems, issues, and ideas to allow the learner to work in context toward their course or unit goal (CSLE2COVA, 2018). As I began creating this UbD Template’s first iteration to design the essential questions and goals forced me to consider the alignment of my performance tasks and learning activities. The constant focus on the transferability of the activities, tasks, questions, understandings, and goals allowed me to evaluate the importance and connected value of each. I believe this content-based education model will be most beneficial when dealing with basic skills and when hoping to apply understanding to a variety of settings and situations (CSLE2COVA, 2018).
I believe the two design processes can work in tandem with one another in situations where both outcomes-based and content-based education are needed. This two-stage process encourages planners to revisit and revise learning goals throughout the development, implementation, and use of the advising course and with future innovation, training, and other learning objectives. This process has pushed my innovation idea forward as I recognize how the environment I create in this learning environment can influence how learners approach other types of learning.
As I worked through the Understanding by Design book and UbD Template, I quickly realized the size and scope of the exercise I initially selected would require many individualized units within multiple courses. I envision this advising course spanning several semesters while utilizing a variety of units within the course. Some units can be ad hoc, and others can be assigned as needed. Some units of the advising course can be compulsory, while others can be utilized at the learners’ discretion. All units should be available at the users’ pace and place.
I will share both versions with the acknowledgment that once it came down to the lesson planning and activities, I recognized that this effort would likely be best undertaken by a team or multiple teams of advisors to ensure clarity and goals. The first course will help illustrate the long-term projected path of this undertaking. Whereas this first of many units will begin with foundational knowledge explanation tasks, subsequent units will continue building in complexity and greater transferability.
UbD Templates – Advising Course 1/Unit 1
W.H.E.R.E.T.O.
One of the components of the UbD template is to align the learning activities to the perspective of the learner. To ensure that [I] have done this, [I have coded] each learning activity in [these] UbD design[s] as [they] relates to the set of principles embedded into the acronym WHERETO. The chart below explains what each letter stands for.
W – Where are we going? Why? What is expected?
H – How will we hook the students?
E – How will we equip students for expected performance?
R – How will we rethink or revise?
E – How will students self-evaluate and reflect their learning?
T – How will we tailor learning to varied needs, interests, and learning styles?
O – How will we organize the sequence of learning?
References
CSLE2COVA. (2018, June 19). Outcome-based Education vs Competency-based Education. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctEqxCr7ZUg
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005, March 15). Understanding By Design (2nd Expanded). Assn. for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
The Advisor That Cares 