MOD0001869 Curricular and Structural

1. MOD0001869Curricular and Structural “the academic community, alongside developing a scholarship of its own towards learning and teaching, should also develop a scholarship of curriculum” (Barnett and Coate, 2005, p. 159) • “the idea of ‘learning and teaching strategies’ is bound to fall short of its potential unless they become ‘curriculum learning and teaching strategies’” (Barnett and Coate, 2005, 9). Hilary Engward Curriculum design

2. Curricular and Structural

3. Curricular

4. Assessment A critical inquiry into the curricular structure/s in your sphere of educational practice that influences your teaching and learning strategies. All content must be supported using theoretical and empirical literature. Maximum word length 6,000 words. • We’ll revisit the assessment later. Hilary Engward Curriculum theory

5. Intro to Curriculum TheoryThe purpose of this session is to reflect on different approaches to curriculum design and assess their potential usefulness in informing/designing the curriculum Learning Outcome 1 Identify and critically evaluate a curriculum model appropriate to their learners. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

6. Outcomes • To identify the type of curricular you work within • To explore different types of curricular • To design a curricular/syllabus • To critically analyse the curricular you work within Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

7. Task • Get together in similar professional groups • Locate the curriculum that you work within • Outline the main tenets of the curriculum that you know of • Identify: • 5 positives • 5 negatives • Note on flip chart Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

8. Definitions • Individually: Write a definition of curriculum in a single sentence – use post its. Post on curriculum poster. 5 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

9. Definitions • “a curriculum is an attempt to communicate the essential principles and features of an educational proposal in such a form that it is open to critical scrutiny and capable of effective translation into practice” (Stenhouse, 1975, p.4). • “All the learning which is planned and guided by the school, whether it is carried on in groups or individually, inside or outside the school.” (quoted in Kelly 1983, p. 10; see also Kelly, 1999). • “a curriculum is a set of educational experiences organized more or less deliberately” (Barnett and Coate, 2005. p. 5). Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

10. “I want you to imagine that you have been asked to form a new department of …... Given the rare opportunity to write without constraint, would your curricula bear much resemblance to most of the formal courses of study to be found today? With any luck your answer will be something like, good grief no! If your answer is something else … there is not much hope for the future!” (Gould, 1973, p. 253) Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

11. Task: In 2/4s, similar professions • If you were starting from scratch, what should your curricula look like, and how best should it be delivered. • Write your thoughts down • 10 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum design

12. Thoughts – we will revisit Nursing Medicine Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

13. What do we mean by the curriculum? “when considering the curriculum we need to identify: • the curriculum which is intended by staff and designed before the student enters the course; • the curriculum that is delivered by the staff/learning materials (including books and software); • the curriculum that the student learns and experiences; and • the curriculum that the student makes part of herself/himself and remembers and uses some years later” (Jenkins, 1998,p. 3). Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

14. Think of a curriculum you would like to write.. • In 4s (ish) inter professional • It can be on any subject • But it must last for at least 1 year • It must have assessments in it • Think of the level/target group • Purpose and overall course learning objectives (min 3, max 6) • Write on flip chart • 20 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

15. Curriculum Organisation The core curriculum Deemed central and mandatory by the teaching authorities • Implies that there are optional parts to the curriculum too • Ongoing conflicts between bigger core and more choice (education authority-directed vs learner-directed) - the teacher is piggy-in-the-middle. • What about professional graduate and postgraduate education - how is the core determined? The spiral curriculum Bruner (1977 Subjects revisited throughout the curriculum • Increasing complexity • Building on previous learning The modular curriculum Self-contained unit • Independent in terms of outcomes, activities and assessment • Usually students choose more than one module (so implication is can be taken in any order) The integrated curriculum vertical- through the course - e.g. integrating clinical practice and basic theory (cfnursing, medicine…) horizontal- Horizontal integration: across the course - e.g. cardiovascular anatomy, physiology, pathology, pharmacology all together Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

16. Four ways of approaching curriculum theory/practice: 1. Curriculum as a body of knowledge to be transmitted. 2. Curriculum as an attempt to achieve certain ends in students - product. 3. Curriculum as process. 4. Curriculum as context/vehicle. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

17. Curriculum as a body of knowledge to be transmitted • A core body of knowledge to be given • A core body to be learnt “Education is the process by which knowledge is transmitted or 'delivered' to students (Blenkin et al 1992,p. 23) Think of mandatory training/moving handling/life support Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

