Analysing the learning demands made in the official science curricula in three Nordic countries M. Allyson Macdonald [email protected] [email protected] Paper.

Analysing the learning demands made in the official science curricula

in three Nordic countriesM. Allyson [email protected]

Paper presented at the ASERA conference, Hamilton, New Zealand, July 2005

ASERA, Hamilton 2

Research questions

How can we assess/describe the learning demands made in official curricula?

What learning demands are made in the 1999 Icelandic (science) curriculum?

How do they compare with the demands made in neighbouring countries, such as Sweden and Denmark?

In revisiting the assessment these practical questions are also considered in terms of larger issues

ASERA, Hamilton 3

Three issues

Comparative study – like with like? Curriculum – what is curriculum? Commissioned research – limits and

advantages

ASERA, Hamilton 4

Nordic countries - background Sweden

• largest – about eight million people – variety of geographic features – often considered archetype of Nordic countries

Denmark• smaller – about four million people – high

population density – flat – island and peninsula – more continental in climate and culture

Iceland• very small – about 300.000 people – island

in North Atlantic – Nordic though has ties to USA

ASERA, Hamilton 5

Nordic countries - education

Education for all• Very little streaming, social inclusion

Compulsory schooling• Sweden, Denmark – age 7-15 – nine years• Iceland – age 6-15 – ten years

Secondary schooling• Sweden, Denmark – age 16-19 – three years• Iceland – age 16-20 – four years

Curriculum areas each conform to a particular template

Rational/technicist presentation

ASERA, Hamilton 6

Nordic countries - time

Amount of time spent in compulsory school in Iceland is 14% more than in Denmark and 20% more than in Sweden

Five curriculum areas in the research • 54% of time in Iceland• 67-68% of time in Sweden and

Denmark Maths – 1200 hours in Iceland, 1080 in

Denmark, 900 in Sweden

ASERA, Hamilton 7

Nordic countries – science curriculum Most detailed in Denmark and least in

Sweden Iceland – grades 1-4, 5-7, 8-10 – natural

science, divided into three areas (physical science, life sciences, earth sciences)

Denmark • 1-6 – nature and technology• 7-8 – biology• 7-9/10 – physics and chemistry

Sweden – 1-5, 6-9 – science studies

ASERA, Hamilton 8

Nordic countries – science curriculum Iceland and Denmark – 624 and 630

hours in science – more in upper grades (last three years) in Denmark (300 vs 216), more in lower grades in Iceland (408 vs 300)

Sweden – 800 science hours in all

ASERA, Hamilton 9

Analysis of curricula

Description of each science curriculum in terms of a decision-making model • Try to understand each curriculum on

its own terms but in such a way that comparable features are made visible

Two-way comparisons• Iceland-Denmark• Iceland-Sweden

ASERA, Hamilton 10

Decision-making model

ContentGoals

Teaching-as-activity Assessment

ASERA, Hamilton 11

Decision-making model

Learning-as-activity

Learning-as-achievement

Initial state of the learner

ASERA, Hamilton 12

Decision-making model

Learning-as-activity

Learning-as-achievement

ContentGoals

Teaching-as-activity Assessment

Initial state of the learner

ASERA, Hamilton 13

Inputs – content, goals, initial state of the learner General in lower grades, moving from

self/immediate environment outwards; subject-based in upper grades

More knowledge-based in Iceland and Denmark, more problem-solving in Sweden

Skills – developed through specific activities in Sweden, separate area in Denmark, to be integrated with content areas in Iceland though skills have their own goals

Technology moving out of science into new curriculum areas, especially in Iceland; all three show care for the environment; nature of science important, seem to be fewer doubts about value of science in Sweden; science for citizenship

ASERA, Hamilton 14

Icelandic science curriculum

About the nature and role of scienceAbout methods and skills

From the physical sciencesFrom the earth sciences

From the life sciences

ASERA, Hamilton 15

Outputs – assessment and achievement Assessment at end of compulsory schooling

• Sweden and Denmark, compulsory, oral and written, group problem-solving, graded internally

• Iceland, optional, written, graded externally Internal assessment – to cover interest,

independence, creativity, responsibility and reasoning

Portfolio evaluation encouraged In Sweden – assessment criteria in line with

goals appear in official curriculum

ASERA, Hamilton 16

Process – teaching and learning as activities Few guidelines for teachers in

Iceland, objectives are in terms of what learners should be able to do

Emphasis on learner participation Problem-solving a distinct learner

activity in Sweden but little advice for teachers.

Constructivism/behaviorism - tension

ASERA, Hamilton 17

Ambitious but ambiguous

Emphases include nature of science, relationship of science and technology, informed citizenship

Yet there are traditional subject areas and an emphasis on content knowledge

ASERA, Hamilton 18

Comparative study

Did we manage to compare the learning demands in the curricula?

We were asked for a comparison of knowledge, skills and attitudes

We supplied the answer differently – was there any added value?

ASERA, Hamilton 19

Curriculum

Reordered for this paper as inputs, outputs and process

Issues of motivation, self-efficacy – goals/objectives are in terms of an end-state (towards, standardised assessment) and not an initial state (away from, individualised instruction)

Learning and curriculum - behaviourism/information processing vs. constructivism/social constructivism

ASERA, Hamilton 20

Curriculum - interpretation

Nicolson and Holman 2002 – English study; need more teachers, continued low popularity, assessment

Eriksson and Jedemark 2004 - Sweden – removal of timetable, teachers defined new tasks

Harland, Moor, Kinder and Ashworth 2002 – Ireland – considered curriculum from the perspective of the learners – three cohorts – breadth and balance, coherence, continuity and progression

ASERA, Hamilton 21

Jerome Bruner (1977, p. xv) said many years ago: Let me turn to .... the production of a

curriculum. Whoever has undertaken such an enterprise will probably have learned many things. But with luck, he will also have learned one big thing. A curriculum is more for teachers than it is for pupils. If it cannot change, move, perturb, inform teachers, it will have no effect on those whom they teach. It must be first and foremost a curriculum for teachers. If it has any effect on pupils, it will have it by virtue of having had an effect on teachers.

ASERA, Hamilton 22

Example of commissioned research Short time-frames are common Need to present results in a

“common-sense” fashion; user value Absence of peer review – what does

it do to research method? Interpretation of results?