Davis & Krajcik (2005) - Revision history

imported>Raymond Johnson: linked educative curriculum materials

2014-08-04T17:44:21Z

linked educative curriculum materials

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:44, 4 August 2014
Line 28:		Line 28:
	== Summary ==		== Summary ==

	''Educative curriculum materials'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ({{Cite\|Rumelhart\|1994}}), how the text is structured ({{Cite\|Armbruster & Anderson\|1985}}), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ({{Cite\|Collopy\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|1999}}; {{Cite\|Schneider & Krajcik\|2002}}). The interaction of these factors is complex ({{Cite\|Lloyd\|1999}}) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ({{Cite\|Clandinin & Connelly\|1991}}). While professional development should also support teacher learning ({{Cite\|Putnam & Borko\|2000}}), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ({{Cite\|Collopy\|2003}}). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.		''[[Educative curriculum materials]]'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ({{Cite\|Rumelhart\|1994}}), how the text is structured ({{Cite\|Armbruster & Anderson\|1985}}), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ({{Cite\|Collopy\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|1999}}; {{Cite\|Schneider & Krajcik\|2002}}). The interaction of these factors is complex ({{Cite\|Lloyd\|1999}}) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ({{Cite\|Clandinin & Connelly\|1991}}). While professional development should also support teacher learning ({{Cite\|Putnam & Borko\|2000}}), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ({{Cite\|Collopy\|2003}}). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.

	=== Research Questions and Teacher Learning ===		=== Research Questions and Teacher Learning ===

imported>Raymond Johnson: /* Guidelines and Heuristics for Educative Curriculum Materials */ spelling fix

2014-03-31T08:01:58Z

Guidelines and Heuristics for Educative Curriculum Materials: spelling fix

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:01, 31 March 2014
Line 46:		Line 46:
	# Materials could promote a teachers' ''pedagogical design capacity'', referring to the ability to use personal and curricular resources to achieve productive instructional ends ({{Cite\|Brown & Edelson\|2003}})		# Materials could promote a teachers' ''pedagogical design capacity'', referring to the ability to use personal and curricular resources to achieve productive instructional ends ({{Cite\|Brown & Edelson\|2003}})

	Regarding the final point, pedagogical design capacity is a characteristic that should help teachers from making a "lethal mutation" ({{Cite\|Brown & Campione\|1996}}, p. 291) to their curriculum. This is important in light of the generally low quality of many curricular resources ({{Cite\|Hubisz\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Kesidou & Roseman\|2002}}) and teachers' need to make ~~adaptatons~~ ({{Cite\|Barab & Luehmann\|2003}}).		Regarding the final point, pedagogical design capacity is a characteristic that should help teachers from making a "lethal mutation" ({{Cite\|Brown & Campione\|1996}}, p. 291) to their curriculum. This is important in light of the generally low quality of many curricular resources ({{Cite\|Hubisz\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Kesidou & Roseman\|2002}}) and teachers' need to make adaptations ({{Cite\|Barab & Luehmann\|2003}}).

	Davis and Krajcik build upon these five guidelines to describe nine design heuristics for educative curriculum materials in science. This is not intended to represent a full set and Davis and Krajcik encourage further development. The heuristics, found in the appendix, are outlined as follows:		Davis and Krajcik build upon these five guidelines to describe nine design heuristics for educative curriculum materials in science. This is not intended to represent a full set and Davis and Krajcik encourage further development. The heuristics, found in the appendix, are outlined as follows:

imported>Raymond Johnson: formatting

2014-03-31T01:39:31Z

formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:39, 31 March 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Title\|Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning}}		{{Title\|Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning}}
	__NOTOC__		__NOTOC__
	~~The article ''Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning'' was written by~~ [[Elizabeth Davis]] and [[Joseph Krajcik]] ~~and published in ''~~[[Educational Researcher]]~~'' in~~ 2005~~. The article is available from Sage Publishers at [http~~:~~//edr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/3~~ http://edr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/3].		* Authors: [[Elizabeth Davis]] and [[Joseph Krajcik]]
			* Journal: [[Educational Researcher]]
			* Year: 2005
			* Source: http://edr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/3