18. Task: • What content of your course is essential? • How can you structure that content in a curriculum? • What knowledge informs that content (core texts please) • How might it be taught (think of context) and by whom? • Write learning objectives for this type transmission. • How will you measure achievement of outcomes? 20 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

19. Assumes • Likely to limit planning to the content/body of knowledge that they wish to transmit (Curzon, 1985) • But - who are ‘they’? • What are the advantages and limitations in relation to your course? Write them down. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

20. Curriculum as product Activities designed so that pupils will attain certain educational objectives(Grundy 1987: 11) Objectives are set, a plan drawn up, applied, and the outcomes (products) measured.  Tasks broken down into their component elements and lists of competencies drawn up.  Influential since the late 1970s with the rise of vocationalism and competencies.  Is it still current? Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

21. Objectives should be Based on four fundamental questions: 1. What educational aims/objectives should be attained? 2. What experiences can be provided to attain these purposes? 3. How can these experiences be organized? 4. How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?  Bobbitt (1918; 1928) and Tyler (1949) (both US. Bobbit – car manufacture, Tyler management theory)  Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

22. Task • What ‘products’ do you want from your course? • How can you structure that content in a curriculum? (module/spiral etc.) • Write objectives – what level/when. • Who determines these objectives? • What kind of learning do your objectives require? • How will you measure the objectives? • 20 mins • Remember: • Objectives are specific • Aims are general Note: advantages and limitations in relation to your course? Write them down. Hilary Engward CurriculuTheory

23. Assumes Implies objective, mechanistically measurement In order to measure, things have to be broken down into smaller and smaller units The result can be long lists of (often) trivial skills or competencies This can lead to a focus on the parts rather than the whole – ‘Shopping list’ Objectives exist prior to and outside the learning experiences.  Assumes importance of plan and product. The success/failure based on whether pre-specified changes occur in relation to the objectives Deskills educators - educators into technicians.  Learners have little/no voice. How can you measure what educators do in the classroom (Stenhouse 1974; and Cornbleth 1990).  Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

24. So far Curriculum is a one way process: Teacher Pupil method Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

25. Break  Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

26. Curriculum as Process The curriculum is what happens in the classroom. The focus is on interactions. Shifts focus from teaching to learning. “Teachers enter particular situations with an ability to think critically; an understanding of their role and the expectations others have of them; and a proposal for action that sets out essential principles and features of the educational encounter. Guided by these, they encourage conversations between and with people - out of which may come thinking and action. They continually evaluate the process and what they can see of outcomes” (Stenhouse, 1975) Stenhouse was not saying that curriculum is the process, but rather the means by which the experience of attempting to put an educational proposal into practice is made available. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

27. Process Focusing on the wider teaching and learning environment Variety of student experiences, mediated by the students themselves(Fraser and Bosanquet, 2006) When is this type of curriculum useful and why? When is it not so useful and why? • What is the ‘process’ of your course? • How can you structure the process (module/spiral etc.) • Write objectives – what level/when. • Who determines these objectives? Is there room for student voice? • What kind of learning do your objectives require? • How will you measure the objectives? • 20 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

28. Assumes • Meaning-making and thinking at its core • The approach is dependent upon the cultivation of meaning-making in the classroom. • Can lead to very different means being employed in classrooms and a high degree of variety in content. • Rests on the quality of teachers • Whether or not students are able to apply the skills to make sense of the world around them may be overlooked. • Overly demanding - focus on the "process of discovery" or "problem-solving", risks reducing learning to sets of actions have become ends- the processes have become the product. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

29. Curriculum as Context/Vehicle • Curriculum cannot be understood without attention to its setting or context e.g. social relationships of the context. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

30. Curriculum as Context/Vehicle • Problems in schools are due to the inability of teachers to see that economics, social structure, family dynamics, power struggles, contribute to the learning process. • The nature of the teacher-student relationship/organization of classes • These elements are sometimes known as the hidden curriculum (Jackson, 1968) Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

31. Factors Affecting the Curriculum Hilary Engward Curriculum design

32. Same groups of 4 for 5 minutes: • analyse where your original ideas/definitions sit. • What were the influences upon you that led to your definition? • Is there another way? • If you could design a curriculum for your profession, how would you go about doing so? • Whose curriculum is it? (could it be, should it be?) • Learner/Teacher • Authority – educational/PRB/political • Authors of texts • Examination authorities Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

