| Images of connected features: |
| | | WorldWatcher Notebook windows |  |
| | | WISE authoring environment (Project Manager) |  |
| | | Automated gathering of peer-evaluation outcomes in CeLS |  |
| | | Examples of Inquiry |  |
| | | Alternated Individual and Group Discourse (eStep) |  |
|
Connections 
|
|
|
| Description: |
| Curriculum designers cannot predict the actual conditions in which their curriculum will be enacted. Class size, students’ cultural background, language skills, reading capabilities, prior knowledge and experiences, access to resources, are just a few of the many parameters that influence the way a curriculum can and should be enacted. To maximize the effectiveness of curriculum materials, teachers need to adapt them so that they will meet local requirements and foster knowledge integration among their learners. |
|
Theoretical background:
|
|
We distinguish between changes to the curriculum materials that are made prior to instruction and those that are made during instruction. Some authors refer to the first type of change as customization (Slotta, 2004; Spitulnik & Linn, 2007), and other authors refer to the second type as adaptation (Remillard, 1999). Following the definition described in chapter 4 (Davis & Varma, in press), we use the term adaptation to refer to all changes made by teachers to curriculum materials.
|
|
|
| Tips (Challenges, Limitations, Tradeoffs, Pitfalls): |
| Brown & Campione (1996) caution that localization designs often lead to "lethal mutations" of the original features. These "mutations" may make the curriculum unable to support the original design goals of an innovation. To prevent this, it is important that the rationale of the original features will be visible to customizers. Therefore, curriculum materials should be flexible enough for teachers to customize them to local needs while maintaining adherence to the original learning goals. |
| References (Off-line): |
Slotta, J. D. (2004). The Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE): Scaffolding Knowledge Integration in the Science Classroom, in Internet Environments for Science Education: How information technologies can support the learning of science. Editors: Linn, M.C., Davis, L., Bell, P.
Davis,B., & Varma, k.,(in press). Synthesizing TELS and CCMS design knowledge. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing Coherent Science Education. NY: Teachers College Press.
Spitulnik, M. W., & Linn, M. C. (2007). Professional development and teachers’ curriculum customizations: Supporting science in diverse middle schools (MODELS Report): University of California, Berkeleyo. Document Number)
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological learning theory and the design of innovative environments: On procedures, principles and systems. In L. Shauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Contributions of instructional innovation to understanding learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(3), 315–342.
Kali, Y., Fortus, D., & Ronen-Fuhrmann, T. (in press). Synthesizing TELS and CCMS design knowledge. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing Coherent Science Education. NY: Teachers College Press. |
| Summary of changes (wiki): |
The rationale for why customize was missing - I added it. Theoretical background still missing.
add refernces, changed name from customization to adaptation |
|
History
|
|
|
|
|
Login
