Really Understanding

The following post was made as a discussion topic for the second week of EDLD 5368 - Instructional Design.

According to Wiggins and McTighe (2000), some teachers believe their students should "really understand," others want their students to "internalize knowledge" and yet others want their students to "grasp the core or essence." Do these mean the same thing? When a student really understands, what will he do that he will not do when he does not understand?

They are similar, but don't necessarily mean the same thing. "Really understand" as I see it, is the ability for a student to not only retain knowledge, but also apply that knowledge to other learning and problems, and be able to use that knowledge when improvising solutions to other problems, or as Williams and McTighe state it, to have both knowledge and the ability to transfer it to practical applications. (Ch. 3, p. 41). When a student merely internalizes knowledge or grasps concepts, he will be able to recite the knowledge on cue, but not be able to transfer it to other applications.

What is your definition of understanding and how do you assess understanding?

My definition of understanding would be similar to that of the authors, however as I have always considered myself a learning fundamentalist, I do like the concept of internalizing knowledge. I would state understanding as the process of internalizing knowledge in order to apply relevant learning to practical applications outside of a particular subject area.

In my opinion, assessment of true understanding comes only from teaching across the curriculum (Cook, 1995) and encouraging students to apply what they learned in one subject to necessary problem solving in another.

Cook, Cathy J. (1995) Critical Issue: Aligning and Articulating Standards Across the Mathematics Curriculum, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory, Retrieved April 24, 2010 from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/math/ma400.htm.