	== Abstract ==		== Abstract ==
Line 70:		Line 73:
	== Also ==		== Also ==

	* [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Davis & Krajcik (2005)\|Pages linking here]]
	* Mendeley: http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/designing-educative-curriculum-materials-promote-teacher-learning/		* Mendeley: http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/designing-educative-curriculum-materials-promote-teacher-learning/

	~~===~~ APA ~~===~~		;APA
			: Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. ''Educational Researcher'', 34(3), 3–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X034003003
	Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. ''Educational Researcher'', 34(3), 3–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X034003003		;BibTeX

	~~===~~ BibTeX ~~===~~

	<pre>		<pre>
	@article{Davis2005,		@article{Davis2005,

imported>Raymond Johnson: /* Guidelines and Heuristics for Educative Curriculum Materials */

2013-11-02T09:10:58Z

Guidelines and Heuristics for Educative Curriculum Materials

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:10, 2 November 2013
Line 41:		Line 41:
	# Materials could help teachers consider ways to relate units during the year ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; {{Cite\|Wang & Paine\|2003}})		# Materials could help teachers consider ways to relate units during the year ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; {{Cite\|Wang & Paine\|2003}})
	# Materials could make visible the developers' pedagogical judgments ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; see also {{Cite\|Heaton\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Petish\|2004}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Shkedi\|1998}})		# Materials could make visible the developers' pedagogical judgments ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; see also {{Cite\|Heaton\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Petish\|2004}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Shkedi\|1998}})
	# Materials could promote a teachers' ''pedagogical design capacity'', referring to the ability to use personal and curricular resources to achieve productive instructional ends ({{Cite\|Brown & Edelson\|2003}}		# Materials could promote a teachers' ''pedagogical design capacity'', referring to the ability to use personal and curricular resources to achieve productive instructional ends ({{Cite\|Brown & Edelson\|2003}})

	Regarding the final point, pedagogical design capacity is a characteristic that should help teachers from making a "lethal mutation" ({{Cite\|Brown & Campione\|1996}}, p. 291) to their curriculum. This is important in light of the generally low quality of many curricular resources ({{Cite\|Hubisz\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Kesidou & Roseman\|2002}}) and teachers' need to make adaptatons ({{Cite\|Barab & Luehmann\|2003}}).		Regarding the final point, pedagogical design capacity is a characteristic that should help teachers from making a "lethal mutation" ({{Cite\|Brown & Campione\|1996}}, p. 291) to their curriculum. This is important in light of the generally low quality of many curricular resources ({{Cite\|Hubisz\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Kesidou & Roseman\|2002}}) and teachers' need to make adaptatons ({{Cite\|Barab & Luehmann\|2003}}).

imported>Raymond Johnson: linking here, category

2013-11-02T08:32:29Z

linking here, category

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:32, 2 November 2013
Line 70:		Line 70:
	== Also ==		== Also ==

			* [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Davis & Krajcik (2005)\|Pages linking here]]
	* Mendeley: http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/designing-educative-curriculum-materials-promote-teacher-learning/		* Mendeley: http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/designing-educative-curriculum-materials-promote-teacher-learning/

Line 92:		Line 93:
	</pre>		</pre>

			[[Category:Summaries]]
	[[Category:Journal Articles]]		[[Category:Journal Articles]]
	[[Category:Educational Researcher]]		[[Category:Educational Researcher]]
	[[Category:2005]]		[[Category:2005]]
	[[Category:Curriculum Use]]		[[Category:Curriculum Use]]

imported>Raymond Johnson: /* Limitations and Tensions */ added subsection

2013-11-02T08:30:49Z

Limitations and Tensions: added subsection

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:30, 2 November 2013
Line 63:		Line 63:

