I thought I would reflect in list form and create a “top 5″ list of UD BIG Ideas. I have found in the past that making a list like this will help me to further implement material in future lessons.

#1: Universal Design is for all learners.

UD is a means to make content more accessible (and interesting) for every child in every classroom. Sometimes, individual accommodations made for one student do not benefit the general population. With individual accommodations, much of a teacher’s time can be spent on a small segment of the classroom population.

Instead, teaching-with-UD aims to make each learning experience more appropriate for every learner. Implementing UD is a win-win situation for teachers and learners. When teachers implement UD, they are considering the multiple paths that can be taken by learners to reach the same goal (end goal: student learning). UD aims to make each learning experience more appropriate for every learner.

#2: Blogs and Wikis can be useful classroom tools.

I had heard of blogs before taking this class. I had probably read a few blogs, too. However, I had not even begun the process of creating my own until I was compelled to do so by this course. At first, the task was slightly daunting. The blog sites use an entirely different vocabulary than I am accustomed to reading, writing or speaking. The good news about being marginally technologically-aware is that I was willing to try out the formatting options and different commands. In the end, I have learned a lot about blogs and their secret lingo. I have found blogging for this course to be a useful way to vent my anxiety, thoughts, and questions.

I think that Blogs would have a place in the classroom. I could see the usefulness of posing a question on a teacher-moderated blog and having students post comments in response. I could also see students showcasing their learning on a blog where teachers and other students could comment on the student’s insights.

I am still a little bit of a Wiki novice. I have set one up, but haven’t spent considerable time on the site. I do think that Wikis would have an application for student-directed group projects. I think Wikis will be my next frontier for collaborative online learning. (Thanks for setting up the Wiki, Cynthia. I will check it out tonight!)

#3: Podcasting: It’s not that hard to do!

I was excited to learn about Podcasting. I had heard of Podcasts, but never realized that I had the capability to make one myself or have my students create their own. It was fun to write and read aloud the reflection Janet and I created. I think that we learned while we were annotating our information, but by writing a script and performing the Podcast, we committed a lot of the information to memory. This would be a very useful way for students to digest new information and present their learning. Next step: I need to learn how to Podcast using the version of Garage Band that I have on my teacher laptop – and the student laptops we have in the classroom.

#4: Collaboration is Key.

Working with my unit team has been challenging (especially to schedule), enjoyable, and enlightening. I have had the opportunity to collaborate with each of my teammates in the past,  but our work has never been technology focused or even focused on our own learning. We’ve always put the kids first. We have had the opportunity to create a unit in a thoughtful and well-planned (or at least we hope it is) way.  It has been interesting to learn where each of us is coming from, write goals about where we are going, and get to where we need to be with this unit. I hope to further collaborate with my team this winter to write the learning experiences that will complete the layout of this unit.

#5: Implementing UD doesn’t have to be complicated.

I have learned many new ways to incorporate UD in my daily lesson plans. It doesn’t have to be groundbreaking or earth-shattering. Baby steps seem to work best in UD implementation. I have already brought in a projector on multiple occasions to share PowerPoint presentations. I have also used the audio CD that accompanies our LA program. I plan to use the HOLT online website very soon to spice up my LA classes. The changes I have made for UD have nicely complimented my current work on teaching study and textbook skills. (Our kids are lacking in this area.)

Overall, I’ve learned a lot this fall. I hope to find new ways to implement UD. I am also excited to teach our unit in a few months. Perhaps I will try to maintain the blog while I am teaching the unit to help me plan my lesson and reflect.

Happy Holidays! Thanks for everything, Cynthia!

I am so grateful for the winter weather. After spending Friday and Saturday at an awesome conference on Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), I just need a couple of days off to rest my brain and get caught up on my work. Let it snow!

About the conference, it was put on by the Northeast affiliate of the ASCD and was titled “Leading and Learning: Sustaining Learning Communities”. It was really very eye-opening. We learned a great deal about PLCs and how to make them successful and useful in our school environment. This conference was very timely, as we just implemented a district-wide initiative committed to each educator taking part in a community that is focused on achieving one of our district-improvement goals.

