Three Column Table vs. Understanding by Design
Both the Three Column Table model of course design by L. Dee Fink and the Understanding by Design framework for unit design by Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe offer researched-based guidelines for course and curriculum development. Which designed is appropriate in which situations depends upon the overall goal of the designer. I invite you to view my Three Column Table for my French II course and my Understanding by Design framework for the first unit of study in my French II course to see how I have implemented each of these models.
The Three Column Table is a useful tool for full course development. The overarching project – or audacious goal – provides an authentic experience that gives the course real world application. L. Dee Fink asks the designer to think about a variety of learning goals – foundational, application, integration, human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn. While these learning goal should and can be part of an overall course design, it can be difficult to incorporate all of them into each unit of study. Depending upon the nature of the course in question, it can be challenging to think of a truly audacious goal, but once the designer has developed that goal, the rest of the pieces begin to fall into place to make the course cohesive.
The Understanding by Design framework of Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe provides curriculum designers and instructors with a manageable structure for unit planning. Whereas the Three Column Table requires that learning experiences be grouped into learning goals, Understanding by Design recognizes that learning activities bridge several goals. Additionally, the UbD framework lends itself more easily to developing daily lesson plans. As a model for full course design, however, Understanding by Design could be cumbersome. Curriculum using this design should be a series of frameworks, where each one represents each unit of study.
Both the Three Column Table and the Understanding by Design framework have their rightful places in curriculum design and can be used in combination. Ideally, curriculum design would begin with an audacious goal and the Three Column Table to clarify overarching course goals and to be sure that the different types of learning goals that Fink discusses are realized. The learning goals of the Three Column Table would inform the essential questions of unit goals, and designers and teachers would then use the Understanding by Design framework to inform individual unit creation.
A New Outlook on Designing Learning Environments
Prior to working through the Three Column Table, I believed that having authentic communication goals was an audacious goal, at least at for courses where I was working with beginner language learners. The Three Column Table forced me to consider that there were larger, more authentic objectives toward which my students could be working. I do not have to wait until my students are in their fourth or fifth year of language study to ask them to communicate in a more authentic way. While I need to adjust my expectations for the level of the learner, there is no reason why my second year French students cannot communicate with native speakers and in authentic contexts.
The human dimension and caring learning goals advocated by L. Dee Fink are frequently overlooked or discussed superficially in world language classes. The focus is too often on the structure of the language and the “fun” elements of culture. Learning French is more than the Louvre and the Eiffel Tower. There are real people, societal challenges, and economic difficulties that are all parts of Francophone culture. While I have addressed these topics in my Advanced Placement course, the Three Column Table helped me to find ways of making culture more real even for students at the beginning stages of their language studies.
Whereas the Three Column Table will be an important resources as my colleagues and I re-evaluate our larger goals to rewrite and revise program curricula, Understanding by Design will help me to see clearly what my unit goals are going forward. As I implement my innovation plan in my classroom, using the backward design model will provide a map for the voyage. In the coming years, I plan to incorporate an in-class blended learning environment into my courses in order to provide a more personalized and individualized experience for my students. Keeping my essential questions in mind for each unit, I will be able to build more effective stations in order to improve learning outcomes and to provide students with more choice, ownership, voice and authenticity in their learning.
References
Fink, L. D. (2003). A self-direct guide to designing course for significant
learning [Pamphlet]. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2008). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Growing my Classroom 