Facets

Because “enduring understanding” is the goal, it is helpful to remember that understanding is not just a single concept, but “a family of interrelated abilities – six different facets – and an education for understanding involves them all” (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998).
The six facets are (pp.44-58):

• Facet 1. Explanation: sophisticated and apt explanations and theories, which provide knowledgeable and justified accounts of events, actions, and ideas.

• Facet 2. Interpretation: interpretations, narratives, and translations that provide meaning.

• Facet 3. Application: ability to use knowledge effectively in new situations and diverse contexts.

• Facet 4. Perspective: critical and insightful points of view.

• Facet 5. Empathy: the ability to get inside another person’s feelings and worldview.

• Facet 6. Self-knowledge: the wisdom to know one’s ignorance and how one’s patterns of thought and action inform as well as prejudice understanding.

When teachers reflect on how to help students stay motivated, they are mindful of instructional complexities and how pivotal the role of the teacher really is. McTighe and Tomlinson (2006) also offered a strong caution to teachers who may have incorrectly applied Bloom’s taxonomy of learning and actually provided incentives for students to stop making progress. Teachers who have interpreted Bloom’s taxonomy of cognition as a type of “ladder” where students move through an ascending progression of stages for learning may have left students on “lower rungs” – indefinitely (p. 119). The caution is to avoid the flawed metaphor of learning as a ladder because, regardless of student mastery of any one area, opportunities to demonstrate understanding of each is critical.

For teachers who differentiate, there are many ways to ensure that students who have historically been the “worksheet” group will have access to McTighe and Wiggins’ “six facets” as well as to Bloom’s full taxonomy. Ironically, Bloom intended the taxonomy to represent the scope of knowledge, not linear steps (McTighe & Tomlinson, 2006, p. 120). Teachers who recognize this pitfall can take McTighe and Tomlinson’s advice to pre-plan for student needs in ways that help students maintain necessary levels of motivation (pp. 114-116).

Teachers who regularly use essential questions often note that the line between teaching and assessing becomes blurred. In fact, a straightforward and practical strategy is to pose an essential question at the beginning of instruction for diagnostic purposes. Initial student responses reveal what students know (or think they know) about the topic at hand, while exposing misconceptions that need to be targeted. The same question can be posed midway through a unit of study (as a formative assessment) and at the end of instruction, enabling the teacher (and the students) and to mark conceptual growth over time. We conclude this section with six practical tips for using essential questions in your teaching.

• Less is more. A truly essential question can go a long way. We suggest employing a small number of essential questions per unit (two to five). When using more than one, sequence the questions so they “naturally” lead from one to another.
• Be sure students understand key vocabulary necessary to explore the questions.
• Because the intent is to engage the learners, use “kid language” as needed to make them more accessible. Edit the questions to make them as engaging and provocative as possible for the age group.
• Help students personalize the questions. Have them share examples, personal stories, and hunches. Encourage them to bring in clippings and artifacts to help make the questions come alive.
• Post the essential questions in the classroom. Making them visible signals their importance and leads readily to teachable moments.
• Use follow-up strategies such as those in Figure 7.1 to engage far more students and deepen their understanding and their thinking.

F I G U R E 7. 1

Follow-up Strategies to Deepen Student Thinking

• Remember “Wait Time I and II.”
  Provide at least five seconds of thinking time after a question and after a response.
  
• Call on students randomly.
Avoid the pattern of calling only on those students with raised hands.
• Use probes and follow-ups.
“Why?” “Can you explain?” “Do you agree?” “How do you know?” “Please give an example.”
• Cue responses to open-ended questions.
“There is not a single correct answer to this question. I want you to consider alternatives.”
• Ask students to “unpack their thinking.”
“Describe how you arrived at your answer.”
• Periodically ask for summaries.
“Could you please summarize the key points of _______ [the text, the speaker, the film, our discussion] thus far?”
• Play devil’s advocate.
Require students to defend their reasoning against different points of view.
• Survey the class.
“How many people agree with ______ [this idea, the author’s point of view, that conclusion]?”
• Pose metacognitive/reflective questions.
“How do you know what you know?” “How did you come to understand this?” “How might you show that you understand?”
• Encourage student questioning.
Provide opportunities for students to generate their own questions.
• Use think-pair-share.
Allow individual thinking time and discussion with a partner, and then open up for class discussion.