In How Learning Works Ambrose et al. cite four basic criteria for applying the science of learning to college teaching:
- theory-grounded: the advice is grounded in a research-based theory of how people learn
- evidence-based: the advice is supported by empirical research evidence showing how to help people learn
- relevant: the advice has clear and practical implications for how to improve teaching
- clear: the advice is understandable concrete and concise
Not only are these principles research-based but they are also:
- domain-independent: i.e. they apply equally well across all subject areas from biology to design to history to robotics; the fundamental factors that impact the way students learn transcend disciplinary differences.
- experience-independent: The principles apply to all educational levels and pedagogical situations.
- cross-culturally relevant: Although the research the authors identified has been conducted primarily in the Western world faculty colleagues in other countries have resonated with the principles finding them relevant to their own classes and students. However it is important to bear in mind that culture can and does influence how the principles should be applied as instructors design and teach their courses. In addition many of the problems students encounter when learning stem from an interaction of intellectual social and emotional factors. Therefore pedagogical solutions must address all these facets at once.
Starting with these principles Ambrose et al. expand upon the three stages of backward design:
- Identify desired results.
- Determine acceptable evidence.
- Plan learning experiences and instruction
The authors of Understanding by Design encourage teachers to ask: What kind of intellectual scaffolding is provided to guide students through the important ideas? How are students expected to use those ideas to make meaning of the many facts? What performance goals would help students know how to take notes for maximal effec- tive use by the course’s end?
They then provide a 1-Page Template with Design Questions for Teachers (Figure 1.2) with an initial design frame. An example template is elaborated upon in Figure 1.3 which supports backward design thinking by making the longer-term goals far more explicit than is typical in lesson planning. Teachers can follow those goals through Stages 2 and 3 to ensure that the design is coherent.
UbD Design Standards are presented in Figure 1.4 to address and verify the coherence of the unit and the authors note: "In summary backward design yields greater coherence among desired results key performances and teaching and learning experiences resulting in better student performance—the purpose of design."