Some of the biggest learning I picked up:

1. (Although, I’m not exactly sure how this connects to PLCs…) We should do away with threatening to and giving kids zeros for incomplete work. There has a been a great deal of research on this topic, and it is proven that the threat of failing an assignment does not work as a motivator for students to complete the work to the best of their ability. I have done some incidental research on this in my own class. I have found the exact same conclusion. Recording zeros, in effect, excuses students from the assignment. And, although I would have been mortified by the impact of a zero in my 6th grade teacher’s grade book, many kids are defeated by the idea of a zero and/or are more willing to avoid work than consider the impact of a zero of their “academic record”. I think my new philosophy will be that all students must complete all work. It will be recommended that students do the work when it is most valuable (when it is assigned and pertinent to the following day’s lesson). However, work that is not done will not be a zero – but will be done by every student at a time that is less convenient to students (recess, after school, etc.). I am going to try this for the duration of this year and see if this policy has an impact on how kids approach their assignments, scores on assessments, and their overall comprehension of materials. I think this policy may give more value to the work that students are expected to do.

2. Another eye-opener, PLC topics need to be selected by teachers for the betterment of students’ education and teacher’s ability to teach and learn. This year, my PLCs topic is RTI. This is a topic I was interested in studying; however, our direction and focus has been assigned to us. Thus, members of my group are frustrated with the process and direction that we are currently moving in. We were also assigned to groups, and I think this limited our ability to select group of colleagues that make sense to us on a practical level. For example, working with teachers at my grade level or those who teach the same curriculum would have been a more comfortable and productive fit.

3. Although not implicitly stated, I think there is a logical connection between PLCs and UD. Planning units and lessons with others who have an understanding or interest in UD would make for a very interesting PLC group. I think it is sometimes overwhelming to consider all of the elements of a unit, along with the opportunities to integrate Universal Design. Working with others would give an individual teacher the chance to collaborate and consider elements of lessons that they may not have thought of on their own. I think units created by teams of teachers are ultimately more thoughtful and creative. I believe a PLC that focuses on integrating UD into their units would find that the unit is more universally accessible.

Overall, it was a very enlightening conference. I think that we will be able to improve our PLCs as a result of what we learning. I think that I also have some new strategies to employ with my unit development group – which is a highly functioning PLC in my opinion.

Cynthia – Will you please let me know if there are objectives on your check-off list that I have neglected to write about on the blog. I would love to complete those reflection pieces in the next couple of weeks. Thanks so much!

See you Thursday!

I’m sorry this is being written post-Thursday, but I just could not find the time to get this done in the week leading up to Thanksgiving. Patrick, my husband, and I, in an effort to spend time with both of our families, typically celebrate each holiday for about 5 consecutive days. So, we are just beginning to come down from a Thanksgiving preparation-and-celebration bender. Not a good excuse for not having this done…but maybe better than “the dog ate my blog post”.

On the brighter side, our group did have a chance to meet this Tuesday afternoon and work on some objectives and other unit essentials. We looked at the objectives first. In particular, our aim was to use the class’ and Cynthia’s feedback to finalize (for now) the objective wording. We were able to do this with an amount of success. We had already implemented many of the suggestions given by the class, so that part was easy! Then, we looked at Cynthia’s feedback. I think we agreed with the valid and interesting points – well, all but two of them. It was actually kind of amusing, because the two pieces of advice we grappled with were about the two objectives that we had previously discussed at length within our own group.

One of the challenging objectives: “Learners will be able to distinguish between effective and detractive literary devices when used as components of a story”. Cynthia had asked whether we could do without this objective – or maybe more precisely, is it needed within the larger list of objectives. Nathan, Julie, Janet, and I discussed this and realized that we do feel there is a need for this particular objective. Our reasoning is that kids often will employ literary devices in their writing that do not properly fit into the work and/or are incorrectly used. We thought there would be value in showing our students different pieces of work – some with appropriately-used literary devices and other with overblown or incorrect or distractive literary devices. Our aim is for kids to understand that authors do not simply use literary devices randomly, but instead employ them to enrich their pieces and add meaning to their work.

Our other dispute centered on the idea of assessing “voice” in this unit. We have gone around and around about this one. I think, for me, the biggest issue I have with writing a voice objective is that there is (in my mind) no way to objectively score that component of students’ writing. I think voice is so individualized that it’s very hard to pinpoint exactly “what it is” and where it’s used. In the end, we decided that the unit is quite full as is – and since we would not be explicitly teaching voice in the unit, that we should not be assessing for it. (Note: I am not sure how to “teach voice” at all… maybe I need to write another whole unit on that one!) We compared assessing voice to assessing mechanics: we are not actively teaching mechanics in this unit, so we do not have an objective for it. However, we have taught mechanics in the past, so we feel the kids should employ the rules taught in past units. Our thinking came around to the idea that we should not try to assess too much the first time we teach this unit, as we need to try it first on a smaller scale – and then possibly add on while revising it for the following year.

