File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: The object of learning in action research and learning study

TitleThe object of learning in action research and learning study
Authors
KeywordsCurriculum reform
Educational objectives
Hong Kong model
Professional development
Variation theory
Issue Date2019
PublisherRoutledge. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/09650792.asp
Citation
Educational Action Research, 2019, v. 27 n. 4, p. 481-495 How to Cite?
AbstractThe Learning study and the Educational Action Research approaches to educational research are compared, not from a third, neutral point of view, but from the perspective of the former. Hence, the comparison is carried out in terms of how the main point of departure of the Learning study (LS), the question of ‘What is to be learned?’, is addressed in the two approaches. Both represent critical stances to Educational objectives, the frequently taken-for-granted answer to the question. Educational objectives communicate, however, what the students are expected to become able to do, but not what they need to learn in order to get there. Hence, what is to be learned cannot be stated in advance, prior to the teacher learning what her students need to learn. The two approaches to educational research agree on the principle that what is to be learned has to be found in the interaction between students and teachers; however, there is an important difference between the two concerning the very point of departure. Educational objectives are too wide and imprecise according to LS, the teachers have to find the critical aspects (necessary to appropriate, but not appropriated as yet by the students) of the object of learning. According to Action research, as formulated by Lawrence Stenhouse, educational objectives are too narrow, too limited and limiting. We shall start looking for what is to be learned amongst inherent aspects of the content itself.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/260617
ISSN
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.549
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMarton, F-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, WM-
dc.contributor.authorChan, SWY-
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-14T08:44:33Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-14T08:44:33Z-
dc.date.issued2019-
dc.identifier.citationEducational Action Research, 2019, v. 27 n. 4, p. 481-495-
dc.identifier.issn0965-0792-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/260617-
dc.description.abstractThe Learning study and the Educational Action Research approaches to educational research are compared, not from a third, neutral point of view, but from the perspective of the former. Hence, the comparison is carried out in terms of how the main point of departure of the Learning study (LS), the question of ‘What is to be learned?’, is addressed in the two approaches. Both represent critical stances to Educational objectives, the frequently taken-for-granted answer to the question. Educational objectives communicate, however, what the students are expected to become able to do, but not what they need to learn in order to get there. Hence, what is to be learned cannot be stated in advance, prior to the teacher learning what her students need to learn. The two approaches to educational research agree on the principle that what is to be learned has to be found in the interaction between students and teachers; however, there is an important difference between the two concerning the very point of departure. Educational objectives are too wide and imprecise according to LS, the teachers have to find the critical aspects (necessary to appropriate, but not appropriated as yet by the students) of the object of learning. According to Action research, as formulated by Lawrence Stenhouse, educational objectives are too narrow, too limited and limiting. We shall start looking for what is to be learned amongst inherent aspects of the content itself.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherRoutledge. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/09650792.asp-
dc.relation.ispartofEducational Action Research-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectCurriculum reform-
dc.subjectEducational objectives-
dc.subjectHong Kong model-
dc.subjectProfessional development-
dc.subjectVariation theory-
dc.titleThe object of learning in action research and learning study-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailCheung, WM: cwming@hkucc.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.emailChan, SWY: swychan@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityCheung, WM=rp00896-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/09650792.2018.1489873-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85060929838-
dc.identifier.hkuros291486-
dc.identifier.volume27-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage481-
dc.identifier.epage495-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000482932800003-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-
dc.identifier.issnl0965-0792-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats