4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 deciles. Differences z-scores 2004-2002; grade 2-4 ... Grades 2-4 (red) and 4-6 (blue). 1. ... Differentiation of learning materials and procedures.
Design and implementation of ICT-supported education for highly able pupils European Conference on Educational Research 25 – 27th August 2010
Prof. dr. Ton Mooij
Overview 1. Introduction 2. Theory 3. Method 4. Results 5. Discussion
Radboud University Nijmegen, ITS Open University of The Netherlands (Heerlen), CELSTEC T. Mooij ECER August 2010
1. Introduction “High ability”: indicators: - four years: may read, write, do arithmetic, or exceptional social / emotional or expressive performances - in one or more areas of development - important: family and environmental support, selfregulation, coaching at / above actual levels of competence - if not realised: forced underachievement, potentials not actualised, unhappy, low motivation, bored, not liking school, disturbing, low school achievement
Age- or norm-based selection in school: problem for high ability pupils Longitudinal cohort study: pre-school characteristics and teacher’s perception of pupil’s functioning 2002 – 2004 Indications: • class size: larger number pupils in class, negative effects • age-based monitoring: negative effects • class mean performance: higher mean, negative effects • acceleration: skipping grade(s) has positive effects
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Age- or norm-based selection Risk --- OK --- Risk
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Differences z-scores 2004-2002; grade 2-4 1,5
Age mean 1
0,5
• General IQ • Language perf. • Arithmetic perf. • Social behaviour • Emotional behav. • Motor behaviour
• General IQ • Language perf. • Arithmetic perf. • Social behaviour • Emotional behav.
0
Language 2-4 n = 8,105
-0,5
Arithmetic 2-4 n = 7,735
-1
-1,5 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
deciles
1
Differences z-scores 2004-2002 Grades 2-4 (red) and 4-6 (blue)
Research questions
1,5
1
0,5 Language 2-4 n = 8,105 Arithmetic 2-4 n = 7,735 Language 4-6 n = 8,496 Arithmetic 4-6 n = 7,970
0
-0,5
-1
1. HOW TO SPECIFY AND SUPPORT LEARNING PROCESSES OF HIGHLY ABLE PUPILS SO THAT THEY CAN ACHIEVE ACCORDING TO THEIR REAL POTENTIALS IN PRIMARY EDUCATION? 2. WHAT ARE THE EMPIRICAL EFFECTS OF ADEQUATE LEARNING ARRANGEMENTS ON HIGHLY ABLE PUPILS IN PRIMARY EDUCATION?
-1,5 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 deciles
2. Theory
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Age-based versus criterion-based learning and assessment
Research: Curricular interventions and effects 1. Curriculum or content directed (compacting, projects) Generally: positive cognitive effects on gifted pupils Non-gifted may even profit more
Age- or norm-based learning: - mean-based tasks and specific adaptations - tasks or activities may not fit individual competence
2. Social comparison processes and effects Specific school-subject developments in achievement and self-concept High competition between pupils or classes – high levels of test anxiety Special programmes improved motivation, achievement, social and self-concept
3. Educational acceleration / skipping class(es) 4. Saturday or summer school programmes
Criterion-based learning: - series of tasks according to psychometric criteria - curriculum: absolute evaluation, continuity in progress at own levels of competence
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Pupil level: self-regulation and learning tasks
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Self-regulation cycle of learning task selection, coaching, and assessment Selectinglearning tasks - By others - By learner - Selecting tasks for others
Zimmerman (2000): self-regulation: self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals competence-based learning: - estimation of difficulty level of task - selection - types of support or coaching of task execution - assessment or evaluation of results T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Self-regulation process - From task selection Fr - To coaching - To assessment - To selection etc. Assessment - By others - By learner - Assessing others
Coaching learning - By others - By learner - Others
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
2
Systemic design to improve education and learning
Education as a multilevel system national educational level / policy
regional education / youth
school / location
class
regional education / youth
school / location
class
class
regional education / youth
school / location school / location school / location
class
class
class
class
school / location
class
class
small group
small group small group small group small group
small group small group small group small group small group small group
pupil pupil
pupil pupil
pupil pupil
pupil pupil
pupil
pupil pupil
pupil pupil
Type of educational contextual dimension Differentiation of learning materials and procedures Integration by and use of ICT support Strategies to improve development and learning
Combination with four learning aspects Diagnostic, instructional, managerial, systemic
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Model of “contextual learning guidelines” Educational contextual dimension: Learning aspect: Diagnostic
Differentiat.
ICT support Improv. strat.
