Advertisement

Conceptions of Universities as Organizations and Change in Science and Mathematics Education

Chapter
  • 886 Downloads

This chapter draws on my experience as a change agent in universities over three to four decades and is partly autobiographical. I appreciate the willingness of the Editors to allow me to write in such a reflective and discursive way. The chapter outlines a problem, posits some theoretical explanations but offers no concrete solution. The kind of comprehensive change in students' experience of university learning that I believe in seems hardly closer now than when I adopted it in its primitive form as my mission more than thirty years ago. Perhaps it appeared to be getting closer at times but more recent years have seen the dream fade. This chapter attempts to analyze why and to ponder whether such an outcome is inevitable. That self-centred portrayal of the problem will be balanced by further analysis using distributed leadership theory1. I want to emphasize that the change I am talking about is not concerned simply with the degree to which discussion of teaching and learning among stakeholders in university education has increased per se (it has increased considerably) but rather whether progressive changes have been made to the learning environment with consequential, beneficial effects on learning outcomes. There has been a lot of discussion in recent decades but the rhetoric has not always been matched by the outcomes. Also, the nature of the activities undertaken by graduates has become much broader, in some situations much less sophisticated, as universities become institutions of mass education, and in other situations more complex and demanding. In a sense the goal posts for university undergraduate education have shifted and it is no longer clear where they are standing. That has made the task of creating the ideal learning environment more difficult to envisage and design

If you continue with your reading of this chapter, doing so may catalyze your thinking and encourage you to reflect on whether the problem described is real and whether you have a way of solving it. My goal is that you, the reader, should use what I write to see if you and others can do in the future what, in the last few decades, my colleagues and I could not

Keywords

Learning Environment Conceptual Change Curriculum Design Scientific Revolution Educational Development 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argyris, C. & Schön, D. (1978). Organisational Learning: A Theory-Of-Action Perspective. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart & WinstonGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P. & Harvey, J.A. (2003). Distributed Leadership. Oxford, UK: National College for School LeadershipGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching For Quality Learning At University. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowden, J.A. (1988). Achieving Change In Teaching Practices. In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning: New perspectives (pp. 255–267). London: Kogan-PageGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowden, J.A. (1989). Curriculum Development For Conceptual Change Learning: A Phenomenographic Pedagogy. Paper Presented At The 6th Annual (International) Conference Of The Hong Kong Educational Research Association, November (Also Available As RMIT EQARD Occasional Paper No 90.3)Google Scholar
  7. Bowden, J.A. (2003). Why Do We Need Reforms, Which, And How Do We Implement Them? In J Carter, K Eriksen, S Horst & R Troelsen (Eds.), If Reform Of Science Education Is The Answer — What Were The Questions? (pp. 9–29). Centre for Science Education: University of CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowden, J.A. (2004). Capabilities-Driven Curriculum Design. In C. Baillie & I. Moore (Eds.), Effective Teaching And Learning In Engineering (pp. 36–47). London: Kogan PageGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowden, J.A. & Masters, G.N. (1993). Implications For Higher Education Of A Competency-Based Approach To Education And Training. AGPS: CanberraGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowden, J.A. & Marton, F. (1998). The University Of Learning: Beyond Quality And Competence. London: Kogan Page. (Paperback edition published by RoutledgeFalmer: London, 2003)Google Scholar
  11. Bowden, J.A., Hart, G., King, B., Trigwell, K. & Watts, O. (2000). Generic Capabilities Of ATN University Graduates. Retrieved April 10, 2007, From http://www.clt.uts.edu.au/ATN.grad. cap.project.index.html
  12. Campbell, D. (2007). Teachers Enjoy Holiday …From Pollies. The Age, January 8: MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  13. Entwistle, N. (1998). Conceptions Of Learning, Understanding And Teaching In Higher Education Scre Fellowship Presentation. Retrieved February 16, 2007, From http://www.scre.ac.uk/fellow/ fellow98/entwistle.html
  14. Hegland, J. (1993). “Sink or Swim?” — Swimming Lessons Can Be Scary For A Child. Mothering, 68. Retrieved February 2007, from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/%22Sink +or+swim%3f%22 + (swimming +lessons +can + be + scary + for + a + child)-a014055083
  15. Henry, S. (2006). A New View: Distributed Leadership. Usable Knowledge. Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved February 2007, from Http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/ leadership/leadership002a.html
  16. Johansson, B., Marton, F. & Svensson, L. (1985). An Approach To Describing Learning As A Change Between Qualitatively Different Conceptions. In A.L. Pines & T.H. West (Eds.), Cognitive Structure And Conceptual Change (pp. 233–257). New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Kuhn, T.S. (1970) The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions. (2nd Ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Mac, P. (2006). Howard's History Is Certainly Bunk. The Guardian, 30 August: UKGoogle Scholar
  19. Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1984). Approaches To Learning. In F. Marton et al. (Eds.), The Experience Of Learning (pp. 36–55). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Marton, F., Dall'Alba, G. & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions Of Learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19, 277–300Google Scholar
  21. Popper, C. (1963). Conjectures And Refutations: The Growth Of Scientific Knowledge. Routledge: LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning To Teach In Higher Education. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Rump, C. (2007). Personal communicationGoogle Scholar
  24. Science, Engineering & Technology Portfolio (2007). SET Portfolio Guiding Principles For Educational Programmes. Retrieved February 2007, From http://mams.rmit.edu.au/ioohvmm4o44wz.doc
  25. Shanahan, D. & Healy, G. (2000). PM's Timely History Lesson. The Australian, 28 April: CanberraGoogle Scholar
  26. Spillane, J.P., Camburn, E. & Lewis, G. (2006). Taking A Distributed Perspective In Studying School Leadership And Management: Epistemological And Methodological Trade-Offs. Draft paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April 7–11, 2006Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Swinburne University of TechnologyMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations