2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3

583 views

Published on

The opportunities for adaptive and personalized learning are promising. The project "Linked Data", which was carried out in 2013, combines the common core curriculum for several subjects, the items from the national final secondary school examinations and its test and item analysis (TIA), and the learning materials from several educational publishers and open educational resources. A web-based tool was developed in which the linked data can be shown graphically in relation to examination scores from students who practice their knowledge and skills on previous examinations. The study examines whether the web-based tool with the linked data results in a) a sufficient overview for the teachers and students of how the students scored, b) if this leads to actions by the teachers to give more personalized and adaptive guidance, and c) if this offers the students support to work independently on their personalized learning path.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
583
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

2014-03-20 Fisser Strijker Muller SITE PLD3

  1. 1. SLO ● nationaal expertisecentrum leerplanontwikkeling Petra Fisser, Allard Strijker, Anne Muller SITE, 20 March 2014 Using ICT for personalized and adaptive learning the case of Linked Data
  2. 2. About SLO • National Institute for Curriculum Development in the Netherlands • Task: design and validation of national curricular frameworks (core objectives, attainment levels, examination programs)
  3. 3. About SLO • The projects of SLO are conducted within the following departments – Primary Education/Special Education – Lower Secondary Education – Upper Secondary Education – Vocational Education – Research & Consultancy
  4. 4. The Dutch curriculum • Until the 1990’s hardly any regulation at the national level regarding the goals and contents for primary and secondary education • The only exception: the examination system at the end of upper secondary education • High level of school autonomy: a prominent article in legislation declares the so-called ‘freedom of education’ – the freedom to found schools – the freedom of school policies – freedom of school organization • In other words… the principle of freedom of education provides schools with more than enough room for school- specific curricular choices
  5. 5. The Dutch curriculum • In 1993 attainment targets (‘goals to strive for’) for primary and junior secondary education were formulated (upper secondary education uses the examination program as goal) • At this moment it is a mixture of common attainment targets (‘goals to strive for’) covering the whole range of subject domains and common standards (‘goals to attain’) for literacy and numeracy • But: there is not one curriculum framework that provides a common, comprehensive and cohesive answer to the question of what is of most worth learning and teaching (freedom of education!)
  6. 6. What does this have to do with technology in education? • Everything.. • If we want to integrate technology in education (and thus in the curriculum), the technology should be aligned with the curriculum – Small-scale technologies often have an added value for a specific (small) part of the curriculum, but are too expensive to be used in only 1 school, 1 course, 1 lesson – Large-scale technologies are also expensive, but offer opportunities for large-scale use if they have an added value in the curriculum
  7. 7. Aligning the curriculum • We have attainment targets • Schools have freedom of education • Dilemma: schools appreciate the freedom, but also need (and ask for) more guidance “things that schools do” Attainment targets primary education “things that schools do” Attainment targets lower secondary education “things that schools do” Examination program upper secondary education freedom freedom freedom
  8. 8. Aligning the curriculum • Defining an (unofficial) common core curriculum with core topics and objectives based on the examination programs, and lined up in possible learning trajectories • The common core curriculum describes – the subject’s core and subcore – a short description of the core – specific concepts that are important in that specific core – Intermediate attainment targets – final attainment target – cohesion with other subjects and levels (primary/secondary education) “things that schools do” Attainment targets primary education “things that schools do” Attainment targets lower secondary education “things that schools do” Examination program upper secondary education Learning trajectory
  9. 9. Example: Geography • Core: Water • Subcore: Netherlands, waterland • Short description: danger of flood and spatial planning • Attainment targets: – primary education: children learn about the measures/actions taken in the Netherlands to live in areas that are threatened by water – lower secondary education: the student learns to recognize the effect of specific choices in the field of living and recreation, in their own living context – Upper secondary education: the student knows about present-day spatial and socio-economic issues of urban areas in the Netherlands
