1. Analysing the learning demands made in the official science curricula in three Nordic countries M. Allyson Macdonald allyson@khi.is allyson@khi.is Paper presented at the ASERA conference, Hamilton, New Zealand, July 2005

2. ASERA, Hamilton 2 Research questions How can we assess/describe the learning demands made in official curricula? What learning demands are made in the 1999 Icelandic (science) curriculum? How do they compare with the demands made in neighbouring countries, such as Sweden and Denmark? In revisiting the assessment these practical questions are also considered in terms of larger issues

3. ASERA, Hamilton 3 Three issues Comparative study – like with like? Curriculum – what is curriculum? Commissioned research – limits and advantages

4. ASERA, Hamilton 4 Nordic countries - background Sweden largest – about eight million people – variety of geographic features – often considered archetype of Nordic countries Denmark smaller – about four million people – high population density – flat – island and peninsula – more continental in climate and culture Iceland very small – about 300.000 people – island in North Atlantic – Nordic though has ties to USA

5. ASERA, Hamilton 5 Nordic countries - education Education for all Very little streaming, social inclusion Compulsory schooling Sweden, Denmark – age 7-15 – nine years Iceland – age 6-15 – ten years Secondary schooling Sweden, Denmark – age 16-19 – three years Iceland – age 16-20 – four years Curriculum areas each conform to a particular template Rational/technicist presentation

6. ASERA, Hamilton 6 Nordic countries - time Amount of time spent in compulsory school in Iceland is 14% more than in Denmark and 20% more than in Sweden Five curriculum areas in the research 54% of time in Iceland 67-68% of time in Sweden and Denmark Maths – 1200 hours in Iceland, 1080 in Denmark, 900 in Sweden

7. ASERA, Hamilton 7 Nordic countries – science curriculum Most detailed in Denmark and least in Sweden Iceland – grades 1-4, 5-7, 8-10 – natural science, divided into three areas (physical science, life sciences, earth sciences) Denmark 1-6 – nature and technology 7-8 – biology 7-9/10 – physics and chemistry Sweden – 1-5, 6-9 – science studies

8. ASERA, Hamilton 8 Nordic countries – science curriculum Iceland and Denmark – 624 and 630 hours in science – more in upper grades (last three years) in Denmark (300 vs 216), more in lower grades in Iceland (408 vs 300) Sweden – 800 science hours in all

9. ASERA, Hamilton 9 Analysis of curricula Description of each science curriculum in terms of a decision-making model Try to understand each curriculum on its own terms but in such a way that comparable features are made visible Two-way comparisons Iceland-Denmark Iceland-Sweden

10. ASERA, Hamilton 10 Decision-making model

11. ASERA, Hamilton 11 Decision-making model

12. ASERA, Hamilton 12 Decision-making model

13. ASERA, Hamilton 13 Inputs – content, goals, initial state of the learner General in lower grades, moving from self/immediate environment outwards; subject-based in upper grades More knowledge-based in Iceland and Denmark, more problem-solving in Sweden Skills – developed through specific activities in Sweden, separate area in Denmark, to be integrated with content areas in Iceland though skills have their own goals Technology moving out of science into new curriculum areas, especially in Iceland; all three show care for the environment; nature of science important, seem to be fewer doubts about value of science in Sweden; science for citizenship

14. ASERA, Hamilton 14 Icelandic science curriculum About the nature and role of science About methods and skills From the physical sciences From the earth sciences From the life sciences

15. ASERA, Hamilton 15 Outputs – assessment and achievement Assessment at end of compulsory schooling Sweden and Denmark, compulsory, oral and written, group problem-solving, graded internally Iceland, optional, written, graded externally Internal assessment – to cover interest, independence, creativity, responsibility and reasoning Portfolio evaluation encouraged In Sweden – assessment criteria in line with goals appear in official curriculum

16. ASERA, Hamilton 16 Process – teaching and learning as activities Few guidelines for teachers in Iceland, objectives are in terms of what learners should be able to do Emphasis on learner participation Problem-solving a distinct learner activity in Sweden but little advice for teachers. Constructivism/behaviorism - tension

17. ASERA, Hamilton 17 Ambitious but ambiguous Emphases include nature of science, relationship of science and technology, informed citizenship Yet there are traditional subject areas and an emphasis on content knowledge

18. ASERA, Hamilton 18 Comparative study Did we manage to compare the learning demands in the curricula? We were asked for a comparison of knowledge, skills and attitudes We supplied the answer differently – was there any added value?

19. ASERA, Hamilton 19 Curriculum Reordered for this paper as inputs, outputs and process Issues of motivation, self-efficacy – goals/objectives are in terms of an end-state (towards, standardised assessment) and not an initial state (away from, individualised instruction) Learning and curriculum - behaviourism/information processing vs. constructivism/social constructivism

20. ASERA, Hamilton 20 Curriculum - interpretation Nicolson and Holman 2002 – English study; need more teachers, continued low popularity, assessment Eriksson and Jedemark 2004 - Sweden – removal of timetable, teachers defined new tasks Harland, Moor, Kinder and Ashworth 2002 – Ireland – considered curriculum from the perspective of the learners – three cohorts – breadth and balance, coherence, continuity and progression

21. ASERA, Hamilton 21 Jerome Bruner (1977, p. xv) said many years ago: Let me turn to.... the production of a curriculum. Whoever has undertaken such an enterprise will probably have learned many things. But with luck, he will also have learned one big thing. A curriculum is more for teachers than it is for pupils. If it cannot change, move, perturb, inform teachers, it will have no effect on those whom they teach. It must be first and foremost a curriculum for teachers. If it has any effect on pupils, it will have it by virtue of having had an effect on teachers.

22. ASERA, Hamilton 22 Example of commissioned research Short time-frames are common Need to present results in a “common-sense” fashion; user value Absence of peer review – what does it do to research method? Interpretation of results?