<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>ARRT Community:</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/2428/47374</link>
    <description />
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 19:31:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:date>2013-05-18T19:31:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Autonomy, conditions and constraints: some cross-cutting themes from ‘Learning How to Learn – in classrooms, schools and networks’</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49638</link>
      <description>Title: Autonomy, conditions and constraints: some cross-cutting themes from ‘Learning How to Learn – in classrooms, schools and networks’
Authors: James, M; McCormick, R; Marshall, B; Pedder, D; Carmichael, P
Abstract: The project aimed to link research conducted across organisational levels – in classrooms, in schools and across networks. This paper provides an overview of the project at the end of the funding period. Although analysis had focused particularly on the separate levels, and some across level analysis remains to be done, several cross-cutting themes, linking our levels, have emerged: &#xD;
&#xD;
1. Autonomy and agency. Our theoretical analysis led us to consider the development of learning autonomy as a central concept in learning how to learn (LHTL). Promoting learning autonomy also emerged as a key factor in our quantitative survey of teachers and is confirmed by our interviews and videos of classroom practice. All data sources point to the importance of teachers’ own sense of agency as crucial in creating the conditions for pupils’ voices to be heard and their autonomy to be enhanced. The application of formative principles in teachers’ own learning emerges as a strong theme. &#xD;
&#xD;
2. Conditions for classroom change: support for teachers’ in-class learning Teacher learning and school support for such learning are key preconditions for the sustained promotion of LHTL in classrooms.  Our data indicated that the conditions in project schools appeared to be conducive to teachers’ learning out of the classroom but less amenable to teachers’ learning with colleagues in the classroom. Yet, it was teachers’ in-class learning practices that were most strongly associated with their classroom promotion of LHTL. School conditions that underpinned teachers’ in-class learning practices centred on the development of a clear sense of direction, the promotion of staff development, the auditing of teachers’ expertise and support for teacher networking.&#xD;
&#xD;
3. Compliance and subversion as responses to the policy context. Interviews with headteachers and school co-ordinators revealed their concerns about leading learning in their schools within the context of prescriptive government policy. All schools were implementing government policies but with varying degrees of enthusiasm, locating themselves on a spectrum of compliance to subversion. Government policies were successful in leaving a depth of imprint on school practice and shaping the discourse which accompanied it.  However, the greater the external pressure, the greater was the desire for flexibility, diversification and agency.</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2005 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49638</guid>
      <dc:date>2005-11-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Feedback and formative assessment in the workplace</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49636</link>
      <description>Title: Feedback and formative assessment in the workplace
Authors: Eraut, M</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49636</guid>
      <dc:date>2007-05-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Teaching controversial issues in a divided society: Learning from Northern Ireland</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49635</link>
      <description>Title: Teaching controversial issues in a divided society: Learning from Northern Ireland
Authors: McCully, Alan
Abstract: The paper draws on the author’s professional experience as teacher, curriculum developer, researcher and teacher educator working with controversial issues in the context of the Northern Irish education system during thirty years of conflict and subsequent peace-building. &#xD;
&#xD;
It argues that while teaching controversial issues in any educational context offers challenges particular difficulties are faced in a society characterised by violent divisions around national identity, ethnicity or religion.  Such situations can generate deep emotional reactions in students that override their capacity to engage in rational dialogue, or cause them to avoid such discourse at all. Facilitating understanding in these conditions requires specific responses on the part of the practitioner in order to establish a conducive and trusting environment for interaction.&#xD;
&#xD;
Arising from the collective experience of three major curriculum initiatives in the field the paper identifies ten points on which to build effective practice. In the conclusion these are placed in the context of recent writing on the relationship between education and divided societies.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Jan 2005 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49635</guid>
      <dc:date>2005-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>It ain't (simply) what you know, it's the way you communicate it: curriculum knowledge and communication</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49634</link>
      <description>Title: It ain't (simply) what you know, it's the way you communicate it: curriculum knowledge and communication
Authors: Edwards, R
Description: This is an article for practitioners, drawing mainly on the Scottish FE context for its examples. It presents the findings of the Literacies for Learning in Further Education research project regarding the literacy practices which mediate learning, teaching and assessment on FE courses. It focuses on differences between literacies for learning and literacies for assessment, between higher and lower level courses, between educational and occupational objectives, and on issues concerning progression. The downloadable pdf contains the whole SFEU publication; this article begins on page 14.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2007 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/2428/49634</guid>
      <dc:date>2007-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