So, finally, we decided upon 11 objectives that we think are doable and will teach kids the “meat and potatoes” of our unit. We then worked on enduring understandings. This may be unpopular, but I do not see the need for enduring understandings. I feel that if the kids are able to master the skills/knowledge in the objectives, then they will understand what I want them to “understand”. However, we worked some out – and the process did help us pinpoint what we want the kids to take away from the unit in a more specific way. We wrote these understandings around the idea that students need to learn what literary devices are, need to know where to find them, and then need to know why we use them. We also wanted the kids to use these devices to enhance their own writing. I hope this is the correct way to word the understandings. Is it ‘ok’ for them to be redundant when read in conjunction with the objectives. Are we on the right track with these?

After grappling with the enduring understandings, we worked on the “essential questions” of the unit. We had already written one:

“What makes a piece of writing worth reading?” I really like that question. I think kids will get that idea and be interested in the exploration of that question. Other questions we developed:

“What are literary devices?” (Simple and forthright)

“How are literary devices used?” (Stolen from the objectives)

“How can we enhance our own writing so that it is more descriptive, more accessible, and more interesting for our readers (aka worth reading)?” (Here, we were trying to list the reasons that literary devices are used by authors – and why readers prefer to read the work of those who are successful at utilizing literary devices. Not sure if we hit the mark here…)

All in all, we didn’t come up with too many essential questions, but we hoped to keep the list short and the wording simple. Since we will want to assess our students on these questions, they are very closely aligned with our objectives and mirror them in many ways. Is this acceptable? Should we design more questions – like one for each objective?

Finally, we talked about how to assess each individual objective. That process was tricky. We are on the right track here, I think, but have barely scratched the surface. A lot of work remains to design some assessments that hit all three corners of the assessment triangulation (student products and performances, teacher-directed evidence, and observations & conversations). We have much to do! I think we’ll have plenty to do when we get back to school on Monday!

I hope you had a great holiday! See you a week from Thursday (I will be at the conference in Boston this week). Cynthia, please let me know what I can do to make up the time I miss. Thanks!

Objective Update: I was really pleased to have an opportunity to gather feedback on our objectives last week in class. It’s funny how the objective writing process works…

1. An individual writes the objectives that he/she thinks are flawless and precise.

2. A group of individuals dissects the individual’s objectives and determines that they were neither flawless nor precise.

3. Group of individuals draft new objectives. They feel confident that their objectives are better than the individual’s objectives. The group assumes that this set may not be absolutely precise and may be imperfect.

4. Group of individuals bring objectives to a larger forum. Objectives are found to be imprecise, slightly confusing, and imperfect.

5. Using feedback from the forum, group rewrites objectives and prays that no larger consortium ever spend a block of time analyzing said objectives. Objectives are left in a state of constant revision.

Ok, maybe it wasn’t all that bad.

I am glad that we had time to work together as a group to look over our objectives and really get to the “meat & potatoes” of what we want the kids to know. I am also glad that we were able to rework our objectives with the larger class (and Cynthia’s) feedback to make them more readily understandable and measurable. I am looking forward to meeting up with my group again to do a final (for now) revision of the objectives and see where that leaves us. (Later, I know we will want to review our objectives as we are teaching the unit and upon its completion.)

As I consider the objective creation process, my thoughts wander to the application of this “Unit Objectives Creation Process” in my everyday teaching…

On creating objectives as a group…. I have found that planning with others is a valuable activity. I learn so much about content – and how to teach it – when I work with other professionals to write lesson plans, craft assessments, and evaluate student work. I gravitate toward teachers who also thrive off this model of group planning (for example: Mrs. Buck!).

On our daily teaching/learning objectives… I think that we (Janet, Tonya – our fearless special educator, and I) often orally go through the same objective creation criteria when we meet to plan SS and LA. We think about what we want the kids to know and then come up with a means to reach those ends. We discuss student learning in terms of quantity of information and precise language. We always think about how much kids need to know about a certain topic and what score they will need to achieve on an assessment to prove mastery of a topic or skill. We also try to create scoring rubrics and checklists that tell kids exactly what we want to them to do/know.

So, I guess the objective creation process is not so far from what we do everyday. We just don’t write it down (which seems to make it so much simpler!). I think working on the set of objectives for our writing unit is helping me to create other sets of objectives for current units being taught and those I will teach in the future. It’s nice to have an opportunity to look at a unit in isolation and spend a good amount of quality time hashing out what we want kids to know and be able to do.

