At ASCD's Summer Conference in Nashville, Tenn., the experts on differentiated instruction (DI), Understanding by Design (UbD), and What Works in Schools (WWIS) shared the same stage for the first time. They provided overviews of their frameworks and discussed the connections between the educational approaches.
Carol Ann Tomlinson, Jay McTighe, Grant Wiggins, and Robert Marzano participated in a panel discussion at the ASCD Summer Conference in June, during which they presented overviews of their innovative strategies and discussed the implications for educators who use the models to increase student achievement. They also illustrated the connections and common underpinnings of each approach. This article provides a quick look at the frameworks that have helped educators around the world increase their efficacy.
Doing It Differently with DI
Tomlinson presented an overview of DI, explaining how the framework challenges, supports, and engages students. "It is the time in the teaching/learning process where we stop and reflect on who we're teaching, not just what we're teaching. With that in mind, I picture the student coming to us with a set of needs. And while we may perceive that they need spelling lists and more information about fractions, typically what they need is a classroom [where] they can feel affirmed; where they feel they can make a contribution; where they see the purpose of what they're doing; where they become empowered by what they've learned; and where they feel challenged and supported and stretched. I think that many students come to us and silently say to us, 'Can you show me that classroom? And if you can, then I'll take a chance at your content,'" said Tomlinson. Using the DI framework allows teachers to employ a variety of teaching methods and activities to meet students' diverse learning needs, explained Tomlinson. "We can differentiate content, which is what we teach; process, which is how we teach students and how they become engaged with the material; and products, which show us what they know. We can do that based on student readiness, interest, and learning profile—three research-based elements that we know are important to address. And we do that through a variety of instructional strategies. That's really a large overview for the motivation behind DI and how its parts play out and relate to one another," said Tomlinson.
Using UbD
In his presentation about UbD, Jay McTighe explained that the framework he created with Grant Wiggins focuses on developing quality curriculum and appropriate assessments to measure student understanding.
"We propose that the best teaching and curriculum are organized around the important ideas that we want students to come to understand. This provides a focal point for developing a rich, viable curriculum. By focusing around important ideas worth understanding, we need to unpack content standards and textbooks. We propose that our jobs are to uncover the content and identify the important ideas, the underlying principles, and the key concepts that help students make sense of some of the more discrete facts and skills," said McTighe. "A second implication of UbD is assessing for understanding," continued McTighe. "This is accomplished when our assessment tasks invite students to apply what they've learned to new situations. Additionally, we propose that the assessment involve some sort of explanation. When you really understand something, you can put it in your own words, teach it to someone else, justify your answer, and show your work so your reasoning is evident."
McTighe also discussed the framework's three-part "backward design" planning approach that requires educators to plan with the intended results in mind. "In Stage 1 of backward design, we ask people to be crystal clear about not only the knowledge and skills to be acquired, but also the larger understandings to be learned. And we propose that we frame those ideas through or around essential questions. The essential questions help us focus our teaching and help us uncover the content and engage students in actively exploring the ideas behind it.
"In Stage 2 of backward design, we ask people to think like assessors, because in Stage 2 we ask people to identify needed assessment evidence given our goals. We propose that assessments need to be aligned with our goals. Assessment should not be a single test at the end of teaching, but a collection of evidence over time. Stage 3 of backward design involves exploring ways that are going to help students achieve the goals and be effective on the assessments we've identified. Good curriculum planning is well-aligned, and backward design supports good alignment whether it's an individual teacher's plan for a unit, a team's or department's plan for a year, or a K–12 curriculum committee's plan across the grades. Focusing on understanding and using backward design will enhance teaching and learning," said McTighe.
Working with What Works
Robert Marzano presented his framework, WWIS, which focuses on 11 different factors that, according to research, appear to influence student achievement. "What Works in Schools was an attempt to go back and review the school correlates research from the 1970s and see if there were any ways of updating it. What we identified were 11 different factors that have a relationship to student achievement, according to the research.
"We broke those factors into three broad categories. Category 1 includes the school-level factors: things that schools do at the policy level. The factors [included] guaranteed and viable curriculum; challenging goals and effective feedback; parent and community involvement; safe and orderly environment; and collegiality and professionalism. Category 2 focuses on the teacher factors: things that are in the teacher's control. There are three of those: effective use of instructional strategies, classroom management strategies, and classroom curriculum design. Category 3 features the student-level factors: things that students bring to the classroom. There are three of those: home environment, learned intelligence/background knowledge, and motivation," said Marzano.
Marzano explained that these factors could be grouped together to form three "critical interventions or commitments" that schools and districts should make to students to ensure their success. "Guaranteed and viable curriculum; challenging goals and effective feedback form the first critical intervention. That's a system of individual student feedback on learning goals at the classroom, school, and district level. The second intervention put together all three of the factors related to teacher and student motivation to ensure effective teaching in every classroom. The third intervention focuses on learned intelligence/background knowledge, which covers things that the school and district can do to make sure that all students walk into classes with an adequate academic background knowledge. Knowledge of the subject matter at a surface level helps them learn content presented by teachers much more effectively," said Marzano.
Bringing It All Together
Throughout the panel discussion, the presenters pointed to the elements that connect their frameworks to one another. In DI, teachers need to differentiate their approach to encompass the diverse needs of students. This has to be rooted in best practices, according to Tomlinson. For UbD, McTighe and Wiggins stressed the identification of students' needs for differentiation can only be achieved through the "backward" design approach—clearly identifying the goals for student understanding and achievement. Marzano's WWIS emphasized the need for the three critical intervention pieces to come together to identify the content underneath the framework. The school, teacher, and student all have parts to play.