Curriculum maturing processes
0 likes757 views
The document discusses top-down and bottom-up approaches to curriculum development and maturing. Traditionally, standards are developed top-down but courses can evolve standards bottom-up by incorporating new knowledge and competencies. Curricula can mature through bottom-up contributions from courses that help standards evolve. Semantic mapping of curricula, standards, competencies, activities and assessments allows for academic analytics and formative evaluation to support ongoing curriculum improvement through bottom-up and top-down processes.
Curriculum maturing processes
- 1. Top-‐down and bo+om-‐up curriculum maturing processes Kai Pata kpata@tlu.ee Tallinn University, Center for Educa?onal Technology
- 2. An expert: Crea?vity and freedom Tradi?onally top-‐to down processes prevail in curriculum development: mapping to the standards, evalua?on based on fixed standards Courses can bring in evolving knowledge and competences and mature the curriculum and standards in bo+om-‐up manner Evalua?on against the standard -‐ an approved collec?ve knowledge
- 3. Mapping the curriculum to the standards Educa?onal technology curriculum – the competences ISTE NETS competences Standards maturing Curriculum development and evalua?on h+p://intelleo.eu/ see demonstrator 3 Issues: curriculum competences should incorporate new course competences, the standard should evolve based on bo+om-‐up contribu?ons
- 4. Mapping the courses to the standard/ curriculum Matching learning outcomes from standard to the courses h+p://htk.tlu.ee/EpoAbi/ Mapping the competences/learning outcomes at courses Standard / curriculum Course competence descrip?ons competences Are contextualized to domain context Issues: -‐ ill-‐formulated competences/learning outcomes cannot be objec?vely measured -‐ standard is unevenly covered
- 5. Mapping ac?vi?es and assessment to competences/ learning outcomes Mapping competences/learning outcomes with learning ac4vi4es and assessment h+p://htk.tlu.ee/EpoAbi/ Competence/Learning outcome descrip?on Assessment types Learning ac?vity/assignment types Get advice from different formula?ons at the curriculum -‐ standard competences -‐ assessment types -‐ learning ac?vity types Issues: -‐ Mapping competences/learning with fiSng assignments and assessment -‐ overlaps between learning ac?vi?es/ assignments at courses -‐ Collec?ng academic analy?cs Shared vocabulary across the curriculum Academic analy4cs based on competences, ac4vity and assessment types
- 6. Academic-‐ and learning analy?cs for evalua?on • In porTolio-‐based eDidak?kum we can map course elements with competence standard (competence ontology) and domain ontology: – the learning ac?vi?es/assignments – the learning resources with competence standard – Academic analy4cs for courses can be used for forma4ve/ summa4ve evalua4on of the curriculum • The learner who takes the assignment will map the planned/graded competences to his eporTolio – Learning analy4cs for competence development at the course, forma4ve evalua4on of the course – Learning analy4cs of personal development h+p://edidak?kum.ee/
- 7. Curriculum maturing processes STANDARD COMPETENCES EVOLVING DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE & COMPETENCES ??? KNOWLEDGE AND COMPETENCES STUDENT PORTFOLIOS PERSONAL LEARNING CONTRACTS DOMAIN ONTOLOGIES COMPETENCE / LEARNING OUTCOMES ONTOLOGIES CURRICULUM LEARNING OUTCOMES STUDENTS’ EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES
- 8. Seman?c curriculum management goals • Managing curriculum and course development (to address coherence within the curriculum courses, to maintain traceability of curriculum linkages with resources for planning and upda?ng it, to address coherence within the course competences, ac?vi?es and resources, to manage and update case-‐based ac?vi?es and resources dynamically across the curriculum); • Managing curriculum and standard evolu4on (using standards such as competence models, domain ontologies and similar curricula as reference ontologies for modeling the curriculum and evolving the standards); • Managing internal and external evalua4on of curricula based on academic analy?cs and geSng overviews; • Managing shared vocabulary development, collabora4on and “ownership taking” in curriculum development; • Managing student-‐centered approach to learning with personal porDolios in the curriculum development (to use the curriculum as the “underground map” for planning learning for competences, finding learning resources for personalized learning experiences, proposing learner’s expected learning outcomes, ac?vi?es and resources to the courses and the curriculum).