Hands, Head and Heart (3H) framework for curriculum review: emergence and nesting phenomena
- PDF / 843,431 Bytes
- 22 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 6 Downloads / 263 Views
Hands, Head and Heart (3H) framework for curriculum review: emergence and nesting phenomena Da Yang Tan 1
2
2
& Eng Guan Tay & Kok Ming Teo & Paul M. E. Shutler
2
Accepted: 22 October 2020/ # Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract
In this work, we report the emergence of the Hands, Head and Heart framework that arose within the curriculum review for subject knowledge courses for primary school pre-service teachers in the National Institute of Education, Singapore. Through an initial grounded analysis of a survey of pre-service teachers and faculty focus group meeting data, the responses were broadly categorised into hands, head and heart domains and these formed an initial framework for discussions in the review committee meetings. By revisiting the data from the survey, an analysis through a complexity lens revealed the emergence of a characteristic nested self-similarity of the framework. Over the course of several committee meetings, further self-similarity was discovered. We conjecture that the Hands, Head and Heart framework and its self-similarity property provide a potential basis for a holistic approach to curriculum review. We used this framework to revise the learning objectives of the subject knowledge curriculum by resolving perspectives which previously seemed contradictory. Keywords Complexity science . Curriculum design . Emergent behaviour . Self-similarity . Mathematics teacher education . Subject knowledge . Primary mathematics
* Da Yang Tan [email protected] Eng Guan Tay [email protected] Kok Ming Teo [email protected] Paul M. E. Shutler [email protected]
1
Singapore University of Technology and Design, 8 Somapah Rd, Singapore 487372, Singapore
2
National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore
Tan D.Y. et al.
1 Introduction There are numerous curriculum design and evaluation models, such as the CIPP model (Stufflebeam, 2003), the model by Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2009), Scriven’s Goal Free model (Scriven, 1991), Stake’s model (Stake, 1967) and Tyler’s model (Tyler, 1949). In particular, Tyler’s model had been adopted in our department curriculum review for the mathematics content in the undergraduate degree programme at the National Institute of Education in Singapore (Tay & Ho, 2015). It was chosen by the mathematicians in the department because of its compact framework of learning objectives, learning experiences and assessment. In general, current curriculum models provide a systematic top-down conceptual framework for the design and evaluation of the curriculum based on their pre-specified objectives. The aim of this paper is not to critically examine the existing models, but to report a fortuitous emergence of a curriculum framework that resulted from another of our curriculum reviews that began with Tyler’s model. We will compare Tyler’s model with the new framework when discussing its reductionist nature in the next section and its linear approach in the final discu
Data Loading...
