O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.
Theoretical models and
practical applications

1
c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11

1
This presentation guides you through a
critical exploration of

› Principles within curriculum design
› Using curriculum f...



Think of a course or programme you are
familiar with
Present it as a ‘mind map’ to give an
overview of
› the differen...





curricula reflect ideological influences
and philosophical approaches to
knowledge, to teaching & learning,
and to...
Activity 2
consider
1. how you would define the term
curriculum in your own context, and
write a brief definition down
2. ...
Fraser and Bosanquet (2006) found 4
distinct categories of descriptions of
the curriculum:
A - the structure and content o...
Fraser and Bosanquet (2006) link these findings to
Habermas’s 3 fundamental human interests:
› Technical interest A&B – re...




identify which of these knowledgeconstitutive interests relates to the
curriculum you mapped at the start of
the ses...
Barnett & Coates (2005) in their recent
research into the changing HE
curricula formulate a general schema
made up of 3 el...
all those aspects of
teaching and learning
required for discipline
specific competency

KNOWLEDGE

The competencies
acquir...




identify which of these three
schematic elements relates to the
curriculum you mapped at the start
of the session
Ag...
Science and Technology Schema

Knowledge

Action

CDLT
c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11

Self

c.marcangelo Feb09

12

12
Arts and Humanities Schema

Knowledge
Action

Self

CDLT
c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11

c.marcangelo Feb09

13

13
Professional Subjects Schema

Knowledge

Action

CDLT
c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11

Self

c.marcangelo Feb09

14

14
Activity 5
Spend a few minutes to summarise your
thinking about
 How these two different models align with
your experienc...
What factors will influence/direct
curriculum design and delivery?
How will these articulate with the
theoretical models?
...
Process Focus:

Content Focus:

Deep learning
• Applying concepts
• Evaluating evidence
• Analysing/ synthesizing
• Creati...


Learning in the workplace or practice
setting:
› Draw learning out through reflection on

seemingly random events
› Ide...


Learning in lectures and seminars:
› Present ideas in a structured manner
› Make links to prior knowledge, module

lear...


DESIGN IN
› Constructive alignment
› Well structured knowledge-base
› A high degree of meaningful and coherent

activit...
DESIGN OUT surface learning conditions i.e.
› High class contact using didactic
›
›
›
›

approaches, excessive course mate...







attractiveness/marketability – is it viable?
diversity, inclusivity and accessibility; Widening
participation ...








Quality Assurance Agency for HE (QAA)
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/ for academic
standards and subject benchmarks
Un...






Balancing a range of methods for
learning, teaching and assessment
across the whole course
Appropriate to levels...
Activity 6.
 In summary, reflect on the issues in this
presentation and how they relate to
› Your current practice
› The ...
Barnett R., Parry G., & Coates K. (2001) Conceptualising Curriculum Change. Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 6, 4 ,
435-...
Próximos SlideShares
Carregando em…5
×

Curriculumworkshopon lineversion2011-110222075834-phpapp02

409 visualizações

Publicada em

Publicada em: Educação, Tecnologia
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