	=== Limitations and Tensions ===		=== Limitations and Tensions ===

			The quality of educative curriculum materials are constrained by (a) the quality of the underlying content, (b) the characteristics of the teacher using the materials ({{Cite\|Collopy\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|1999}}; {{Cite\|Schneider & Krajcik\|2002}}), and (c) their limited influence as a single intervention within a larger system. Educative curriculum materials must be detailed enough to be helpful, but respect teachers' limited time, attention, and teaching in general as a learning profession ({{Cite\|Darling-Hammond & Sykes\|1999}}). Considerations may need to be given to teachers with different needs, with novice teachers requiring more rationales and PCK support. Teachers may also need educative materials that they can use online ({{Cite\|Davis, Smithey, Petish\|2004}}; {{Cite\|Fishman\|2003}}) and may benefit from audio and video depictions of practice.

			Despite difficulty in researching the connections between teacher learning, teacher practice, and student learning ({{Cite\|Wilson & Berne\|1999}}) progress is being made ({{Cite\|Fishman, Marx, Best, & Tal\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon\|2001}}; {{Cite\|Rowan, Correnti, & Miller\|2002}}; {{Cite\|Schneider & Krajcik\|2002}}). These heuristics should be tested empirically and we need a greater understanding of teachers curriculum support needs and wants.

	== Also ==		== Also ==

imported>Raymond Johnson: /* Summary */ added guidelines and heuristics

2013-11-02T08:11:24Z

Summary: added guidelines and heuristics

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 == Summary ==
-''Educative curriculum materials'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ([[Rumelhart (1994)|Rumelhart, 1994]]), how the text is structured ([[Armbruster & Anderson (1985)|Armbruster & Anderson, 1985]]), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ([[Collopy (2003)|Collopy, 2003]]; [[Remillard (1999)|Remillard, 1999]]; [[Schneider & Krajcik (2002)|Schneider & Krajcik, 2002]]). The interaction of these factors is complex ([[Lloyd, 1999]]) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ([[Clandinin & Connelly (1991)|Clandinin & Connelly, 1991]]). While professional development should also support teacher learning ([[Putnam & Borko (2000)|Putnam & Borko, 2000]]), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ([[Collopy, 2003]]). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.
+''Educative curriculum materials'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ({{Cite|Rumelhart|1994}}), how the text is structured ({{Cite|Armbruster & Anderson|1985}}), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ({{Cite|Collopy|2003}}; {{Cite|Remillard|1999}}; {{Cite|Schneider & Krajcik|2002}}). The interaction of these factors is complex ({{Cite|Lloyd|1999}}) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ({{Cite|Clandinin & Connelly|1991}}). While professional development should also support teacher learning ({{Cite|Putnam & Borko|2000}}), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ({{Cite|Collopy|2003}}). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.
-=== Research Questions and Issues ===
+=== Research Questions and Teacher Learning ===
 Davis and Krajcik ask, "How can K-12 curriculum materials be designed to support teacher learning, and what might teacher learning with educative curriculum materials look like?" The design process should be iterative and reflective, with testing cycles and development cycles grounded in theory. Davis and Krajcik call their set of descriptors ''design heuristics'' instead of ''design principles'' to reflect the relative lack of empirical evidence research has yielded thus far.
-Comparing teacher learning and knowledge to that of students, Davis and Krajcik claim that teachers' sense of agency over the learning, as well as their advanced development as learners, makes the study of teacher learning complex. Following their formal preparation, opportunities for teacher learning can be scattered and incoherent ([[Wilson & Berne (1999)|Wilson & Berne, 1999]]). In addition to content and pedagogical knowledge, teachers also develop pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) that helps them effectively teach specific content ([[Shulman (1986)|Shulman, 1986]]). Teachers need to integrate their knowledge in a coherent curriculum ([[Davis (2004)|Davis, 2004]]; [[Linn, Eylon, & Davis (2004)|Linn, Eylon, & Davis, 2004]]) and maintain a flexibility to respond to student ideas in discussions ([[Ball & Bass (2000)|Ball & Bass, 2000]]). This knowledge is situated in practice and distributed across artifacts like their curriculum materials ([[Putnam & Borko (2000)|Putnam & Borko, 2000]]), making it difficult at times for teachers to apply theories of pedagogy and student learning to their practice (see [[Fenstermacher (2004)|Fenstermacher, 2004]]). Teacher learning is also both individual and social ([[Borko (2004)|Borko, 2004]]; [[Cobb (1994)|Cobb, 1994]]), all of which, say Davis and Krajcik, make promoting teacher learning more complex than promoting student learning. Prior research suggests that focusing on PDK might be most effective ([[Collopy (2003)|Collopy, 2003]]; [[Schneider & Krajcik (2002)|Schneider & Krajcik, 2002]]), especially where theories of PDK have been developed in discipline-specific ways.
+Comparing teacher learning and knowledge to that of students, Davis and Krajcik claim that teachers' sense of agency over the learning, as well as their advanced development as learners, makes the study of teacher learning complex. Following their formal preparation, opportunities for teacher learning can be scattered and incoherent ({{Cite|Wilson & Berne|1999}}). In addition to content and pedagogical knowledge, teachers also develop pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) that helps them effectively teach specific content ({{Cite|Shulman|1986}}). Teachers need to integrate their knowledge in a coherent curriculum ({{Cite|Davis|2004}}; {{Cite|Linn, Eylon, & Davis|2004}}) and maintain a flexibility to respond to student ideas in discussions ({{Cite|Ball & Bass|2000}}). This knowledge is situated in practice and distributed across artifacts like their curriculum materials ({{Cite|Putnam & Borko|2000}}), making it difficult at times for teachers to apply theories of pedagogy and student learning to their practice (see {{Cite|Fenstermacher|2004}}). Teacher learning is also both individual and social ({{Cite|Borko|2004}}; {{Cite|Cobb|1994}}), all of which, say Davis and Krajcik, make promoting teacher learning more complex than promoting student learning. Prior research suggests that focusing on PDK might be most effective ({{Cite|Collopy|2003}}; {{Cite|Schneider & Krajcik|2002}}), especially where theories of PDK have been developed in discipline-specific ways.
-=== High-Level Design Guidelines ===
+=== Guidelines and Heuristics for Educative Curriculum Materials ===
 == Also ==

