Chapter 10 of Subjects
Matter begins with an example of “backmapping.” The term means that an
educator creates an inquiry project first and then decides what goals and
standards the project will check off second. This sounds like a process that is
opposite of the UBD model. Backmapping sounds like it focuses on an activity or
project that an educator really wants to incorporate and then considers the
standards later. A few things can go wrong here. First, lets say an educator
gets very excited about an inquiry project for their students. They spend lots
of time and energy planning the project. Then it is time to look at the
standards and the project does not relate to any of the standards. What will
the educator do? Most will create a new project, some will adjust the existing
project so it fits a standard, and few might make it fit a standard that it
does not relate to. It sounds like educators will waste a lot of time using
this method of “backmapping.” Also, the focus is on the project, not the
standards that we are responsible for teaching.
The pros are understandable. Students will be engaged in an
exciting, interesting, and real-world learning experience. The take-away will
be huge! But I do not think standards are a bad place to start when planning an
inquiry project. Standards do not measure or consider every aspect of learning.
Surprise – they are not perfect. We are still responsible for making sure our
students reach the state standards and part of that responsibility is being
creative. Make meeting a standard just as interesting and authentic as your
favorite activity. I do not think it is impossible to create an inquiry project
that meets a standard even if you did not start it with a standard in mind. As
teachers, we will spend most of our time planning and this model seems like it
could potentially waste a lot of the little time we do have. That is my opinion
on backmapping.
On the other hand, inquiry projects sound awesome. A project
that engages students in an investigation has immense potential. It produces a
deeper learning experience, takes a longer time to process, and does not result
in a simple “yes or no” answer. There are many moving parts so teachers in
other content areas can collaborate with you on the project. They can lead and
assess specific areas of the project, too. Some challenges include time
management and project progress.
Chapter 11 offers tips on supporting students who struggle
with reading. I think the most important tip is to model reading for your
students. By showing them your thought process, your personal techniques, and application
of reading skills, you will encourage students to utilize new ways to read more
actively. Continuous reassurance is also a great way to show a student you care
about their reading skills.
Hey Casandra,
ReplyDeleteI had a very similar post to yours. This idea of back-mapping sounded very contrary to what we've been learning about specifically the UbD model. I think you're right that standards do not measure everything, and I think a lot of times teachers make them sound more restrictive then they are. There are plenty of standards specifically in the ELA content which are open enough that you could choose one first and then design your lesson to be inquiry-based while still addressing that standard. I think it's something that would make teaching and learning much more enjoyable is when students are the ones primarily involved and driving the learning. But I also feel, as you stated, that we can accomplish this while starting with the standards first.
Hi Casandra,
ReplyDeleteI actually didn't think that backmapping seemed contradictory to UBD, although I understand your criticism. I was thinking of it as complimentary to UBD. Like, you figure out what you want students to get from the inquiry project, design the activity (like the structure), then do the boring stuff (which standards?) I feel like they didn't really explain the process very well, but I think they meant something more like what I am describing?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCasandra,
ReplyDeleteI am glad I am not the only one that thought backmapping contradicted every thing we learned about UbD. Something just does not seem right about implementing a lesson plan, then applying appropriate standards to it. By doing it this way, is the student really going to learn the standards, or is the teacher just assigning a standard that seems appropriate just for the sake of adding a standard? We are responsible for teaching these standards, so I think it is better to follow the UbD model.
Casandra,
ReplyDeleteWhen you mentioned back mapping I too thought of the UBD model. I agree that the idea of backmapping seems like an issue. When one plans with the standards in mind they often spend more time revising lesson plans than they did to create it. Thought we oftentimes don't necessarily agree with some of the standards, our students are required to meet them and prove that they have met them. Thus, planning according to the standards is important.