33. What is the context of your course? • What factors affect the context of your curriculum? • Can you structure the context (module/spiral etc.) • Can you write objectives – what level/when/where in curriculum? • Who determines these objectives? Is there room for student voice? • What kind of learning do your objectives require? • How will you measure the objectives? • 20 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

34. Further Dimensions C21st a curriculum should involve engaging students in three dimensions or ‘building boxes’ • Knowing – personal relationship between the person and the intellectual field in question • Acting – activities which lead to the development of discipline-based, generic and employment-related skills and taking on the identity of what it is to be ??? • Being – how students develop a sense of themselves and their capabilities, how they gain in self-confidence. Hilary Engward Curriculum design

35. Recap • What does your curriculum look like? • A bit messy? • Have a think, re order/structure/design • Draw a visual model of your whole curriculum to present to others • Present to others, 5 mins max, using curriculum type vocab.. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

36. Recap • If you were starting from scratch, what should your curricula look like, and how best should it be delivered. What are your thoughts know? • 10 mins Hilary Engward Curriculum design

37. Thoughts – revisited Nursing Medicine Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

38. Think about…. Need to distinguish between: • Curriculum-as-designed –as written • Curriculum-in-action – as practised and experienced (Barnett and Coate, 2005) You need to think about this for this assignment. Hilary Engward Curriculum design

39. “the test of an effective curriculum is ‘engagement’: Are the students individually engaged? Are they collectively engaged?” (Barnett and Coate, 2005, 165) “we deliberately want to leave open space for and, indeed, to encourage, creativity in curriculum design. … Rather than filling up the time with tasks intended to achieve stated objectives, the curriculum challenge has to be inverted to be understood as one of the imaginative design of spaces” (Barnett and Coate, 2005, 3, 168). Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

40. Conclusion • It can be argued that a curriculum comprises: • A view of aims, purpose, values and interests • A view of knowledge – what knowledge and whose knowledge is important and how this impacts on the curriculum content • A view of the nature of a curriculum • A view of how a curriculum should be designed and organised • A view of the nature and purposes of pedagogy/andragogy • A view of directions and contents of curriculum change and development • How knowledge will be assessed Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

