(Leithwood 1981)

Goes through each of 9 curriculum dimensions explaining what it means, why it is important. Platform or image - "implicit or explicit beliefs and assumptions accepted as the bases for decisions about what to include in and exclude from a curriculum." p27 Objectives - intended outcomes. Student entry behavious - "competencies a learner is expected to posses at the outset of the programme." p28 Assessment tools and procedures - "range from participant observation and unobtrusive measures, through frequency counts and paper-and-pencil tests." p29 Instructional material - " the written, visual, audio or other material used by the student within a curriculum." p29 Learner experiences - "mental operations and physical acts engaged in by learners" p30 Teaching strategies - "patterns of behaviour designed to facilitate student learning." This includes such things as "the relative dominance of the teacher in the student-teacher interaction, the reasoning style embodied in the interaction (inductive - deductive) and the physical clustering of students." p31 Goes on to talk about Joyce and Weil's four categories of teaching models: Social interaction, information-processing, personal sources and behaviour modification. Content - "the specific facts, concepts, principles or generalizations, and thougth systems included in the curriculum." p32 Time - this is qualitatively different to other dimensions and cuts across them. Useful summary diagram on p33 that shows how the dimensions can be thought to link to each other.

(Jones, Valdez et al. 1994)

Technology Effectiveness Framework [TEF] based on two axes - learning (passive to engaged) and technology performance (low to high). Uses indicators of learning - based on work of Means et al 1994. Uses six indicators of technology performance. Indicators described in part 2 of report. (p2) Four Carol diagram with four major learning/technology patterns: "Category A - Engaged learning and high technology performance Category B - Engaged learning and low technology performance Category C - Passive learning and high technology performance Category D - Passive learning and low technology performance" p2 [ranked in order of desirability it would seem] Variables of Learning Indicators for Engaged Learning 1. Vision of learning Responsible for learning Strategic Energized by learning Collaborative 2. Tasks Authentic* Challenging* Integrative/Interdisciplinary* 3. Assessment Performance-based* Generative Seamless and ongoing Equitable 4. Instructional Modes Interactive* Generative 5. Learning Context Collaborative* Knowledge building Empathetic 6. Groupings Heterogeneous* Equitable Flexible 7. Teacher roles Facilitator* Guide Co-learner/Co-investigator 8. Student roles Explorer* Cognitive apprentice Teacher Producer (of knowledge) (Things with * were suggested by Means et al). This table from p16. Previous pages explain each of the terms. Variables of Technology Indicators of High Technology Performance -> Performance Engaged Learning 1. Access Connectivity Ubiquity Interactivity Design for equitable use 2. Operability Interoperabilty Open architecture Transparency 3. Resource Organization Distributed resources and logic/intelligence User contributions Design for collaborative projects 4. Engagement Opportunties for challenging tasks and experiences Opportunities to learn by doing Guided participation and intelligent tutoring Information just in time and just enough 5. Ease of use Effective helps User friendly User control Training and support Speed 6. Functionality Use of multimedia technologies Use of generic tools Use of context-specific (work-specific) tools Programming/authoring skills Design and project implementation skills Use of tools that are used to make tools/programs

(Mullens 1995)