imported>Raymond Johnson: /* Research Questions and Issues */ added subsection

2013-11-02T06:26:41Z

Research Questions and Issues: added subsection

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:26, 2 November 2013
Line 27:		Line 27:
	''Educative curriculum materials'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ([[Rumelhart (1994)\|Rumelhart, 1994]]), how the text is structured ([[Armbruster & Anderson (1985)\|Armbruster & Anderson, 1985]]), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ([[Collopy (2003)\|Collopy, 2003]]; [[Remillard (1999)\|Remillard, 1999]]; [[Schneider & Krajcik (2002)\|Schneider & Krajcik, 2002]]). The interaction of these factors is complex ([[Lloyd, 1999]]) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ([[Clandinin & Connelly (1991)\|Clandinin & Connelly, 1991]]). While professional development should also support teacher learning ([[Putnam & Borko (2000)\|Putnam & Borko, 2000]]), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ([[Collopy, 2003]]). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.		''Educative curriculum materials'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ([[Rumelhart (1994)\|Rumelhart, 1994]]), how the text is structured ([[Armbruster & Anderson (1985)\|Armbruster & Anderson, 1985]]), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ([[Collopy (2003)\|Collopy, 2003]]; [[Remillard (1999)\|Remillard, 1999]]; [[Schneider & Krajcik (2002)\|Schneider & Krajcik, 2002]]). The interaction of these factors is complex ([[Lloyd, 1999]]) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ([[Clandinin & Connelly (1991)\|Clandinin & Connelly, 1991]]). While professional development should also support teacher learning ([[Putnam & Borko (2000)\|Putnam & Borko, 2000]]), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ([[Collopy, 2003]]). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.