41. References • Barnett, R (2009) Knowing and becoming in the higher education curriculum, Studies in Higher Education 34(4), 429 – 440. • Barnett, R and Coate, K (2005) Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Open University Press: Maidenhead. • Baxter Magolda M B (2001) Making their own way: narratives for transforming higher education to promote self-development. Sterling, VA: Stylus. • Baxter Magolda, M B (2006) Intellectual development in the college years, Change 38(3), 50-54. • Baxter Magolda, M B (2009) Educating students for self-authorship: learning partnerships to achieve complex outcomes, in Kreber, C (ed) The university and its disciplines: teaching and learning within and beyond disciplinary boundaries. London: Routledge. pp143-156. • Baxter Magolda, M B and King P M (eds) (2004) Learning partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus. • Beckman, M and Hensel, N (2009) Making explicit the implicit: defining undergraduate research, Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly 29(4), 40-44 • Bekken, B and Marie, J (2007) Making self-authorship a goal of core curricula: the earth sustainability pilot project, in Meszaros, P S (ed) Self-authorship: advancing students’ intellectual growth New Directions for Teaching and Learning 109,. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp53-67. • Flint, A., and Oxley, A. (2009) Learning from internal Change Academy processes: final report. Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University, Learning and Teaching Institute. Available from: www.seda.ac.uk/resources/files/oxleyflint.pdf • Fotheringham, J, Strickland, K and Aitchison, K (2012) Curriculum: Directions, decisions and debate, Glasgow: QAA Scotland http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/curriculum-directions-decisions-and-debate.pdf • Fraser, S and Bosanquet, A (2006) The curriculum? That's just a unit outline, isn't it? Studies in Higher Education, 31(3) 269–284. • Gerstein, J. (2012) Flipped classroom: The full picture for higher education. User generated education web page 5 May. Available from:usergeneratededucation.wordpress.com/2012/05/15/flipped-classroom-the-full-picture-for-higher-education/ • Gould, P (1973) The open geographic curriculum, in Chorley, R J (ed.) Directions in geography. London: Methuen. pp253-284. • Griffiths, R (2004) Knowledge production and the research-teaching nexus: the case of the built environment disciplines, Studies in Higher Education 29(6), 709-726 • Healey, M (2005) Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning, in Barnett, R (ed) Reshaping the university: new relationships between research, scholarship and teaching. pp.30-42. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press • Healey, M (2013) Students as change agents handouthttp://www.mickhealey.co.uk/resources • Healey M, Bradford M, Roberts C and Yolande K 2010 Bringing about Change in Teaching and Learning at Department Level. Plymouth: National Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences http://www.gees.ac.uk/events/2009/deptchg09/deptchg09.htm • Healey M, Bradford M, Roberts C and Yolande K (2013) Collaborative discipline-based curriculum change: applying Change Academy processes at department level, International Journal for Academic Development 18(1), 31-44. • Healey, M and Jenkins, A (2009) Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. York: Higher Education Academy. • Hodge, D, Haynes, C, LePore, P, Pasquesi, K, and Hirsh, M (2008) From inquiry to discovery: developing the student as scholar in a networked world, Keynote address, Learning Through Enquiry Alliance Inquiry in a Networked World Conference, June 25-27, University of Sheffield. Available online at: http://networked-inquiry.pbwiki.com/About+the+LTEA2008+keynote • Holton D. (2012) What’s the ‘problem’ with MOOCs? EdTechDev 4 May. http://edtechdev.wordpress.com/2012/05/04/whats-the-problem-with-moocs/ • Jenkins, A (1998) Curriculum Design in Geography, Cheltenham: Geography Discipline Network, Cheltenham and Gloucester College of Higher Education. Available online at: http://resources.glos.ac.uk/ceal/gdn/publications/fdtl/index.cfm#alan • Jenkins, A (2009) Supporting student development in and beyond the disciplines: the role of the curriculum, in Kreber, C (ed) The university and its disciplines: teaching and learning within and beyond disciplinary boundaries. London: Routledge. pp157-168. • Kegan, R (1994) In over our heads: the mental demands of modern life. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP. • Kingston University (nd) Revised Academic Framework https://blogs.kingston.ac.uk/raf/ • Lage, M. J, Platt, G. J., and Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education,31, pp. 30-43. • Levy, P. (2009) Inquiry-based learning: a conceptual framework (version 4). Centre for Inquiry-based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences, University of Sheffield. Available at: http://www.shef.ac.uk/cilass/resources • McCabe, H. (2013a) Flipped lab: Examining what works in a flipped classroom. University of British Columbia Flexible Learning Web Page 26 July. Available from: flexible.learning.ubc.ca/showcase/flipped-lab-examining-what-works-in-a-flipped-classroom/ • Moore N, Fournier E, Hardwick, S W, Healey M, Maclachlan J and Seeman J (2011) Mapping the journey towards self-authorship in geography, Journal of Geography in Higher Education 35(3), 351-364. • Perry, W P (1968) Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: a scheme. Austin, Texas: Holt. • Roy, D, Borin, P and Kustra, E (2007) Assisting curriculum change through departmental initiatives. In: Wolf, P and Christensen Hughes, J (eds.) Curriculum development in higher education: faculty-driven processes & practices. New Directions for Teaching and Learning112. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp21-32. • University of Bath (2013) The flipping project. flippingproject.wikispaces.com/Flipping • University of Gloucestershire (nd) Undergraduate research NTF project http://insight.glos.ac.uk/tli/activities/ntf/urproject/Pages/default.aspx Hilary Engward Curriculum design

42. Group Presentations: Day 5 Objectives • To practise inter-professional team teaching • To teach a large group • To work as a team • To provide effective formative feedback to peers Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

43. Schedule • 1 hour per group • Inc. 10 mins Q & A from peers • Any subject to do with education – so long as there is no repetition between groups • Any kind of format – pedagogy? Andragogy? • Usual resources – anything different, you supply. Hilary Engward Curriculum Theory

44. Types of questions you might like to ask yourself/provide feedback on could be: • Is the main message/point clear? • Are the aims of the session clearly articulated? • Is the flow of the session coherent and un-fragmented (there should be a fluidity between presenters etc.)? • Are key points regularly repeated? • Are the resources clear? • Are the learning activities (if any) relevant? Clearly explained? Sufficient time given to complete and feedback on? • How is the session concluded? Are the salient points of the session explained? • Are additional resources identified (reference list etc.)? • Evidence that all participant's in the team were involved?

45. Group presentation Themes

46. Any questions • In relation to days activity? • Other questions related to course work, assignment, progression to be taken at the close of the day.