Learning opportunities, on the other hand, include the specific content covered, the teacher's emphasis on the topic, and the allocated time." p2-3. "Systematic measures of classroom instructional processes are one method of evaluating effectively." p3 "two critical elements of classroom instructional practices - the content presented and the pedagogy employed" p3 Four dimensions: **Pedagogy - "categorised into five areas: teacher actions; student actions; intended learner outcomes; organization (of the lesson or activity); and other instructional strategies, including homework and student assessment." p5 Teacher actions - included in all survey instruments they looked at. Describe different modes of instruction (eg lecture to entire class). Student actions - included in nearly every questionnaire. Intended learner outcomes - "look less at observable actions of the teacher and student and more at the instructional intention or purpose behind the activity." p7 Organization - included in all questionnaires they looked at - mostly distinguishing between 6 common methods of structuring teaching (eg lecture, demonstration, recitation/drill, whole class discussion, students working in pairs/teams/small groups, students working independently) p8 Other specific instructional strategies - Homework & Student assessment (which usually looked at type of assessment and the use to which the results were put). Teacher's influence on pedagogy ** Professional Development ** Instructional Materials and Technologies Text and other printed materials - who chose them etc Calculators and computers Science-related materials Library and audio-visual materials ** Topical Coverage within Courses Generally seek info in three areas: Specific topics covered - Emphasis within the course - Classtime allocation - often in minutes per day or hours per week. "The accuracy and ultimate value of this information depend on the teacher's ability to recall with precision the amount of time allocated to any given topic (CCSO, February 25, 1992)." p15 "All four dimensions under consideration have an established relationship to student achievement ......Of the four, pedagogy and topical coverage within courses are more related to the teacher/student interaction and may therefore have a stronger relationship with student achievement." p16

(Lemke and Coughlin 1998)

p17 Introduces 7 dimensions which are: 1 Learners 2 Learning Environments 3 Professional Competency 4 System Capacity 5 Community Connections 6 Technology Capacity 7 Accountability Each dimension consists of a key focus question plus some 'profile' statements that flesh out what that dimension means.

(Passey and Ridgway 1994)

Identifies seven stages in developing integrated IT use into whole school practice: "- innovation (when one person is finding out what IT is and how it can be used); - firelighting (when that person is trying to persuade those who can influence widely about using IT); - promotion (when school management actively supports the development via INSET, and extra resources including time); - growth (when teachers begin to use IT more widely, and demand can rapifly outstrip the available resources); - coordination (when the need to monitor pupils' total experiences becomes urgent); - integration (when most teachers use IT, a stable state is reached, and IT use is planned and coordinated); and - extension (when new educational uses for IT are explored, and built into pupils' everyday experineces). " (p3)

References

Chandler, D. (1984). Young learners and the microcomputer. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Heppell, S. (1993). Eyes on the horizon, feet on the ground? Interactive Multimedia: Practice and promise. C. Latchem, J. Williamson and L. Henderson-Lancett. London, Kogan Page: 97-114.

Heppell, S. (1993). "Teacher Education, Learning and the Information Generation: the progression and evolution of educational computing against a background of change." Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education 2(2): 229-237.

Huberman, A. M. (1973). Understanding Change in Education: An introduction. Paris, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Jones, B. F., G. Valdez, et al. (1994). Designing Learning and Technology for Educational Reform. Oak Brook, IL, North Central Regional Educational Laboratory.

Laurillard, D., M. Stratfold, et al. (1999). "Affordances for learning in a non-linear narrative medium." Journal of Interactive Media in Education.

Leithwood, K. A. (1981). "The Dimensions of Curriculum Innovation." Journal of Curriculum Studies 13(1): 25-36.

Lemke, C. and E. C. Coughlin (1998). Technology in American Schools: Seven Dimensions for Gauging Progress - A Policymaker's Guide. Santa Monica, Milken Exchange on Education Technology.

Mullens, J. E. (1995). Classroom Instructional Processes: A Review of Existing Measurement Approaches and Their Applicability for the Teacher Follow-up Survey. Washington, National Centre for Educational Statistics.

Passey, D. and J. Ridgway (1994). "The Current Impact of IT, and the Stages of School IT Development: Are there any prospects for the future?" Computer Education 76(Feb 94): 2-5.

Radlick, M. (1994). Restructuring School: What is Changing in Classrooms? How Does Technology Fit? New York, New York State Education Department, Albany Office of Instruction and Program Development.

Squires, D. and S. McDougall (1994). Choosing and using educational software: a teacher's guide. London, Falmer Press.

Home Frameworks More frameworks
Investment Literature Impact Reasons Solution Limitations The CPF Discussion

This page is maintained by Peter Twining (PeterT@meD8.info)
Last updated 6th December 2001