I think that backwards design would be very useful in teaching history by projecting the end before discussing the means to illustrate the role of causation. While it seems obvious, backwards design came about as an alternative to teaching straight from the text in a linear fashion. The textbook is supposed to be a resource, and not a syllabus (page 9). Teaching in a linear way does not help students understand broader concepts and be able to answer essential questions, but rather it functions as as means of knowledge acquisition. I do feel that there is a difference between acquisition and understanding. If a student is able to recite the dates of the various events leading up the the American Revolution such as the Tea Act, the Stamp Act, the Boston Tea Party and the Boston Massacre, the student clearly acquired a lot of knowledge on the subject. But can the student answer the essential question "Why did the colonists want Independence from Britain?" To be able to answer this question requires understanding of broader concepts, and backwards design would argue that understanding best comes from a circular form of teaching. Start with a goal, work towards the goal, and reach the goal.
I remember when I was in high school I was taught in a backwards-design way with essential questions how to symbolically read. My 10th grade English teacher wrote "words have meaning" on the board, and we all just rolled our eyes and said "we know." My teacher went on to say that we were all taught that words have definitions, and that the entire point of her class was to teach us that words have meaning. After our main goal was defined (that we will be able to understand that words have meaning), she handed out paper back versions of "The Scarlet Letter." We spent the next 3 days going over the first paragraph through class discussions, exercises and lectures. This is stage 2 in backwards design, where our teacher was collecting the evidence needed to see if we were capable of reading the deeper meaning in the words. I remember her saying "the rose bush is more than a rose bush!" After the class was able to demonstrate to her that we understood the symbolism, and she was confident we could read the symbolism behind the words, we were assigned to read the rest of the book. Stage 3 involved our teacher holding class discussions and other various learning events (like having a girl in class wear a sign that said "slut" in front of the class to talk about what it was like for Hester to have to wear the A) as we were reading the book, and she did this to guide us in our symbolic reading and help us master the skills. I never knew at the time that this was a teaching style called "backwards design," but looking back it definitely was. Our final paper assignment for that year was to answer the question "How do words have meaning?" I know it was an effective teaching strategy because I can remember that entire unit so clearly, and it has been 10 years since I took that class.
I have to say that is a really great unit that your teacher came up with. I also read The Scarlet Letter in high school, but it was an outside reading book and we did not talk about it with anywhere near the depth you did. I think that experience justifies all that this reading is trying to tell us is effective. You remember what you learned and were able to answer the overarching essential question that extended way beyond the unit. Starting at the end and working back to beginning as a form of design really seems like the best way to go. Also, when you mentioned it being a good way to teach history, my first thought was about how teachers don't want to spoil the big conclusion. It's almost like there is a desire to weave the lesson like a story and hold back details for the big reveal. But by starting at the end, like you mention, by discussing the issues that made the colonists feel oppressed by Britain before doing anything else, a student will really come to understand why the American Revolution took place. And that why is certainly more important than just being able to say on what date the Tea Act was put in place.
ReplyDeleteHey Calla, as your History colleague, I think you've hit something interesting when you say that you think that "backwards design would be very useful in teaching history by projecting the end before discussing the means to illustrate the role of causation." What do you mean by projecting the end? Like, a spoiler alert? Or do you mean more to front load the units with the desired outcome, "Why do people seek independence?", for example, or, "How do people resist the powers held over them," or, "What actions are available to people who are wrongfully subjugated?" I think your idea of making the final assessment explicitly reflective of the essential question- if students have been thinking about it from the very beginning they will have a better sense of what to pay greater attention to, what to question more. Regarding the issue of causation in history, that's a tough one. How can you both present the idea that "history is not inevitable," while demonstrating that "actions have reactions?" I'd be interested as to what Brown would say... you know he's very focused on causation vs. correlation....
ReplyDeletePaige, I know exactly what you mean about the slippery slope of causation versus correlation! I think that it is one of the trickiest parts about studying history. That being said, I think that one of the best parts about backwards design is it in a way helps the teacher and the students try to distinguish between the two. For example, "Why do people seek independence" would be a great essential question to frame a unit on the American Revolution, and it would be a way to also sift out the causation from the correlation, and bring up the differences between causation and correlation in the classroom. I also think it would be a great way to introduce primary sources into the unit. The distribution of Boston Massacre propaganda throughout the nation, for example, and having students look at the Paul Revere plate of the massacre and have students see what message Revere is trying to convey about the British - is this correlation to why people seek independence, or causation? What a fun class discussion that would be :)
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou have to watch Easy A, a modern retelling of Hester Prynne's tale.
ReplyDeleteDr Kraus -
DeleteI have seen that movie! I thought it was a great modern take on it. I think it is great when an older book can be applicable to student life today.