Indeed, the ability to effectively transfer science learning involves the application of the practices in conjunction with core concepts. Transfer refers to the capacity to take what we know and use it creatively, flexibly, and fluently, in different situations (Bransford, Brown, and Cocking 2000). For students to construct evidence-based claims, they have to use the special combination of three dimensions advocated by the NGSS. In addition, explore-before-explain teaching places priority on students constructing evidence-based claims. This conception is perfectly aligned with the NGSS’s emphasis on teaching science through the conceptual lenses of disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), science and engineering practices (SEPs) and crosscutting concepts (CCs) rather than fixating on factual information only. In its essence, the UbD framework intends to help educators identify the big ideas that we want students to come to understand at a deep level so that they can transfer their learning to new situations. We will also examine an instructional sequence called explore-before-explain teaching, intended to engage students immediately in a meaning-making process leading to deep understanding.Īs its title suggests, Understanding by Design reflects the convergence of two independent ideas: (1) the focus of modern education on teaching and assessing for understanding and transfer, and (2) a time-honored “backward design” process for developing curriculum with those ends in mind. In this article, we will explore the use of Understanding by Design (UbD), a widely-used curriculum development framework, for honoring the intentions of the NGSS. It is the job of teachers and curriculum teams to use the Standards as the basis for designing the specific pathway for teaching and learning. The NGSS are elegant in their conception but will require major shifts from the way science has been taught in many classrooms.Īs well-developed as they may be, standards are not curriculum. Moreover, by streamlining the curriculum content, teachers will have more opportunities to involve students in learning and applying the practices of science. Focusing on fewer, more significant ideas is critical to avoid superficial “coverage,” while allowing more time to engage students in the kinds of active, meaning-making processes that are necessary for developing conceptual understandings. This construct aligns with the recommendation of curriculum experts (e.g., Wiggins and McTighe 2005, 2011 Erickson 2008, 2017) that educators should move away from trying to cover volumes of factual material and instead prioritize their curriculum around a smaller number of conceptually larger, transferable ideas. To avoid the familiar problem of curricula that are “a mile wide and an inch deep” ( Schmidt 2004), the Standards call for framing teaching around disciplinary core (“big”) ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts. Its three-dimensional construct calls for teachers to favor depth over breadth, while engaging students in “doing” science, not just learning science facts. The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) present a modern framework for science education.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |