Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Concept-Based Curriculum and the Teacher: Galvanising Teacher Agency

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Curriculum for High Ability Learners

Part of the book series: Education Innovation Series ((EDIN))

Abstract

With current understanding about the teacher’s critical role in the learning process (Barber M, Mourshed M, How the World’s best-performing school systems come out on top. McKinsey & Co, Dubai, 2007; Hattie J, Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge, London, 2009; Mourshed M, et al., How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. Retrieved from http://ssomckinsey.darbyfilms.com/reports/schools/How-the-Worlds-Most-Improved-School-Systems-Keep-Getting-Better_Download-version_Final.pdf, 2010), educators are now increasingly looking to involve teachers in ensuring greater customisation of learning. Educational systems are exploring more bottom-up approaches to curriculum development, as they seek to ensure that schools are equipping learners for the post-modern economy whilst at the same time deal with persistent achievement gaps and manage greater stakeholder involvement in education (Braslavsky C, The new century’s change: new challenges and curriculum responses. In: Proceedings of COBSE-International Conference, New Delhi, 2002; Darling-Hammond L, Friedlaender D, Educ Leadersh 65(8):14–21, 2008; Garner R, The Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/finland-schools-subjects-are-out-and-topics-are-in-as-country-reforms-its-education-system-10123911.html?cmipid=fb, 2015; Kalantzis M, Cope B, Comput Compos 23(4):402–411, 2006). School-based efforts have become test-beds to change instructional practices that have traditionally relied on centrally controlled, linear models of curriculum development (Brady L, Curric Teach 10(1):47–54, 1995; Gopinathan S, Deng Z, Plan Chang 37(3):93–110, 2006; Law E, Nieveen N, Schools as curriculum agencies: Asian and European perspectives on school-based curriculum development. Sense Publishers, Dordrecht, 2010). Teachers’ role in curriculum has become important in leading the bottom-up approach to curriculum, and factors such as teachers’ curricular expertise in selecting and conveying content suited to the learner in particular contexts (Ennis CD, Quest 46(2):164–175. doi:10.1080/00336297.1994.10484118, 1994), professional learning opportunities (Cochran-Smith M, Lytle SL, Rev Res Educ 24:249–305. doi:10.2307/1167272, 1999; Timperley A, et al., Teacher professional learning and development: best evidence synthesis iteration. Ministry of Education, Wellington, 2007) and teacher agency (Campbell E, Curric Inq 42(2):183–190, 2012; Fenwick TJ, Edwards R, Actor-network theory in education. Routledge, Abingdon, 2010; Priestley M, J Educ Chang 12(1):1–23. doi:10.1007/s10833-010-9140-z, 2011; Priestley M et al, Curric Inq 42(2):191–214. doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00588.x, 2012) have become significant considerations in school-based curriculum development efforts. Specifically, given that such change depends on the active, reflexive engagement of teachers in their curricular contexts for action, teacher agency has become a critical determinant for the ongoing development and refinement of curriculum.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Both curriculum development and innovation are used interchangeably in this chapter. Furthermore, the term curriculum development is used in its widest sense and refers to the appropriate selection and use of content as well as instructional strategies to achieve disciplinary learning and meet learners’ needs in specific contexts.

  2. 2.

    Curriculum orientations reflect decisions made about what knowledge is of most worthy in public education and are derived from the original five orientations set out by Eisner and Vallance (1974). Briefly, the four approaches are as follows: (1) academic rationalism approach promotes the ideas and structures within each discipline; (2) experiential approach promotes the development of a student’s ability to think; (3) the technological approach aligns curriculum with how to assess and provide appropriate prescription of instruction and activities to students; (4) the pragmatic orientation focuses on developing students to solve social problems and participate in society.

  3. 3.

    For description and comparative review of these curriculum models , please see VanTassel-Baska and Brown, 2007 and VanTassel-Baska and Stambaugh, 2009.

  4. 4.

    It might be useful for teachers to become used to distinctions between two kinds of curricula - one which is prescribed and fixed, and a fluid one, where they have space for deliberation and experimentation of key ideas. This idea is taken up again later in this chapter.

  5. 5.

    Recent theories have made efforts at finding a “middle ground” and to blur the dichotomy between structure and agency as can be seen in arguments made by Archer (2003), Bourdieu (1984) and Giddens (1984) as well as the arguments made about the holistic and individualistic strategies used to explain agency (Hollis, 1994; Levine, 2005).

  6. 6.

    Deleuze and Guattari published together, and so in this chapter the reference to Deleuze is used to refer to their collective work.