In other news… I hope that we will have time to talk more about UD assessment before we are set forth to create assessments for our unit. I understand that we will be using three different types of assessment. I also plan to create a rubric or other grading criteria list for each type of assessment we will use. I think I am most confused about the assessment reporting format you would like us to use. I also hope that we may find time in class to work on this aspect of the project – as finding other opportunities to work together is a quite difficult for our group.

Hope you are having a great week! See you Thursday!

This week, I’m actually a little digitally speechless (which is very unusual!). I think I’m meeting-ed out this week, so much so, that I am feeling a little passionless about any one particular hot topic. All the PLC, RTI, social studies curriculum, universal design, report card talk has fried my brain!

A few disjointed thoughts… I was glad to learn about Grab last week – I have used it before, but it had been awhile, and it was a nice refresher. I could see applications of that program in making technology manuals for kids (0r adults) to use. I am also excited to learn more about Podcasts and the application for that technology in my classroom. I haven’t tried creating or playing any yet, but plan to tackle that media in the coming weeks. I could see broadcasting information for kids from one of the many Podcasts available on I-tunes. I could also see the application for Podcasts on a sub day. You could leave your instructions in a Podcast format so that the kids could hear directions and guidelines as intended by the classroom teacher. I suppose I would have to have a technologically-savvy sub, but I think we are moving toward that (hey, and you could always burn it on a cd!).

Our objectives are coming along. I think we came a long way from our original draft. We were also to rework or delete any objectives that we perceived as subjective or unclear. We refined exactly what we were looking for in the process and narrowed our statements down to the essential ideas and skills.

We really struggled with finding a way to assess voice in writing. I think I’ve always struggled with this in my correction of student work. It is hard to say exactly what voice is. It can also be very subjective. What I consider good voice could be very different that Janet or Julie’s perception of the same piece of writing. So, we dealt with this by debating what we specifically wanted to see in the students’ writing – and eliminating the term “voice” altogether. I think in the end, we were able to develop quantifiable objectives by really thinking about precisely what we wanted instead of using blanket terminology (like voice).

Although I’ve known this is what we needed to do to develop objectives, it wasn’t until we had drafted some vague ones that we were able to rework those ideas and design concrete and quantifiable objectives. It also took the discussion between my colleagues and myself to really hash out what we wanted and how we were to word our demands.

I think this process will help me in creating everyday lesson plans. I will be able to think about the “meat and potatoes” (or essential understandings, to be more technical) I want the kids to gather from a lesson. This focus should help drive my instruction and assessment. I also plan to work harder to make my objectives (daily and unit) more available to students. It gives the kids a sense of purpose and understanding when they can see what they are working toward and a possible route to get there.

I think that’s it for this week. I am looking forward to our “objective share” this week in class and hope that we will be able to cement our objectives and get to work on the assessment piece.

See you Thursday!

When we attend class, I will probably be coming down from a week-long sugar high. And, to top it off, I was at a workshop all day today – and have another day long workshop stint planned for Thursday. Maybe I should make some good points in this reflection, since I may be useless by the time Thursday afternoon rolls around.

To start, I am feeling a little more positive than last week. I suspect bloggin’ my feelings out may have helped. (I also suspect that the ten pounds of Halloween candy lurking on every counter has significantly helped my mood while have having the opposite effect on my waistline.) I think I am at the point now where I just have to do what I can, and always be willing to improve my teaching practices.

Cynthia – Your comments on last week’s reflection entry made me feel much better, too. It’s nice to know I’m not alone in my frustration. It’s also nice to hear that UD is one of those teaching components that gets easier to implement over time and practice.

In other news… I was really glad to work with my group last week and start to hammer out our objectives. We have tried several times to meet outside of Thursday’s class, but we are all so busy that we only find a few minutes at lunch to really collaborate. So, having a uninterrupted block of time to work together was priceless. I think we now have an idea of what we want the kids to be able to do – it is just wording the objectives (and making them measurable) that we need to focus on. That is sometimes a challenge.

Issue: We are a planning to do a reading/writing unit. Determining quantifiable objectives that makes sense and are not arbitrary has proved to be easier-said-than-done. For example, one of our desired outcomes is for the kids to be able to “create an introduction that catches a reader’s attention”. I am stuck on how to quantify the idea of “interest-catching”. I suppose this could be quite subjective. However, determining exactly how to define “interest-catching” is beyond me. I suppose if I were hard-pressed to encapsulate that idea – I would say it uses descriptive language, one of our five story-starting methods (opening with a questions, phrase explosion, etc.), and relates to the topic at hand. Will we limit the students if we specify the terminology so rigidly? I don’t want to have the kids become writing-robots, but rather, I want them to use the tools we’ll be giving them and enhance their own writing styles. Any advice?

Issue: Is there a master list of all UD technologies for teaching available? There seems to be so many powerful tools – but fitting the right ones into the right lessons is a tall order. This may be more of a problem for us now than it will be down the line. I think the more we learn about UD, the more ideas we amass. But in the meantime, is there a site I could visit to inspire our group?

Otherwise, I think we are working our way into the right direction. I look forward to sharing out work with the other groups in the class. I hope that they, and our Fearless Professor, will be able to help us sort through our confusion. It was very helpful to listen to the process and outcomes of the 5th grade group last week.

Another quick note… (Sorry about the jumbled information discussed in this blog entry.)… I am feeling better about RTI. I have done some research lately and looked into the successes some western states (Colorado & Oregon among them) are having after the implementation of RTI. I am also glad that our district will not have to reinvent the wheel and can adopt and adapt a working model from another district that has already done the footwork. Here are a couple of interesting sites I found with a wealth of information on RTI:

http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdesped/RTI.asp

http://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?id=315

I also found this site, which seems to offer a technological information collection method to help school districts track RTI data:

http://www.autoskill.com/intervention/access_rti_wp.php

I’m sure there are many other CBM-like programs out there. I think technology may be our best friend in the implementation of RTI – and in the interventions we propose for kids in need of assistance.

See you Thursday night!

(Oh wait, wrong blog.)

Ok. So, I’m feeling like a real negative Nancy lately. I used to be really optimistic about all things educational. In the last year or so, however, I’ve begun to feel a a little discouraged and disgruntled. I think it stems from the feeling that I am trying my very best to paddle, but the boat keeps going in circles. It doesn’t seem to matter how much time/attention I give to teaching. Whether I dedicate that time toward working with students… giving feedback on assignments… collaborating with teammates… or planning. I can work for four or five hours a night after the kids go home, and the next day, I’m back buried under the pile of correcting, data, and new programming to integrate. I guess I’m a little disillusioned. Maybe this stems from the fact that I spend the majority of my time at work doing assignments I never even knew teachers were expected to do – before I become one myself.

In any rate, I know I need an attitude readjustment, a refocus, or a vacation. (Maybe all three!) I know what’s most important – connecting with my students and helping each one make academic and personal progress. I somehow need to see past the muck and mire to the real goal. How to do this, I haven’t yet figured.

I know this may not be a discussion solely about UBD or UD, but I think it all connects back. There are so many lessons I want to plan integrating the teaching principles of UBD and the accessibility of UD. I just need to find a way to make these tasks a priority – and I would say that this course is helping me move in that direction. Every time we read an article, I am reminded of being an optimistic college student learning about ideas like UBD, UB, and MI – so eager to have my own classroom where those ideas would be as routine as lunch counts and attendance.

In any rate, I haven’t given up yet. I know there’s a light in the tunnel – however dim it looks right now. I hope that we will learn some strategies (and dare I say, shortcuts) to help make UD a near-effortless component of my teaching.

Sorry about the rant. I have to say, just writing this all down has made me feel better.  I guess the good news is that I know where I am going – it’s just the means to get there that is a little fuzzy.  I think I’m jumping out of the boat for tonight. Until next time…

Our conversation during class last week’s class got me thinking about the relationship between the new “Response to Intervention” legislation and Understanding by Design theory. Then, I began to contemplate the relationship the same new legislation has with Universal Design.

First, Understanding by Design: At our district, we have been implementing UbD for about three years now. In that time, we have also increased the number of Connected Math units we teach, adopted a reading anthology for teaching LA, bought new social studies textbooks, and continued the use of the Foss science program and the Write Traits writing program. It has been somewhat of a challenge to plan UbD units while still meeting all the district benchmarks and teaching the programs we are asked to use in our classrooms.

RTI calls for the use of programs that have been tested and are supported by research. My best guess is that this means we will be using more programs that are created by textbook companies that have the staff and resources to conduct product testing. I am beginning to wonder what effect this will have on our abilities to create UbD units that are designed to meet benchmarks and the individual needs and interests of our population. How much can we alter a standardized program before its results are no longer research-based?

