Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies

2020 Edition
| Editors: Arthur Tatnall

Challenge of Transforming Curricula with Computers, High Impact Interventions and Disruption

  • Andrew E. FluckEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10576-1_207


Educational Expectations

Conventional educational attainment expectations for school students are generally defined by curriculum documents in each jurisdiction. However, new technologies disrupt societies, so it is pertinent to ask how computers have changed educational expectations. Robert Heinlein put this into perspective in a short story (1957). The protagonist is Holly Jones. She is 15 and a spaceship designer: “I’m very bright in mathematics, which is everything in space engineering, so I’ll get my degree pretty fast. Meanwhile we design ships anyhow. I didn’t tell Miss Brentwood this, as tourists think a girl my age can’t possibly be a spaceship designer.” This demonstrates some early aspirations of how education might...

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


  1. Allen D (2001) Learning integral calculus through non-template problem solving. Primus Probl Resour Issues Math Undergrad Stud 11(2):147–160Google Scholar
  2. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (2015) Guide to understanding ICSEA (Index of Community Socio-educational Advantage) values. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. http://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/Guide_to_understanding_icsea_values.pdf
  3. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2018) National assessment program – literacy and numeracy (NAPLAN) 2017 technical report. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), Sydney. http://www.nap.edu.au/docs/default-source/default-document-library/2017_naplan_technical_report.pdf?sfvrsn=2Google Scholar
  4. Barrance R, Elwood J (2018) National assessment policy reform 14–16 and its consequences for young people: student views and experiences of GCSE reform in Northern Ireland and Wales. Assess Educ Princ Policy Pract 25(3):252–271.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2017.1410465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cerna L (2013) The nature of policy change and implementation: a review of different theoretical approaches. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/The%20Nature%20of%20Policy%20Change%20and%20Implementation.pdf
  6. Chin CKH, Fluck A, Chong CL, Penesis I, Ranmuthugala D, Coleman B (2017) Higher order thinking through Calculus for Kids. J Digit Learn Teach Vic 4(1):26–31Google Scholar
  7. Coe R (2002) It’s the effect size, stupid: what effect size is and why it is important. Paper presented at the Conference of the British Educational Research Association, University of Exeter, England. 12–14 Sept 2002Google Scholar
  8. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Erlbaum, HillsdalezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Davenport TH (1993) Process innovation. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  10. Downes T, Fluck A, Gibbons P, Leonard R, Matthews C, Oliver R, Vickers M, Williams M (2002) Making better connections. Commonwealth Department of Education, Science and Training. Online at http://isq3.wikispaces.com/file/view/Making+Better+Connections+%28DEST%29.pdf
  11. Fluck A (2003) Integration or transformation? A cross-national study of ICT in school education. PhD thesis, University of Tasmania. https://eprints.utas.edu.au/232/
  12. Fluck A, Hillier M (2017) eExams: strength in diversity. In: Tatnall A, Webb M (eds) Tomorrow’s learning: involving everyone. Springer Nature, Cham, pp 409–417Google Scholar
  13. Glass GV, McGaw B, Smith ML (1981) Meta-analysis in social research. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Gravemeijer K, Doorman M (1999) Context problems in realistic mathematics education: a calculus course as an example. Educ Stud Math 39:111–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hamilton E, Rosenberg J, Akcaoglu M (2016) The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: a critical review and suggestions for its use. Tech Trends 60(5):433–441.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0091-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hattie JAC (2009) Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  17. Heinlein R (1957, August) The menace from earth. The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction. http://www.baen.com/Chapters/0743498747/0743498747___2.htm
  18. Huang Y-M, Liao Y-W, Huang S-H, Chen H-C (2014) A Jigsaw-based cooperative learning approach to improve learning outcomes for mobile situated learning. Educ Technol Soc 17(1):128–140Google Scholar
  19. Karasavvidis I (1999) Learning to solve correlational problems: a study of the social and material distribution of cognition. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/files/6076012/t000000a.pdf
  20. Koehler MJ, Mishra P (2008) Introducing TPACK. In: The AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology (ed) Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge for educators. Routledge for the American Association of Colleges for Teacher EducationGoogle Scholar
  21. Kozma RB (2011) A framework for ICT policies to transform education. In: Transforming education: the power of ICT policies. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Paris. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002118/211842e.pdf
  22. Lopez X, Valenzuela J, Nussbaum M, Tsai C-C (2015) Some recommendations for the reporting of quantitative studies. Comput Educ 91(10):106–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Maple (18-2016) Maplesoft, a division of Waterloo Maple Inc., Waterloo, Ontario. www.maplesoft.com
  24. Oates T (2009) Do no harm: a call for greater ethical regulation of innovation in education and training. CADMO 17(2):123–144.  https://doi.org/10.3280/CAD2009-002012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pearson P D, Ferdig R, Blomeyer RL, Moran J (2005) The effects of technology on reading performance in the middle-school grades: a meta-analysis with recommendations for policy. Learning Point Associates/North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED489534.pdf
  26. Puentedura R (2012) Thinking about change in learning and technology. Presentation given September 25, 2012 at the 1st Global Mobile Learning Conference, Al Ain, UAE. http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2012/04/10/iPad_Intro.pdf
  27. Robinson N (2018) The NAPLAN results are in: here’s what you need to know. Australian Broadcasting Corporation News. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-28/naplan-results-are-in-and-heres-what-you-need-to-know/10169934
  28. Rogers EM (2003) Diffusion of innovations, 5th edn. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Salomon G, Globerson T, Guterman E (1989) The computer as a zone of proximal development: internalizing reading-related metacognitions from a Reading Partner. J Educ Psychol 81(4):620–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Statistica (2018) The 100 largest companies in the world by market value in 2018 (in billion U.S. dollars). https://www.statista.com/statistics/263264/top-companies-in-the-world-by-market-value/
  31. Tallmadge GK (1977) The joint dissemination review panel IDEABOOK. U. S. Office of Education, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  32. Tamim RM, Bernard RM, Borokhovski E, Abrami PC, Schmid RF (2011) What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning a second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Rev Educ Res 81(1):4–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tamim RM, Borokhovski E, Pickup D, Bernard RM, El Saadi L (2015) Tablets for teaching and learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Commonwealth of LearningGoogle Scholar
  34. Wiliam D (2010) Standardized testing and school accountability. Educ Psychol 45(2):107–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of TasmaniaLauncestonAustralia

Section editors and affiliations

  • Arthur Tatnall
    • 1
  1. 1.Information SystemsVictoria UniversityMelbourneAustralia