References

  • Archer, M. (2003). Structure, agency and the internal conversation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). In L. W. Anderson & D. R. Krathwohl (Eds.), A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, M., & Mourshed, M. (2007). How the World’s best-performing school systems come Out on Top. Dubai, United Arab Emirates: McKinsey & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, T. (2010). Collaborative inquiry learning: Models, tools, and challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Peretz, M. (1980). Teachers’ role in curriculum development: An alternative approach. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l’éducation, 5(2), 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Peretz, M. (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of texts. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berliner, D. (2001). Learning about and learning from expert teachers. International Journal of Educational Research, 35(5), 463–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boaler, J., Williams, C., & Confer, A. (2014). Fluency without fear: Research evidence on the best ways to learn math facts. youcubed. Retrieved from http://youcubed.org/teachers/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/FluencyWithoutFear.pdf

  • Bolstad, R. (2004). School-based curriculum development: Redefining the term for New Zealand schools today and tomorrow. Paper presented at the New Zealand Association of Research in Education (NZARE), Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.nzcer.org.nz/pdfs/13514.pdf

  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brady, L. (1995). School based curriculum development and the national curriculum: Can they coexist? Curriculum and Teaching, 10(1), 47–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How experts differ from novices. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braslavsky, C. (2002). The new century’s change: New challenges and curriculum responses. Proceedings of COBSE-international conference, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calhoun, C. (2002). Agency. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Dictionary of the social sciences (p. 7). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (1986). The sociology of an actor-network: The case of the electric vehicle. In M. Callon, J. Law, & A. Rip (Eds.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology (pp. 19–34). London: Macmillan Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, E. (2012). Teacher agency in curriculum contexts. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 183–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carl, A. E. (2009). Teacher empowerment through curriculum development: Theory into practice (3rd ed.). Cape Town, South Africa: Mills Litho.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, D., & Wong, H.-W. (2002). Measuring teacher beliefs about alternative curriculum designs. The Curriculum Journal, 13(2), 225–248. doi:10.1080/09585170210136868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305. doi:10.2307/1167272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (2007). Educational innovation and the problem of scale. Scale up in Education: Ideas in Principle, 1, 19–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colebrook, C. (2002). Gilles Deleuze. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1998). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of experience. New York, NY/Toronto, ON: Teachers College Press/OISE Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L., & Friedlaender, D. (2008). Creating excellence and equitable schools. Educational Leadership, 65(8), 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN/London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleuze, G. (1995). Negotiations 1972–1990, (trans: Joughin, M.). New York, NY: Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, Z., Gopinathan, S., & Lee, C. K.-E. (2013). The Singapore curriculum: Convergence, divergence, issues and challenges. In Z. Deng, S. Gopinathan, & C. K.-E. Lee (Eds.), Globalisation and the Singapore curriculum (pp. 263–275). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press [reprinted in L. A. Hickman & T. M. Alexander (Eds.) (1998). The essential Dewey, Vol. I. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press].

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. (1992). Curriculum and pedagogy. Handbook of Research on Curriculum, 5, 486–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisner, E. W., & Vallance, E. (1974). Conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, C. D. (1994). Knowledge and beliefs underlying curricular expertise. Quest, 46(2), 164–175. doi:10.1080/00336297.1994.10484118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, L., & Lanning, L. A. (2014). Transitioning to concept-based curriculum and instruction: How to bring content and process together. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eteläpelto, A., Vähäsantanen, K., Hökkä, P., & Paloniemi, S. (2013). What is agency? Conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educational Research Review, 10, 45–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenwick, T. J., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (1993). The professional teacher: Why teachers must become change agents. Educational Leadership, 50(6), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1(1), 5–27. doi:10.1023/A:1010068703786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gale, K. (2010). An inquiry in to the ethical nature of a deleuzian creative educational practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(5), 303–309. doi:10.1177/1077800409358869.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garner, R. (2015, March 20). Finland schools: Subjects scrapped and replaced with ‘topics’ as country reforms its education system. The Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/finland-schools-subjects-are-out-and-topics-are-in-as-country-reforms-its-education-system-10123911.html?cmipid=fb

  • Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopinathan, S., & Deng, Z. (2006). Fostering school based curriculum development in the context of new educational initiatives in Singapore. Planning & Changing, 37(3), 93–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or praxis? London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests (J. Shapiro, Trans.). London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. A. H. Stevenson & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262–272). New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herschbach, D. (1989). Conceptualizing curriculum change. Journal of Epsilon Pi Tau, 55(1), 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, D. (2014). Why is Singapore’s school system so successful, and is it a model for the West? The Conversation Media Trust. Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/why-is-singapores-school-system-so-successful-and-is-it-a-model-for-the-west-22917

  • Hollis, M. (1994). The philosophy of social science—an introduction. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2006). On globalization and diversity. Computers and Composition, 23(4), 402–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kärkkäinen, K. (2012). Bringing about curriculum innovations: Implicit approaches in the OECD area. Paris: OECD.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, K. J. (2013). Singapore’s school curriculum for the future: Beyond national development? In Z. Deng, S. Gopinathan, & C. K.-E. Lee (Eds.), Globalisation and the Singapore curriculum: From policy to classroom (pp. 205–224). Singapore, Singapore: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, K. J., & Lee, J. C.-K. (2008). The changing role of schools in Asian societies: Schools for the knowledge society. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, E., Ponnusamy, L. D., Tan, L. S., Lee, S.-S., & Ramos, M. E. (2014). A Singapore case study of curriculum innovation in the twenty-first century: Demands, tensions and deliberations. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(4), 851–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasky, S. (2005). A sociocultural approach to understanding teacher identity, agency and professional vulnerability in a context of secondary school reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(8), 899–916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law, E., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2010). Schools as curriculum agencies: Asian and European perspectives on school-based curriculum development. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. L. (2004). Speech by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the Teachers’ Day Rally 2006. The Max Pavilion, Singapore Expo, Singapore, Singapore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leong, K. L., Sim, J. B.-Y., & Chua, S. H. (2011). School-based curriculum development in Singapore: Bottom-up perspectives of a top-down policy. Curriculum Perspectives, 31(1), 51–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, C. (2005). What happened to agency? Some observations concerning the postmodern perspective on identity. Identity, 5(2), 175–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, C., Day, C., Hannay, L., & McCutcheon, G. (1990). Reconceptualising school-based curriculum development. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meirink, J. A., Meijer, P. C., Verloop, N., & Bergen, T. C. (2009). Understanding teacher learning in secondary education: The relations of teacher activities to changed beliefs about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D., & Tennyson, R. D. (1977). Concept teaching: An instructional design guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • MICA. (2004). Report of the committee on specialised arts school. Singapore, Singapore: Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mol, A. (2010). Actor-network theory: Sensitive terms and enduring tensions. Köllner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpshychologie, 50(1), 253–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C., & Barber, M. (2010). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. Retrieved from http://ssomckinsey.darbyfilms.com/reports/schools/How-the-Worlds-Most-Improved-School-Systems-Keep-Getting-Better_Download-version_Final.pdf

  • Ng, P. T. (2008). Educational reform in Singapore: From quantity to quality. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 7(1), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (1992). Smart schools: From training memories to educating minds. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (1993). The connected curriculum. Educational Leadership, 51(2), 90–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priestley, M. (2011). Schools, teachers, and curriculum change: A balancing act? Journal of Educational Change, 12(1), 1–23. doi:10.1007/s10833-010-9140-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priestley, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2013). Teachers as agents of change: Teacher agency and emerging models of curriculum. In M. Priestley & G. Biesta (Eds.), Reinventing the curriculum: New trends in curriculum policy and practice (pp. 187–206). London: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priestley, M., Edwards, R., Priestley, A., & Miller, K. (2012). Teacher agency in curriculum making: Agents of change and spaces for manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry, 42(2), 191–214. doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00588.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Priestley, M., Robinson, S., & Biesta, G. (2011). Mapping teacher agency: An ecological approach to understanding teachers’ work. Paper presented at the Oxford ethnography and education conference, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, W. A. (1999). Curriculum as institution and practice: Essays in the deliberative tradition. Mahwah, NJ: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, B. (1997). Informing the shape of the curriculum: New views of knowledge and its representation in schooling. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 29(6), 683–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, J. J. (1973). The practical 3: Translation into curriculum. School Review, 81(4), 501–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skilbeck, M. (2005). School-based curriculum development. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), The roots of educational change (pp. 109–132). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sotorin, P. (2011). Becoming woman. In C. J. Stivale (Ed.), Key concepts (2). Durham, UK: Acumen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stryker, S., & Burke, P. J. (2000). The past, present, and future of an identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 284–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum development, theory, and practice. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, C., & Ng, P. (2007). Dynamics of change: Decentralised centralism of education in Singapore. Journal of Educational Change, 8(2), 155–168. doi:10.1007/s10833-006-9016-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, L. S., & Ponnusamy, L. D. (2013). Weaving and anchoring the arts into curriculum: The evolving curriculum process. In C. H. Lum (Ed.), Contextualised practices on arts education: An international dialogue on Singapore (pp. 219–249). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timperley, A., Wilson, A., Barrar, H., & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher professional learning and development: Best evidence synthesis iteration. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner-Bisset, R. (2001). Expert teaching. London: Fulton Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J. (1989). Appropriate curriculum for the gifted. In J. Feldhusen, J. VanTassel-Baska, & K. Seeley (Eds.), Excellence in educating the gifted (pp. 175–191). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J., & Brown, E. F. (2007). Toward best practice: An analysis of the efficacy of curriculum models in gifted education. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51(4), 342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2009). What works: 20 years of curriculum development and research for advanced learners, 1988–2008. Center for Gifted Education, College of William and Mary (p. 40). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED506369.pdf

  • Walker, D. F., & Soltis, J. F. (2004). Curriculum and aims. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallin, J. J. (2010). A Deleuzian approach to curriculum: Essays on a pedagogical life. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Letchmi Devi Ponnusamy

Authors
  1. Letchmi Devi Ponnusamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Letchmi Devi Ponnusamy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Liang See Tan

  2. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Letchmi Devi Ponnusamy

  3. Curriculum Planning and Development Division, Ministry of Education, Singapore, Singapore

    Chwee Geok Quek

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ponnusamy, L.D. (2017). Concept-Based Curriculum and the Teacher: Galvanising Teacher Agency. In: Tan, L., Ponnusamy, L., Quek, C. (eds) Curriculum for High Ability Learners. Education Innovation Series. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2697-3_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2697-3_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2695-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2697-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation