Knowledge Transmitter, Social Scientist or Reflective Thinker: Three Images of the Practitioner in Western Australian High Schools

Carter, D. S. G.

doi:10.1080/00933104.1990.10505618

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At a national level, however, it has become necessary to seek ways to develop what over a decade ago Toffler (1980) identified as two basic raw materials for the (then) coming age: information and imagination. The basic skills of reading, writing, computing and communicating with all forms of technology are still vitally necessary, but a more systematic effort has yet be made to get beyond the fashionable rhetoric of higher order thinking and problem-solving to make these a reality in classrooms (Carter, 1990). To be functional in a complex participatory democracy students will need to have acquired more than a discrete thesaurus of unrelated facts.…”

Section: Curriculum Management 155mentioning

confidence: 99%

Curriculum Management, Instructional Leadership and New Information Technology

Carter

Burger²

1994

School Organisation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Curriculum Management 155mentioning

confidence: 99%

Curriculum Management, Instructional Leadership and New Information Technology

Carter

Burger²

1994

School Organisation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Untitled

Newhouse

2001

Learning Environments Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development and validation of the smart classroom inventory

Kong

Guang

2015

Smart Learn. Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the development and validation of the Smart Classroom Inventory (SCI). The SCI is derived from existing technology integration learning environment instruments, including TROFLEI, TICI and CCEI (ergonomic). To accurately describe the features of smart classroom, the factors of flexibility, learning data, learning experience are added to SCI, and the description of information technology usage of some items are also altered to fit the smart classroom environment. More than 640 11 to 15 years old students validated the instrument, revealing ten scales: Physical Design, Flexibility, Technology Usage, Learning Data, Differentiation, Investigation, Cooperation, Students Cohesiveness, Equity, and Learning Experience. Cronbach's alpha coefficient is 0.92 and 0.94 for the entire questionnaire in Actual and Preferred forms respectively. The results of EFA and CFA prove SCI to be a parsimonious instrument for assessing the smart classroom learning environment. In assessing Actual and Preferred learning environments, SCI results indicated that there are significant differences in all of the ten factors. Students' perception of factors of Differentiation, Flexibility, Technology Usage, and Learning Data are the largest four actual-preferred discrepancies within the smart classroom learning environment. These suggest the importance of innovative application of the current information equipment, and schools should pay more attention to satisfying the students' personalized learning demands. The differences between the gender and between the school settings indicate that smart classroom should integrate both the technology and the humanities factors into the design and application of smart classroom, as well as design multi-level learning activities to satisfy the choices of different age students.

show abstract

Knowledge Transmitter, Social Scientist or Reflective Thinker: Three Images of the Practitioner in Western Australian High Schools

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Curriculum Management, Instructional Leadership and New Information Technology

Curriculum Management, Instructional Leadership and New Information Technology

Untitled

Development and validation of the smart classroom inventory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About