	== Research Questions and Issues ==		=== Research Questions and Issues ===

			Davis and Krajcik ask, "How can K-12 curriculum materials be designed to support teacher learning, and what might teacher learning with educative curriculum materials look like?" The design process should be iterative and reflective, with testing cycles and development cycles grounded in theory. Davis and Krajcik call their set of descriptors ''design heuristics'' instead of ''design principles'' to reflect the relative lack of empirical evidence research has yielded thus far.

			Comparing teacher learning and knowledge to that of students, Davis and Krajcik claim that teachers' sense of agency over the learning, as well as their advanced development as learners, makes the study of teacher learning complex. Following their formal preparation, opportunities for teacher learning can be scattered and incoherent ([[Wilson & Berne (1999)\|Wilson & Berne, 1999]]). In addition to content and pedagogical knowledge, teachers also develop pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) that helps them effectively teach specific content ([[Shulman (1986)\|Shulman, 1986]]). Teachers need to integrate their knowledge in a coherent curriculum ([[Davis (2004)\|Davis, 2004]]; [[Linn, Eylon, & Davis (2004)\|Linn, Eylon, & Davis, 2004]]) and maintain a flexibility to respond to student ideas in discussions ([[Ball & Bass (2000)\|Ball & Bass, 2000]]). This knowledge is situated in practice and distributed across artifacts like their curriculum materials ([[Putnam & Borko (2000)\|Putnam & Borko, 2000]]), making it difficult at times for teachers to apply theories of pedagogy and student learning to their practice (see [[Fenstermacher (2004)\|Fenstermacher, 2004]]). Teacher learning is also both individual and social ([[Borko (2004)\|Borko, 2004]]; [[Cobb (1994)\|Cobb, 1994]]), all of which, say Davis and Krajcik, make promoting teacher learning more complex than promoting student learning. Prior research suggests that focusing on PDK might be most effective ([[Collopy (2003)\|Collopy, 2003]]; [[Schneider & Krajcik (2002)\|Schneider & Krajcik, 2002]]), especially where theories of PDK have been developed in discipline-specific ways.

			=== High-Level Design Guidelines ===

	== Also ==		== Also ==

imported>Raymond Johnson: added first summary paragraph

2013-11-02T05:58:29Z

added first summary paragraph

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:58, 2 November 2013
Line 22:		Line 22:
	* Alternative Structures for Delivering Curriculum Materials		* Alternative Structures for Delivering Curriculum Materials
	* What Next?		* What Next?

			== Summary ==

			''Educative curriculum materials'' refer to curriculum materials that support teacher learning as well as student learning. Davis and Krajcik credit both [[Ball & Cohen (1996)]] and [[Bruner (1960)]] for promoting the idea and present in this article suggestions for the design of such materials and how they might be used. Materials that are educative should help teachers make instructional decisions in both the short- and long-term and lead to a general teaching knowledge that can be applied flexibly across contexts. How teachers learn from educative materials involves the interactions between reader, text, and context ([[Rumelhart (1994)\|Rumelhart, 1994]]), how the text is structured ([[Armbruster & Anderson (1985)\|Armbruster & Anderson, 1985]]), persistence in using the materials, teacher knowledge and beliefs, and disposition towards reflective practice ([[Collopy (2003)\|Collopy, 2003]]; [[Remillard (1999)\|Remillard, 1999]]; [[Schneider & Krajcik (2002)\|Schneider & Krajcik, 2002]]). The interaction of these factors is complex ([[Lloyd, 1999]]) and shapes how the curriculum is ultimately enacted ([[Clandinin & Connelly (1991)\|Clandinin & Connelly, 1991]]). While professional development should also support teacher learning ([[Putnam & Borko (2000)\|Putnam & Borko, 2000]]), educative materials are positioned to support teachers' daily decisions in the real-world context of the classroom ([[Collopy, 2003]]). If successful, educative materials will not just promote teacher learning, but will ultimately lead to increased student learning.

