Futuribles of learning 2030 - Delphi supports the reform of the core curricula in Finland

Airaksinen, Tiina H.; Halinen, Irmeli; Linturi, Hannu

doi:10.1007/s40309-016-0096-y

Cited by 18 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The main goal of the reform in Finland was to create better conditions for successful teaching and to enable pupils to develop their own lifelong learning skills and prepare them to maintain a sustainable lifestyle for the future (Airaksinen et al 2016;Halinen 2018;Viinikka et al 2019). One main source of discussion on the reform has been so-called phenomenon-based project studies where pupils work in collaboration with other classrooms and with several teachers on topics crossing subject boundaries.…”

Section: Educational Background To the 2014 Curriculum Reform In Finlandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dialogue, Worldview Inclusivity, and Intra-Religious Diversity: Addressing Diversity through Religious Education in the Finnish Basic Education Curriculum

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article is to discuss how religious and non-religious diversity are addressed in the current national core curriculum for religious education (RE) in basic education in Finland. We first discuss the educational developments behind the Finnish curricular reform, and then focus on issues related to RE and RE research in Finland. We then describe the key contextual contributors to the current RE curriculum in basic education before proceeding to examine how diversity is addressed in the curriculum. Based on our examination, we identify four themes in the curriculum: inter-religious diversity, religious and non-religious worldviews, cultural diversity, and dialogue skills. In RE, diversity is largely addressed within a framework of religion and multiculturality. The article ends with a call for renewal of research foci in RE.

show abstract

Section: Educational Background To the 2014 Curriculum Reform In Finlandmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dialogue, Worldview Inclusivity, and Intra-Religious Diversity: Addressing Diversity through Religious Education in the Finnish Basic Education Curriculum

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This result is strongly influenced by phenomenon-based learning. Since the beginning stage of phenomenon-based learning is the reality and real-world observation of learners into a phenomenon from different points of view, then they are empowered to attempt various strategies to solve the problem, perhaps by themselves or in collaboration with peers [20]. By working on real-life problems from various angles and trying different strategies to solve them cooperatively, students are then well-prepared to answer and give solutions at various categories [21].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embedding Proof-Writing in Phenomenon-based Learning to Promote Students’ Mathematical Creativity

Asahid¹,

Lomibao²

2020

EDUCATION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed to identify the significant impact of phenomenon-based learning and embedding proof writing to this new teaching strategy on students' mathematical creativity in tertiary education. The study used a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest non-equivalent control group design. There were 2 experimental groups, one exposed to phenomenon-based learning alone and the other was exposed to phenomenon-based learning with classroom proof-writing activities, and one control group exposed to the conventional method. Multiple solution tasks were used to measure students' level of creativity. The data were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, and ANCOVA. The analysis revealed that students exposed to phenomenon-based learning with proof writing had the highest posttest creativity score. Students in this group had a significantly higher level of creativity among the three groups. Further, students exposed to phenomenon-based learning alone may not outperform students exposed to phenomenon-based learning with proof writing, but they still had significantly higher posttest mean scores compared to students exposed to the conventional type of teaching. The researchers recommend to teachers in tertiary education to use phenomenon-based learning with proof writing in teaching mathematics and its related courses since this instructional approach engages students in learning that is more focused to real-life issues, apply skills and knowledge from different subjects, and enhance important skills like creativity, problem-solving, communication, and teamwork.

show abstract

“…Our third critique related to the DAD method: without doubt, DAD and other comparable real‐time approaches (e.g., Airaksinen et al, 2017; Huan‐Niemi et al, 2016; Meyer et al, 2021) are a significant step forward since they offer the ability to capture and feed back panelists' rationales in a manageable way. Nevertheless, the streamlined real‐time process does also create some possible social psychological issues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical evaluation of 42, large‐scale, science and technology foresight Delphi surveys

Belton

Cuhls

Wright

2022

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large‐scale Delphi surveys on technology foresight started in the 1960s and involve an average of about 2000 participants answering, potentially, up to about 450 items. This contrasts sharply with the participation and content of the more common, smaller‐scale Delphi surveys. Previously, Belton et al. developed “six steps” to underpin a well‐founded and defensible Delphi process and we apply these steps in a novel evaluation of the quality of 42 large‐scale technology foresight surveys. Using a detailed analysis of two exemplar studies and a content analysis of all 42 surveys, we explore whether such surveys differ systematically from “traditional” smaller‐scale Delphi surveys and, if so, why this may be and what it may mean for the quality of data produced. We conclude that there are some problematic issues within these surveys—to do with (i) data quality in both the numerical summarizing of participant's between‐round feedback and in the reporting of final round numerical responses, (ii) the infrequent elicitation of rationales to justify participants' proffered numerical responses, and, when such rationales are elicited, (iii) the between‐round summary and presentation of the rationales. We speculate on the reasons for these design differences in the extant large‐scale surveys and conclude that extra‐survey political influences, such as differing objectives and the need to demonstrate wide‐ranging expert participation, may be the underlying cause. We conclude with considerations and recommendations for the design of future large‐scale Delphi surveys to enable the underlying process to become better‐founded and more defensible to procedural evaluation.

show abstract

Futuribles of learning 2030 - Delphi supports the reform of the core curricula in Finland

Cited by 18 publications

References 9 publications

Dialogue, Worldview Inclusivity, and Intra-Religious Diversity: Addressing Diversity through Religious Education in the Finnish Basic Education Curriculum

Dialogue, Worldview Inclusivity, and Intra-Religious Diversity: Addressing Diversity through Religious Education in the Finnish Basic Education Curriculum

Embedding Proof-Writing in Phenomenon-based Learning to Promote Students’ Mathematical Creativity

A critical evaluation of 42, large‐scale, science and technology foresight Delphi surveys

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About