Understanding by Design
Designing an effective learning experience requires thoughtful planning and alignment of goals, assessments, and instructional strategies. The foundation of the UbD (Understanding by Design) provides an approach that focuses on backward design to make sure that learning goals drive instruction. Fink's 3 Column Table shows us a holistic perspective by combining significant learning experiences that create deeper understanding and engagement. This page explores the application of the UbD model for implementing automation in Banner for financial aid staff and compares it to Fink's model. This will reflect on designing processes that help develop innovative and meaningful learning environments.
Comparison of Ubd Template and Fink's 3 Column Table
​​
​
Ubd and Fink's 3 column table provides a structured approach in designing learning experiences, but focuses on different aspects:
​
Ubd emphasizes on backward design, establishing alignment between learning goals, assessments, and instructional strategies. It begins with the end in mind and systematically develops a pathway to those goals (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). Fink's 3 Column Table focuses on significant learning experiences, tying foundational knowledge, application, and caring dimensions (Fink, 2003).
​
Each of these models is effective but serves different purposes. The Ubd model is more structured and outcome-driven, which is essential for aligning my innovation plan in implementing automation in Banner for financial aid staff. Fink's model allows for a transformative learning experience through deeper engagement and motivation. The Ubd framework makes sure to have consistency and clarity in design, making it useful for structured training programs. The UbD's backward design approach makes sure that learning objectives push forward instruction rather than the other way around (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005). This is very important for corporate or higher education settings where outcomes are critical. Fink's model prioritizes self-directed learning and personal engagement, which is crucial in my organization where change is frowned upon. Choosing between the two models depends on the learning goals and audience needs.
​
​
Reflection on Learning Design and Innovation Planning
​​
​
The UbD design has strengthened my ability to create a learning environment that will provide clear goals, aligned assessments, and relevant activities. Focusing on the end goals first, I can make sure that each method of my learning environment supports my innovation plan effectively. This approach has made it easier to develop a curriculum that progresses reasonably from foundational concepts to advanced applications (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005).
​
Fink's model has opened my perspective on learning experiences by focusing on personal significance, motivation, and deeper learning connections. This is important in the conditions of automation adoption, where financial aid staff must not only learn technical skills but also develop a mindset toward change (Fink, 2003). Fink's model allows learners to connect new knowledge with their current experiences, making learning more meaningful.
​
Implementing both models into my innovation plan allows for a balanced approach, making sure there's structure while fostering meaningful engagement. Reflecting on both models gives me the ability to design learning environments that are goal-oriented and impactful, supporting the implementation of automation in Banner for financial aid staff. Using the Ubd model, I can create a roadmap that guides staff through a structured learning process while using Fink's model to ensure that learning is engaging and meaningful. Applying both models helps serve different learning styles and preferences, which can increase the successful adoption of automation technology.
​
Understanding the strengths of both models has given me more flexibility in instructional design. I can tailor learning experiences based on the learner's needs. This knowledge helps me make more informed decisions when designing future training programs and learning initiatives. Integrating both the Ubd and Fink's 3 Column Table will continue to shape my approach to instructional design and innovation in digital learning environments.
​
​
​
​
References
​
Fink, L. D., (2003). A self-Directed Guide to Designing Courses for Significant Learning. Creating Significant Learning experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
​
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.