			== Research Questions and Issues ==



	== Also ==		== Also ==

imported>Raymond Johnson: title, outline, notoc, cleanup

2013-11-01T15:35:31Z

title, outline, notoc, cleanup

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-The article ''Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning'' was written by [[Elizabeth Davis]] and [[Joseph Krajcik]] and published in [[Educational Researcher]] in 2005. The article is available from Sage Publishers at [http://edr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/3 http://edr.sagepub.com/content/34/3/3].
+{{Title|Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning}}
 == Abstract ==
 Curriculum materials for Grades K–12 that are intended to promote teacher learning in addition to student learning have come to be called educative curriculum materials. How can K–12 curriculum materials be designed to best promote teacher learning? What might teacher learning with educative curriculum materials look like? The authors present a set of design heuristics for educative curriculum materials to further the principled design of these materials. They build from ideas about teacher learning and organize the heuristics around important parts of a teacher's knowledge base: subject matter knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge for topics, and pedagogical content knowledge for disciplinary practices. These heuristics provide a context for a theoretically oriented discussion of how features of educative curriculum materials may promote teacher learning, by serving as cognitive tools that are situated in teachers' practice. The authors explore challenges in the design of educative curriculum materials, such as the tension between providing guidance and choice.
-== Detailed Summary of ''Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning'' ==
+== Outline of Headings ==
-=== Goals and Structure of the Article ===
+* Goals and Structure of the Article
-=== Teacher Learning and Teacher Knowledge ===
+== Also ==
-=== The Design of Educative Curriculum Materials: Some High-Level Guidelines ===
+* Mendeley: http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/designing-educative-curriculum-materials-promote-teacher-learning/
 === APA ===
-Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X034003003
+Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. ''Educational Researcher'', 34(3), 3–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X034003003
 === BibTeX ===
@@ Line 50: / Line 35: @@
 <pre>
 @article{Davis2005,
 author = {Davis, Elizabeth A. and Krajcik, Joseph S.},
 doi = {10.3102/0013189X034003003},

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:10, 2 November 2013
Line 41:		Line 41:
	# Materials could help teachers consider ways to relate units during the year ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; {{Cite\|Wang & Paine\|2003}})		# Materials could help teachers consider ways to relate units during the year ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; {{Cite\|Wang & Paine\|2003}})
	# Materials could make visible the developers' pedagogical judgments ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; see also {{Cite\|Heaton\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Petish\|2004}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Shkedi\|1998}})		# Materials could make visible the developers' pedagogical judgments ({{Cite\|Ball & Cohen\|1996}}; see also {{Cite\|Heaton\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Petish\|2004}}; {{Cite\|Remillard\|2000}}; {{Cite\|Shkedi\|1998}})
	# Materials could promote a teachers' ''pedagogical design capacity'', referring to the ability to use personal and curricular resources to achieve productive instructional ends ({{Cite\|Brown & Edelson\|2003}}		# Materials could promote a teachers' ''pedagogical design capacity'', referring to the ability to use personal and curricular resources to achieve productive instructional ends ({{Cite\|Brown & Edelson\|2003}})

	Regarding the final point, pedagogical design capacity is a characteristic that should help teachers from making a "lethal mutation" ({{Cite\|Brown & Campione\|1996}}, p. 291) to their curriculum. This is important in light of the generally low quality of many curricular resources ({{Cite\|Hubisz\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Kesidou & Roseman\|2002}}) and teachers' need to make adaptatons ({{Cite\|Barab & Luehmann\|2003}}).		Regarding the final point, pedagogical design capacity is a characteristic that should help teachers from making a "lethal mutation" ({{Cite\|Brown & Campione\|1996}}, p. 291) to their curriculum. This is important in light of the generally low quality of many curricular resources ({{Cite\|Hubisz\|2003}}; {{Cite\|Kesidou & Roseman\|2002}}) and teachers' need to make adaptatons ({{Cite\|Barab & Luehmann\|2003}}).