I hope I’m seeing this as a “glass half empty” scenario and that the actual legislation will be more flexible and allow us to continue to tweak our lesson plans to suit the needs of our learners and employ UbD. In the last few years, we have found ways to use the tested-programs and still make changes to further promote student understanding.

I hope the people behind RTI have the best of intentions. I am concerned about programs that bring about massive changes for all kids – and all teachers. One-size-fits all fixes seldom bring about positive and lasting change. I would like to do some more research on RTI to see if this policy was tested for effectiveness in a school district or two or whether it was looked at from a more budget-minded angle.

On the other hand, I do think this RTI legislation may be a better match with Universal Design. Because we will be looking at ways to help kids with specific learning issues, we will most likely look to assistive technologies and other programs to help provide timely interventions for kids who need them. I think UD can become a useful tool to help kids and teachers reach desired learning outcomes. But, again, here, I worry about UD technology being seen as a fix in and of itself – without proper staffing to help students learn the technology and modify student programs. If we can do this,  I think we can meet desired learning outcomes.

I am looking for more information on RTI. I hope I can find a way to better match UbD with UD and the changes we will see because of RTI.

Any suggestions?

I do think that I have a better idea about what UD is and how it works to help all kids access an education that is appropriate for their strengths and needs. I am totally on board with what is suggested by the article authors. I do see a lot of potential roadblocks on our way to making this happen for our kids – but I think it’s a matter of when not if we will overcome these obstacles (sooner would be much better!).

As I was reading this week and sitting in class last Thursday, I kept thinking about my language arts curriculum. For background: I have been teaching at GNG for 6 years. I’ve always taught SS, but have switched between teaching math and teaching LA. Last year, I taught math, this year LA. I think switching my focus from time-to-time gives me an interesting vantage point. When teaching math, we use the Connected Math Program. It is very straightforward. All the math teachers at our grade level use the program and we deliver a pretty consistent math experience at our grade level.

In LA, we do have a reading program (HOLT), a spelling program, and a set of learning objectives for writing and grammar. Unlike in math where the outcomes are clear, in LA, I feel like I am planning specific lessons for my students that do not always tie into what we did yesterday – or what we are going to do tomorrow. I have standards and goals to teach by and a cohort of colleagues who plan with me, but I still feel disjointed and “overly goaled” (which leads to me feeling focus-less). I am hoping that in this course we can plan a unit with reasonable learning outcomes, purpose, scaffolding, and an obvious course of lessons. In this way, I hope my students will be able to see where we are going and where we have come from. I think using UD will allow me to tailor each learning experience to each student – providing them with choices, individualized learning, and academic progress.

On a lighter note, I love the NoteTaker software. I’ve asked our curriculum coordinator to see if we can purchase it for 6th grade teacher laptops. I think our hand-me-down student laptops would be too expensive to outfit, especially since they are technologically on-their-way-out. Karen said she will look into it – and we are very optimistic.

I am also loving the text reader on this laptop. I have been using it to help me proofread my entries for the blog. This is great because I have a real difficulty picking up typos on the screen.

Overall, interesting week. I am looking forward to starting out unit on Thursday in class.

(Cynthia – Please let me know if I am not “meeting standards” on these reflections. I want to make sure that I am on track.)

I was surprised to find out at our first class that the course would be focusing on Universal Design and not Understanding By Design. The phrasing is similar – so, I assume somewhere along the way, I accidentally added a “B” to my notion of this course.

I was also surprised to discover that UD and UBD are really not all that far apart. It seems like the philosophy of UD fits the theory of UBD. One of the aims of UBD is to allow all learners to access and understand their educational experiences, and UD is the ability of individuals to meet those needs through technology. I guess it is a good fit. I am hoping to learn in this course how to best fuse these two acronyms. Maybe UBDUD?

Another thought from the first class: I am really excited to learn about available new technologies that I can use with my students. As I mentioned in my previous post, my kids love computers! I would love to find ways to integrate technology into lessons and have my students involved and attentive. I would also like to find ways to better teach my materials through the use of technology. I have tried Web Quests with some success and other models of technologically-based lessons. I would like to be able to be current in my social studies materials (the web seems like the most affordable and easiest way to do this). I would also like to be more savvy in instructional technologies that may assist students with special needs.

I am anxious to start this class and really excited about the chance to work with my colleagues to develop a unit that will be applicable, interesting, standards-based, and differentiated. I love taking courses with the teachers at my grade level. It gives us a reason to rethink what we teach and how we teach it. It also gives us time to collaborate and really come up with some lessons that will ‘wow’ the kids and bring about the desired learning.

Looking forward to next week….