Findings of qualitative studies on Understanding by Design: A meta-synthesis
Designed by the meta-synthesis method, the researchers examined the studies designed on the Understanding by Design (UbD) and implemented and their findings were qualitatively evaluated. It tried to obtain a comprehensive and holistic perspective on the effects and reflections of the model. 48 UbD studies were accessed from 6 databases, and 12 research findings were included after three criteria in this meta-synthesis. The findings were reached through a six-stage data analysis process; they were analyzed inductively with content analysis. The validity and credibility of this analysis process have been brought under control with the coding reliability processes and the audit technique. According to the conclusions, in the development of units based on UbD, teachers generally did not create goals/standards by collecting evaluation evidence of UbD; it was concluded that the inadequacy of this was mostly due to model inexperience, the school's facilities/conditions, teacher stagnation and emotional state, and inadequate pedagogy knowledge. Findings showed that teaching based on UbD improves students' cognitive development and participatory insights. This meta-synthesis study guides researchers who want to reference UbD as a design framework in a unit study in the overall assessment of UbD.
Al-Abdulaziz, A., Chova, L. G., Blenguer, D. M. & Martinez, A. L. (2011). A proposed multiple intelligences and leadership training program for leaders by using ‘backward design’ in the institute of public administration, Saudi Arabia. Edulearn11: 3rd International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Barcelona.
Al-Awidi, H., & Aldhafeeri, F. (2017). Teachers’ readiness to implement digital curriculum in Kuwaiti schools. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 16, 105-126. https://doi.org/10.28945/3685.
Aldridge, A. M. J. (2010). Investigating efforts to change educator attitudes and teaching strategies through professional development focused on the use of backward design curriculum and the principles of efficacy: Educator beliefs and attitudes. (Unpublished Doctorate Thesis). Lindenwood University, Missouri, USA.
Barry, C. A., Britten, N., Barber, N., Bradley, C. & Stevenson, F. (1999). Using reflexivity to optimize teamwork in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 9(1). 26-44.
*Boozer, A. (2014). Planning backward to go forward: Examining pre-service teachers' use of backward design to plan and deliver instruction. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Arizona State University, Arizona, USA.
Carr, W. and & Kemmis K. (2002). Becoming critical- education, knowledge and action research. USA: Routledge Falmer.
Cho, J. (2005). Thinking about backward curriculum design. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23(1). 63-94.
Cho, J., & Trent, A. (2005). “Backward” curriculum design and assessment: What goes around comes around, or haven't we seen this before?. Taboo, 9(2). 105-122.
Choi, Y. (2012). Backward design of social studies assessment for the enhancement of social studies teachers’ expertise. Research in Social Studies Education, 19(1). 85-100.
Choi, Y-K. & Kang, H-S. (2008). A study on an application of backward design for music class. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 11(2), 211-230. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2008.11.2.211.
Chou, C.-H. (2011). Teachers' professional development: investigating teachers' learning to do action research in a professional learning community. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20. 421-437.
Cooper, H. (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach: 2 (Applied Social Research Methods). USA: SAGE.
Daugherty, K. K. (2006). Backward course design: Making the end the beginning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 70(6), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7006135.
Durmaz, B. (2014). Üstün yetenekli ilköğretim öğrencilerinin problem çözme stratejilerini öğrenme düzeyleri. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Uludağ Üniversitesi, Bursa, Türkiye.
Emory, J. (2014). Understanding backward design to strengthen curricular models. Nurse Educator, 39(3), 122-125. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000034.
Geylan, H. A. (2021). Ekosistem ekolojisi konusuna yönelik anlamaya dayalı tasarımın (Ubd) başarı, tutum ve kalıcılığa etkisi. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.
Gholami, L. (2015). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 60, 83-86. https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.60.83.
Gough, D., Oliver, S. & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews. USA: SAGE.
*Graff, N. (2011). An effective and agonizing way to learn: Preparation for planning curriculum. Teacher Education Quarterly. 38(3), 151-168. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23479622.
Hannes, K. & Lockwood, C. (2012). Synthesizing qualitative research. Choosing the right approach. USA: John Wiley & Sons.
*Herro, D. (2018). A qualitative single case study on backward design lesson planning experiences of teachers in a professional learning community. (Unpublished Doctorate Doctoral Dissertation). Northcentral University, California, USA.
Horzum, M.B., Akgün, Ö.E. & Öztürk, E. (2014). The psychometric properties of the technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 6(3), 544-557. https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2014.03.004.
*Jozwik, S., Lin, M., & Cuenca-Carlino, Y. (2017). Using Backward design to develop service-learning projects in teacher preparation. New Waves - Educational Research & Development, 20(2). 35-49.
Kang, H-S. & Yi, J-E. (2013). Review of the applicability of backward design version 2.0. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(3).153-172.
Kang, H-S. (2010). In search of the applicability of backward design to elementary classroom. The Journal of Elementary Education, 23(2). 383-409.
Kang, H-S. (2014). Application of backward design in gifted education. The Journal of the Korean Society for Gifted and Talented, 13(1). 129-154.
Kang, H-S. (2015). In search of school curriculum development based on backward design model. The Korea Educational Review, 21(3). 107-130.
Kelting-Gibson, L. M. (2003). Preservice teachers’ planning and preparation practices: A comparison of lesson and unit plans developed using the backward design model and a traditional model. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Montana State University, Montana, USA.
Kim, A. Y. & Lee, D. H. (2013). Backward designing program in the curriculum of physical high school. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 13(2). 141-163.
Langenbach, M., Hinkemeyer, M. T. & Beauchamp, G. (1999). An emprical analysis of curriculum design. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED045582.pdf in 19.03.2021.
Lee, T. & Lee, H. J. (2014). Development and application of PE lessons using backward curriculum design for character education. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14(10). 227-253.
Lee, T. & Lee, H. J. (2015). Collaborative problem-solving ability in physical education using backward curriculum design. Korean Journal of Sport Science, 26(4). 917-934. https://doi.org/10.24985/kjss.2015.26.4.917.
Manyarara, B. C. (2015). Lesson planning for teacher effectiveness. Namibia CPD Journal for Educators (NCPDJE), 2(1). 76-87.
McTighe, J. & Thomas, R. (2003). Backward design for action. Educational Leadership, 60(5). 52-55.
Miles, M. B. ve & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. USA: SAGE.
OECD (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments: First results from TALIS. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/43023606.pdf in 04.03.2021.
*Ostinelli, G. (2016). The role of motivation and understanding in the change of teaching practices. Journal of Inquiry & Action in Education, 7(2). 1-18.
Oflaz, M. (2019). The use of padlet with backward design lesson plans to engage students actively in language learning. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Özyurt, M., Kan, H. & Kıyıkçı, A. (2021). The effectiveness of understanding by design model in science teaching: A quasi-experimental study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 94, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2021.94.
Park, I-S. (2013). A case study of pre-service teacher’s unit design through backward design. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 13(4). 327-350.
*Peters-Burton, E. (2012). Learning progressions in instructional design: expectations and practice of scientists becoming teachers in the preservice and first-year settings. Jamaica National Agency for Accreditation, 7(12). 18-33.
Polat, S. & Ay, O. (2016). Meta-sentez: Kavramsal bir çözümleme. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi- Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 4(1), 52-64. https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.4c2s3m.
Ramaligela, S. M. (2012). Can lesson plan affect lesson presentation? A case of mathematics student teachers’ teaching practice in schools. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, 47(19). 87-91.
Saini, M. & Shlonsky, A. (2012). Systematic synthesis of qualitative research. England: Oxford University Press.
Sandelowski, M. & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. USA: Springer Publishing Company.
Schomberg, J. (1995). A rainbow of planning resources: Selected bibliography for unit planning. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED385367.pdf in 14.03.2021.
Scott, C. T. (2015). Backward design: Building ELSI into a stem cell science curriculum. Hastings Center Report, 45(3), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.448.
Seamon, M. P. (1999). Connecting learning & technology for effective lesson plan design. Paper presented at the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Conference, San Francisco.
*Seeger, V., Wood, S., & Romans, D. (2018). Questioning for meaning: Enhancing questioning strategies of teacher candidates through the Understanding by Design Approach. College Quarterly, 21(3). 1-13.
Silverman, D. (2018). Nitel verileri yorumlama (E. Dinç, Çev.). Ankara: Pegem.
Skaalvik, E. M. & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059-1069. https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.60.83.
Sohn, J. (2016). A study on an application of backward design for art curriculum development. Journal of Research in Art Education, 17(1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2008.11.2.211.
Rubica, R. D. B. (2018). Action research on project-based learnıng and understanding by desıgn and their effects on the science achievement and attıtude of science students. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED585254.pdf in 15.05.2020.
Uluçınar, U. & Dinç, E. (2021). Effectiveness of authentic performance tasks: The case of a special education course. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(2), 152-171. https://doi.org/ 10.33902/JPR.2021270069.
Uluçınar, U. (2018). Öğrencilere özenli düşünme becerilerini kazandırmaya yönelik duyuş temelli bir eğitim programının geliştirilmesi. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi, Eskişehir, Türkiye.
Viera, C. & Magma, A. J. (2013). Using backward design process for the design and implementation of computer science (CS) principles: a case study of a Colombian elementary and secondary teacher development program. 43rd Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, Oklahoma.
*Walters, R. D. (2018). Investigating the combined impact of cognitively guided instruction and Backward Design model in mathematics on teachers of grade 3 students. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Toronto, Toronto, USA.
Wiessa, J. L. (2011). Backward planning: Examining consequences of planning direction for motivation. (Unpublished Doctorate Doctoral Dissertation). Wilfred Laurier University, Ontario, Canada.
Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design (2nd Expanded Edition). USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2011). The understanding by design guide to creating high-quality units. USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (2012). The understanding by design guide to advanced concepts in creating and reviewing units. USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
*Young, S. B. (2005). Understanding by design: An action plan for implementation. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, USA.
Yuen-Ling, L. (2008). Teachers in action research: Assumptions and potentials. Educational Action Research, 16(2), 251-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790802011908.
Yurtseven, N. (2016). Yabancı dil öğretiminde eylem araştırmasına dayalı UbD (anlamaya dayalı tasarım) uygulamalarının öğretmenler ve öğrenciler üzerindeki yansımalarının incelenmesi. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye.
*Yurtseven, N. & Altun, S. (2016). Understanding by Design in EFL teaching: the investigation of students’ foreign language learning motivation and views. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(3), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i3.1204.
*Yurtseven, N. & Altun, S. (2017). Understanding by Design (UbD) in EFL Teaching: teachers’ professional development and students’ achievement. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 17(2), 437-461. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.2.0226.
Yurtseven, N. & Altun, S. (2018). The role of self-reflection and peer review in curriculum-focused professional development for teachers. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33(1), 207-228. https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.2017030461.
Yurtseven, N. & Doğan, S. (2018). UbD implementations in preschool teaching: Reflections from the teacher and student perspective. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 33(3), 656-671. https://doi.org/doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2018037101.
Yurtseven, N., Doğan, S. & Altun, S. (2013). UbD (Understanding by Design) modeline göre hazırlanmış farklılaştırılmış fen ve teknoloji dersi öğretim planı: Türkiye örneği. Siirt Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1, 1-20. https://doi.org/0.24289/ijsser.279009.