Curriculumworkshopon lineversion2011-110222075834-phpapp02

  1. 1. Theoretical models and practical applications 1 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 1
  2. 2. This presentation guides you through a critical exploration of › Principles within curriculum design › Using curriculum frameworks › Practical issues in planning learning, teaching and assessment 2 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 2
  3. 3.   Think of a course or programme you are familiar with Present it as a ‘mind map’ to give an overview of › the different modules at each level (4, 5 & 6) › links that cross the levels, for example discipline themes, topic threads, skills extension and competence-building › assessment methods  Identify your overarching philosophy that underpins the design 3 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 3
  4. 4.    curricula reflect ideological influences and philosophical approaches to knowledge, to teaching & learning, and to the student and to what is “higher education” It is argued that we are moving to ‘performativity’ in terms of curriculum focus and that academic knowledge is changing from ‘is it true’ to ‘what use is it’, and how can we measure it. Barnett & Coate (2005) c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 4 4
  5. 5. Activity 2 consider 1. how you would define the term curriculum in your own context, and write a brief definition down 2. What underpinning philosophies and values influence the courses/programmes you are currently involved in teaching 5 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 5
  6. 6. Fraser and Bosanquet (2006) found 4 distinct categories of descriptions of the curriculum: A - the structure and content of a unit B – the structure and content of a programme of study C – the students’ experience of learning D – a dynamic and interactive process of teaching and learning 6 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 6
  7. 7. Fraser and Bosanquet (2006) link these findings to Habermas’s 3 fundamental human interests: › Technical interest A&B – relates to subject knowledge › Practical (communicative) interest C – relates to learning that results from reflection and making meaning of the subject matter to enable appropriate action › Emancipatory interest D – learners are active creators of knowledge, with content negotiated 7 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 7
  8. 8.   identify which of these knowledgeconstitutive interests relates to the curriculum you mapped at the start of the session Put notes onto your map in a different colour that indicate where the technical, practical and emancipatory interests feature, and in what proportion 8 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 8
  9. 9. Barnett & Coates (2005) in their recent research into the changing HE curricula formulate a general schema made up of 3 elements: Knowledge, Action & Self They argue that the philosophical position of the different disciplines is recognisable in the dominance and interaction of these three elements. 9 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 9
  10. 10. all those aspects of teaching and learning required for discipline specific competency KNOWLEDGE The competencies acquired through doing S ACTION SELF The development of an educational identity e.g.. reflective practitioner, critical evaluator General Curriculum Schema 10 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 10
  11. 11.   identify which of these three schematic elements relates to the curriculum you mapped at the start of the session Again – Put notes onto this in a different colour/font that indicate where development of Knowledge, Skill and Self occur in the programme 11 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 11
  12. 12. Science and Technology Schema Knowledge Action CDLT c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 Self c.marcangelo Feb09 12 12
  13. 13. Arts and Humanities Schema Knowledge Action Self CDLT c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 c.marcangelo Feb09 13 13
  14. 14. Professional Subjects Schema Knowledge Action CDLT c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 Self c.marcangelo Feb09 14 14
  15. 15. Activity 5 Spend a few minutes to summarise your thinking about  How these two different models align with your experiences of curricula that you are/have been involved with teaching and learning?  What are the connections with Anderson & Krathwohl’s (2001)taxonomy dimensions 15 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 15
  16. 16. What factors will influence/direct curriculum design and delivery? How will these articulate with the theoretical models? First on a micro level – your own teaching …. 16 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 16
  17. 17. Process Focus: Content Focus: Deep learning • Applying concepts • Evaluating evidence • Analysing/ synthesizing • Creating Using the language of the discipline Making an argument Defending a viewpoint Clarifying and understanding Exploring the ‘rules’ of the (From: Exley & Dennick (2004)Small Group Teaching discipline Communication Skills  Presenting  Listening  Responding  Questioning Personal Development Reflective Practice Group working Collaboration & learning from others Routledge)
  18. 18.  Learning in the workplace or practice setting: › Draw learning out through reflection on seemingly random events › Identify themes of learning › Relate to skills/knowledge frameworks › Use formative processes and action planning  Manage a coherent learning process even when not in control of the overall module or programme c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 18
  19. 19.  Learning in lectures and seminars: › Present ideas in a structured manner › Make links to prior knowledge, module learning outcomes, assessment activities and programme themes › Use a range of different examples › Include short focused activities to activate understanding, introduce higher level thinking skills and vary pace › Limit ‘input’ time to 10 minute bursts c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 19
  20. 20.  DESIGN IN › Constructive alignment › Well structured knowledge-base › A high degree of meaningful and coherent activity that develops critical thinking › Emphasis on depth of learning (principles) rather than breadth of coverage › Interaction with others (collaboration) › Choice that facilitates pursuing personal interests and enables INCLUSIVITY 20 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 20
  21. 21. DESIGN OUT surface learning conditions i.e. › High class contact using didactic › › › › approaches, excessive course materials; isolated information –giving Expectations of student learning potential too low or too high Lack of choice in learning Negative or cynical perspectives Assessment that tests and rewards lowlevel outcomes 21 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 21
  22. 22.      attractiveness/marketability – is it viable? diversity, inclusivity and accessibility; Widening participation and flexibility; employability links teaching-learning-assessment philosophies and values; strategies, methods content – knowledge, skills, levels of learning, and ways of knowing; threshold and troublesome knowledge delivery strategies –when and where to learn i.e. F2F, specialist placement, FDL & e-learning 22 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 22
  23. 23.       Quality Assurance Agency for HE (QAA) http://www.qaa.ac.uk/ for academic standards and subject benchmarks University - threshold criteria for validation Faculty Portfolio Professional Bodies Employers Potential students 23 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 23
  24. 24.     Balancing a range of methods for learning, teaching and assessment across the whole course Appropriate to levels of study Developmental approach to knowledge, skills and understanding Support for course development – course developers guide & CDEPP http://www.cumbria.ac.uk/Services/AdminServices/AcademicOffice/Course%20Developers.as 24 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 24
  25. 25. Activity 6.  In summary, reflect on the issues in this presentation and how they relate to › Your current practice › The practice you observe in peer reviews › Writing for your module assignments  What actions will you take as a result of considering these curriculum design issues? c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 25 25
  26. 26. Barnett R., Parry G., & Coates K. (2001) Conceptualising Curriculum Change. Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 6, 4 , 435-449 Barnet R & Coate K (2005) Engaging the Curriculum in Higher education. Maidenhead, Open University Press Carnell E (2007) Conceptions of teaching in Higher education: extending the boundaries. Teaching in Higher Education Vol.12, 1, 25-40 Donnelly R (2004) Fostering of creativity within an imaginative curriculum in higher education. The Curriculum Journal Vol. 15, 2, 155-166 Fraser SP., & Bosanquet AM., (2006) The Curriculum? That’s just a unit outline, isn’t it? Studies in Higher Education Vo 31, 3, 269-284 Hussey T., & Smith P. (2008) Learning Outcomes: a conceptual analysis. Teaching in Higher education Vol.13, 1, 107-115 Light G. & Cox R (2001) Learning & Teaching in Higher Education – the reflective professional: London, Paul Chapman Publishing. Kemmis S. & Fitzclarencwe L (1986) Curriculum Theorizing: beyond reproduction theory. Waurn Ponds, Deakin University Margolis E. (ed) 2001 The Hidden Curriculum in Higher Education: London, Routledge [e-book available through UoC library Pithers RT., & Soden R. (2000) Critical thinking in education: a review. Educational Research Vol. 42, 3, 237-249 Pratt D., Boll S., Collins JB. (2007) Towards a plurality of perspectives for nurse educators. Nursing Philosophy vol. 8 49-59 Taylor R (2005) Creating a connection: tackling student attrition through curriculum development. Journal of Further and Higher Education Vol. 29, 4, 367-374 Toohey S. (1999) Designing Courses for Higher Education: Milton Keynes, SRHE & OUP Univeristy of Cumbria Course Developers Guide http://www.cumbria.ac.uk/Services/AdminServices/AcademicOffice/Enhancement/CourseDevelopers/course%20develop 26 c.marcangelo CDEPP CD.olv/feb11 26

×