When designing a great learning experience, it's not just about picking activities and hoping students get it—there has to be a clear plan. Working with UbD alongside Fink's model has given me some great insight on creating a more effective learning environment. Fink’s model helped me create meaningful learning experiences that foster motivation and engagement. Meanwhile, the UbD framework provided a structured approach to ensure that every component of my innovation plan—adaptive learning for special education students—was aligned and purpose-driven. By using a combined approach, I can create effective, engaging, and meaningful learning environments that align with my BHAG of —improving student learning through a balanced approach to digital and traditional education. You can view my Three Column Table outlining the learning outcomes here.

Fink's 3-Column Table vs. UBD Template

Fink’s 3 Column Table: Best for Deep, Transformative Learning

Fink’s model is most effective in learning environments that prioritize student engagement, self-directed learning, and interdisciplinary thinking. It is particularly valuable in:

Project-based learning (PBL) and inquiry-based instruction. Because Fink’s framework integrates application, reflection, and emotional engagement, it enhances projects where students are asked to solve real-world problems.
Higher education and adult learning. University courses, professional development programs, and job training programs use Fink’s approach because it emphasizes focuses on teaching people how to learn, encouraging self-reflection and connecting ideas from different fields.
Subjects like social sciences, humanities and design based courses encourage creativity. They also benefit from Fink’s focus on human dimensions, caring, and motivation, ensuring students engage with the material in a meaningful way.
Personalized learning environments. Since Fink’s model incorporates elements of self-reflection and independent thinking, it allows students to take ownership of their learning, making it particularly effective in self-paced or blended learning environments.

UbD: Best for Structured, Goal-Driven Learning

UbD works best in standards-based and outcome-driven learning environments. Where goals, assessments, and teaching line up perfectly. It's especially great for:

K-12 education, especially in subjects with standardized testing, like STAAR. Since UbD ensures that assessments and instruction directly align with learning goals, it is ideal for preparing students for high-stakes testing.
Planning the curriculum at the district or school level is easier with UbD. It helps keep things consistent across all classrooms and grade levels.
Subjects requiring clear skill progression, such as mathematics, science, and grammar. In these subjects, students must master foundational concepts before progressing, making backward design an effective approach.
Designing instructional materials for diverse learners. UbD focuses on matching assessments with learning goals, making sure teaching methods are tailored to fit students' needs.
UbD’s structured approach is well-suited for teacher-led instruction, where educators need a clear plan to ensure that every activity is intentionally designed to meet specific learning objectives.

How Each Supports the Innovation Plan

My innovation plan for balanced technology integration benefits from both Understanding by Design (UbD) and Fink’s 3 Column Table, ensuring that technology in third-grade classrooms is both structured and engaging.

Understanding by Design (UbD)

Fink's 3 Column Table

UbD establishes a clear framework, aligning learning objectives, assessments, and instructional activities to ensure that technology is used intentionally rather than as an afterthought. This is crucial for achieving the goal of improving STAAR performance and closing learning gaps, as every digital tool and activity is strategically incorporated to support measurable progress.

At the same time, Fink’s model enhances engagement and deeper learning, ensuring that students do not just use technology passively but interact with it in meaningful ways. By combining elements like application, reflection, and personal connection, Fink’s framework ensures that students develop problem-solving skills, take ownership of their learning, and see the relevance of their education beyond the classroom.

Developing a balanced technology integration plan requires a thoughtful combination of structure and engagement, ensuring that students not only meet academic standards but also develop critical thinking, problem-solving, and independent learning skills. Both Understanding by Design (UbD) (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) and Fink’s 3 Column Table (Fink, 2013) have played a key role in shaping my innovation plan, each contributing unique strengths to create a comprehensive, student-centered learning environment.

UbD (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) has been instrumental in providing a clear structure for my innovation plan by ensuring that learning goals, assessments, and instructional strategies are aligned. Since my plan focuses on improving STAAR scores and closing learning gaps in third-grade resource students, the backward design approach ensures that every technology-enhanced lesson and activity directly supports student progress toward these measurable outcomes. UbD also helps in maintaining consistency across digital and traditional learning formats, allowing for a systematic and organized technology integration process.

At the same time, Fink’s 3 Column Table (Fink, 2013) enhances my plan by emphasizing deeper engagement, motivation, and self-directed learning. Technology integration is not just about using digital tools but about transforming how students engage with learning, and Fink’s model ensures that students not only acquire foundational knowledge but also apply it in meaningful ways. By incorporating reflection, real-world connections, and active learning strategies, Fink’s framework supports student agency, collaboration, and problem-solving, which are essential components of a future-ready classroom.

Together, UbD (Wiggins & McTighe, 2005) provides the necessary structure, while Fink’s model (Fink, 2013 enriches the learning experience, making technology integration both effective and engaging. UbD ensures that digital tools are used purposefully, aligning them with learning outcomes, while Fink’s model encourages creativity, student ownership, and interdisciplinary connections. By integrating both frameworks, my innovation plan creates a balanced, adaptable approach that supports student success in both traditional and digital learning environments. This combination allows me to implement technology in a way that enhances—not replaces—proven instructional practices, ensuring a sustainable, student-centered approach to modern education.

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. & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design (expanded second ed.). Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.