1
6
11
Instructional
2
7
12
Instructional
3
8
13
Managerial
4
9
14
5
10
15
Systemic
Contextual learning model (1) Differentiation of learning materials and procedures 1. Identify a pedagogical-didactic kernel structure for competence (sub)domains 2. Structure domains of competence in terms • Instruction of subskills and instructional lines 3. Include psychometrically valid indicators to evaluate learning progress • Management 4. Organise and match flexible groups of learners and teachers / coaches • Systemic 5. Use integrated systems for monitoring, evaluation, and administration • Diagnostic
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Contextual learning model (2)
Contextual learning model (3)
Integration by and use of ICT support • Diagnostic
1. Facilitate construction and use of a pedagogical-didactic kernel structure (PDKS) • Instruction 2. Enhance structuring, transparency, and flexible use of instructional lines 3. Facilitate individualised instruction, collaborative learning, and self-regulation • Management 4. Encourage differentiated and multilevel evaluation of learning 5. Integrate instruction and learning across • Systemic different contexts, levels, and points in time T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Strategies to improve development and learning • Diagnostic • Instruction
• Management • Systemic
1. Use a learner’s entry characteristics to stipulate instructional lines 2. Create and control pro-social relationships in and around school 3. Use collaborative didactic procedures to stimulate self-regulation 4. Concentrate teacher coaching on those pupils most in need of this 5. Apply multilevel indicators to improve instruction and learning T. Mooij ECER August 2010
3
Hypothesis
3. Method
Gifted pupils learning according to systemic contextual learning conditions will do better than gifted pupils in traditional education, in particular because the self-regulatory capacities of gifted pupils can be used more, and better, in the improved systemic conditions.
Goal: realise guidelines ‘contextual learning model’ • • • • •
Development of prototype PDKS Development of prototype software Pilots in pre-school / primary school Collaborative research and development in practice Experimental longitudinal research
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Skill view
4. Results Language
Arithmetic / mathematics
... Cognition
Pedagogical-Didactic Kernel Structure ...
language general - cognitive social - emotional arithmetic / mathematics physical - medical general - psychological motor
two-word sentences
...
...
...
Preliminary reading
... Auditory discrimination
Auditory discrimination word
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
internal representation of information
...
Reading
Competency domains: skill-views:
Auditory analysis
Auditory Auditory Auditory discrimination analysis analysis T. Mooijword ECER August 2010sound sound
Concept
...
more-word sentences
one-word sentences production of sounds
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
4
Example of special instructional line: School behaviour judgement
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Figure 8: Results of screening of entry characteristics
Implementation: practice examples Pre-school and primary education • collaboration with pre- / primary school teachers • screening of entry characteristics of four-year olds • experiences in practice:
• • • •
collaboration between parents and teachers multi-perspective communication about competence levels introduction of other types of play and learning materials further specific educational support in small groups
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
5
Age-independent collaboration between pupils 1. School level / throughout school • curriculum: PDKS-related • learning tasks: criterion-based competencies / free • general social-emotional and behavioural rules 2. Small group level / collaboration • teacher: instructs, coaches, checks requirements • pupil chooses other pupil(s)
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
3. Pupil level • placement of pupil at own levels of competence • tasks: self-chosen or assigned, individual progress T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Some references 5. Discussion 1.
Model of contextual learning guidelines seems adequate
2.
Intense innovation processes in pre-school practice
3.
Cases of individual high ability pupils and motivation effects
4.
Further systemic educational and ICT-development in collaboration with teachers
5.
Longitudinal experimental research
T. Mooij ECER August 2010
Mooij, T. (2006). Theoretical and methodological significance of Information and Communication Technology in educational practice. European Educational Research Journal, 5(2), 77-79. Mooij, T. (2007). Contextual learning theory: Concrete form and a software prototype to improve early education. Computers & Education, (48)1, 100-118. Mooij, T. (2007). Design of educational and ICT conditions to integrate differences in learning: Contextual learning theory and a first transformation step in early education. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1499-1530. Mooij, T. (2007). Learning for self-regulation: Improving instructional benefits for pupils, teachers, parents, schools, and society at large. Heerlen, The Netherlands: Open University of The Netherlands (OUNL). Mooij, T. (2008). Education and self-regulation of learning for gifted pupils: Systemic design and development. Research Papers in Education, 23(1), 1-19. Mooij, T., & Driessen, G. (2008). Differential ability and attainment in language and arithmetic of Dutch primary school pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 491-506. Mooij, T. (2009). Education and ICT-based self-regulation in learning: Theory, design and implementation. Education and Information Technologies, 14(1), 3-27. T. Mooij ECER August 2010
6
