Learning Goals in Didactics and Education, Inclusion and Social Mobility
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract NERA 2016 Learning Goals in Didactics and Education, Inclusion, Social Mobility Ninna V. Braüner, master in general pedagogy, University College Sjælland, nvb@ucsj.dk Mette Bruun, master in general pedagogy, University College Sjælland, meb@ucsj.dk During the last 5-10 years teaching with centralized learning goals in didactics and education together with inclusion of children with special needs have been focus areas both nationally and internationally. In Denmark the Inclusion Act was passed in 2012 and a new school act in 2014. Several pupils with special needs are included in the school and the teacher meets a great challenge by teaching all pupils in the class in an including way. We see a trend in our country. Some educators believe or have the hypothesis that clear, detailed, and specified goals combined with classroom management is a main thing for better learning and for including all pupils. Even the social mobility will increase. In our project we want to discuss the hypothesis mentioned above. Which advantages and disadvantages have effective learning goals of inclusion? How can practice be developed within these frames? Teachers, educators, directors of education etc. find inspiration in works by John Hattie and James Nottingham, and visit schools in Ontario. Many Danish municipalities require teaching in schools with detailed goals and effective learning. We want to ask critical questions to the research in this area and to develop critical analysis and didactic thinking of professional teachers. We see a conception of the didactics with a very narrow understanding. We know from investigations that teaching is very important for pupils´ learning, but what about learning goals in didactics and education? How will the great focus on effective learning goals influence pupils´ learning and teachers´ possibilities of making plans for their teaching and carrying out their plans? Is it a question of thinking in an instrumental way? Can teachers still be independent, reflect their didactic approach and estimate what is convenient in their own class? In the project we use the Design Based Research approach supplied with other approaches. We observe teaching in schools and discuss the observations with teachers to understand their goals and arguments for planning. Our aim is not only to observe, but also to intervene and discuss. 3-4 teacher students participate in our project in relation to their own bachelor project.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».