  10. 10. Example: Geography • primary education: children learn about the measures/actions taken in the Netherlands to live in areas that are threatened by water • Specific concepts: • Ages 4-5: sea, beach, dunes • Ages 6-7: sea, beach, dunes & rivers, canals, lakes • Ages 8-9: …& … & defense against the sea, dike, mills • Ages 10-12: …& … & … & river management, polders, mounds, peat excavation
  11. 11. Digitizing the curriculum • The specific concepts can be used as a language to describe – the curriculum from primary to upper secondary education – all educational materials (learning materials, school test items and national examination questions, technology applications, etc.) • By using one (1) language everyone has to speak this same language • We can use the concepts as “metadata” to label (tag) all educational materials
  12. 12. How does it work? An example.. Concepts from 8 subjects for upper secondary education (economics, management & organization, biology, physics, English, mathematics, geography, chemistry) National examination questions (2008 – 2013) Learning materials from open educational resources Learning materials from educational publishers
  13. 13. Conceptx Conceptx Conceptx • Labeling national examination questions with concepts
  14. 14. • Labeling Learning materials from educational publishers Conceptx Concepty Conceptz Concepta
  15. 15. Linking all data • By linking – the common core curriculum – the items from the national final secondary school examinations from 2009-2013 – the test and item analysis (TIA) of the national final secondary school examinations from 2009-2013 – the learning materials from several educational publishers and open educational resources • and making this available in an online tool for teachers and students • the curriculum is aligned and digitalized
  16. 16. Online application • Students can practice questions from previous national final examinations • Teachers get a graphical overview of the average examination results of his/her class and individual students in relation to: – the common core curriculum – the table of contents of the learning materials, text books or open educational resources they use at their school – the national average P-value (benchmark) – a profile of their students in terms of progress
  17. 17. Online application • different starting points for students Table of contents learning materials Chapter Paragraph Section Related examination questions Question type & level Question type & level
  18. 18. Online application • different starting points for students Examinations (practice a complete examination) Question type (practice by question type, such as knowledge, mathematical, apply)
  19. 19. Online application • scores Examination question Question type (here: mathematic) Question level (here: easy) Subject disussed in Chapter 6 & 3 Other questions to practice , here: 1 easy 2 medium Compare score with classmates Compare score with national score
  20. 20. Comparing class results with national results • Overview for the teacher • Linked data for – overview – actions to be taken – personalized learning
  21. 21. Lesson observation • Secondary education, final examination year (ages 16-17) • 30 students • 2 teachers • Lesson observation • Structured focus group interview with teachers and students
  22. 22. Lesson observation • Economics, 8.10 – 9.00 hours, in the computer lab • Usually at that time preparing for the final examination – Explanations/instruction – Practicing with paper examinations • Teacher writes the “to do’s” on the whiteboard
  23. 23. Lesson observation • Most students do work in the online application • Two students had to be “motivated” • Students practice examination question • Students fill in the scores • Students see the smileys: “wow-effect” • Some students only use the online application, others also use the textbook
  24. 24. Interviews • Positive aspects according to the students – Many examinations available – Smileys for comparing scores – Possibility to search per chapter, paragraph, type of examination question, level of question, etc. – Not just economics, but also 7 other subjects – Anytime, anywhere – Good preparation for the final examination
  25. 25. Interviews • Positive aspects according to the teachers – Time efficiency – Personalized learning – Possibility to search per chapter, paragraph, type of examination question, level of question, etc. – Quick overview of scores and problems – Having a core curriculum
  26. 26. Interviews • Negative aspects according to the students and teachers –Some technical errors –Getting used to the system
  27. 27. More research • Pre- and post test questionnaire – Pre: high expectations with regard to effect and personalized learning – Post: after the final examinations in May • More lesson observations and focus group interviews • Interviews with other stakeholders
  28. 28. What we do know • Teachers need more support, especially related to (T)PCK: – “how can we integrate this in our current teaching practice” – “how can we use this during the whole academic year, and not just before the final examinations?” – “is personalized learning the same as individualized learning?” – etc.
  29. 29. More information? • Do you have experience with these kind of systems? Please let us know! • Petra Fisser, p.fisser@slo.nl

×