Er for Schoolmanagement Systems - DOC by xmf29996

VIEWS: 15 PAGES: 13

More Info
									                                                PROO

        Aanvraagformulier projecten binnen aandachtsgebieden
                             2001/2002
                        Programmaraad Onderwijsonderzoek
                  (Gebied Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen)
Dossiernummer:

1a. Aanvrager(s)
    hoofdaanvrager / contactpersoon
    naam, titel(s):                           Dr. T. Mooij                                              Man
    Corr. adres:                              Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, ITS
                                              Toernooiveld 5
     postcode: 6525 ED                        Plaats: Nijmegen
     telefoon: 024-3653558                    fax: 024-3653599                E-mail: t.mooij@its.kun.nl
     Onderzoeksschool: Interuniversitair Centrum voor Onderwijskundig Onderzoek (ICO)
     overige aanvragers
     namen, titels / universiteit, vakgroep / onderzoeksschool:
    Prof. dr. R. M. van den Berg, KUN, Onderwijs en Educatie / NUOVO
     Drs. H. A. T. van der Meijden, KUN, Onderwijs en Educatie / NUOVO


1b. Recente publicaties en andere gegevens uit past performance hoofdaanvrager

AUTEURS            TITEL                                 TIJDSCHRIFT                          JAAR, NR
Mooij, T., &       Modelling and supporting ICT          Computers & Education                2001, 36,
Smeets, E.         implementation in secondary                                                265-281.
                   schools.
Smeets, E., &      Pupil-centred learning, ICT, and      British Journal of Educational       2001, 32,
Mooij, T.          teacher behaviour: observations in    Technology                           403-418.
                   educational practice.
Mooij, T.,         A social perspective on new        In R.-J. Simons, J. van der Linden,     2000, pp.
Terwel, J., &      learning.                          and T. Duffy (Eds.), New Learning       191-208.
Huber, G.                                             Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
Mooij, T.          ICT to optimise didactic           In C. Day and D. van Veen (Eds.),       2000, pp.
                   management in early education.     Educational Research in Europe.         59-71.
                                                      Leuven (Belgium) / Apeldoorn (The
                                                      Netherlands): Garant.
Smeets, E., &      Time on task, interaction and      Journal of Educational Computing        1999, 21,
Mooij, T.          information handling in multimedia Research                                487-502.
                   learning environments.


2.   Titel van het onderzoeksproject

Lerende docenten in lerende scholen: ICT implementatie en onderwijstransformatie
Learning teachers in learning schools: ICT implementation and educational transformation




                                                     1
3. Korte samenvatting van de probleemstelling
A software prototype (LINE: Learning In a Networked Environment) has been developed to assist the
optimizing of instructional, learning, and didactic management processes at different school levels.
The prototype was developed in HAVO/VWO and is characterized by instructional lines including
diagnostic and progress indicators, flexible grouping of students, and integrated instructional support
for teachers and students.
The present research concentrates on innovative implementation processes and effects of the LINE
program in VMBO (classes 3-4) and the first year of MBO, in the subject metal-working
(metaaltechniek). The objective is to check the validity and usefulness of LINE in „lower‟ educational
types, with teachers working with less advantaged students. Moreover, it is checked whether
experienced teachers can use LINE to professionalize colleagues, and to transform curriculum and
school organization in VMBO and MBO to reduce the gap between these two educational types.


4. Publicaties
In welke vorm zullen de resultaten van dit project worden gepubliceerd?
Dissertation
Three articles in international journals
Three presentations of papers on international conferences
One handbook for teachers (in Dutch)


5.    Periode aangevraagde subsidie
        duur (jaren): 4                         startdatum: April 2002


6.   Onderzoeksterrein (raadpleeg de toelichting)
    onderzoeksgebied volgens de indeling Trefwoorden Expertise Onderwijsonderzoek
Onderwijstechnologie (12500), ICT (12800), kennismanagement (12700), instructiesystemen (13020),
instructietechnologie (13030)


7.    Samenstelling van de onderzoeksgroep
        Naam, titels:               discipline              universiteit   aantal uren per week ten laste van
     dr. T. Mooij                  Psycholoog               Nijmegen                4            NWO
     vacature AIO                                           Nijmegen                38           NWO
     prof.dr. R.M. van den Berg    Onderwijsinnovatie       Nijmegen           2 (promotor)      KUN
     drs. H.A.T. van der Meijden   Onderwijskunde/CSCL      Nijmegen               p.m.          KUN
     dr. R. L. Martens             Onderwijskunde           Heerlen                p.m.          OUNL
     dr. N. M. Nieveen             Onderwijskunde           Twente                 p.m.          UT
     dr. W. R. van Joolingen       Onderwijskunde           Amsterdam              p.m.          UvA



8. Hernieuwde aanvraag
    nee


9. Plaats van uitvoering
   organisatie: KU Nijmegen
   instituut: ITS / Onderwijs en Educatie
   adres: Toernooiveld 5
   postcode: 6525 ED                            plaats: Nijmegen


                                                        2
10.     Is de aanvraag ook elders ingediend?
       Nee


11.     Financiële bijdrage aan het project door derden (wat, hoeveel en door wie):
        De Assistent in Opleiding zal worden verbonden aan de subfaculteit Onderwijs en Educatie (prof.dr.
      R. M. van den Berg) van de KUN, en aldaar de gebruikelijke universitaire infrastructuur benutten. Er is
      geen ondersteuning door derden.


12 en 13: Zie bijlage

1.       Gevraagde financiële ondersteuning

a.      personeel

                                               Academici                                Niet-academici
                         Assistent in opleiding * Zeer ervaren onderzoeker **
               jaar       maanden          fte                 fte                    maanden          fte
Aanvraag       2002           9            1.0               Zie **                      -              -
Raming         2003           12           1.0               Zie **                      -              -
Raming         2004           12           1.0               Zie **                      -              -
Raming         2005           12           1.0               Zie **                      -              -
Raming         2006           3            1.0               Zie **                      -              -

uitleg en motivatie van het aangevraagde personeel (gelieve een kort cv van de onderzoekers bij te voegen)

* Op dit moment is nog niet bekend wie de AiO zal worden. Een CV kan dus niet worden verstrekt.
** Zoals uitgewerkt in paragraaf 12.3 bij de methode van onderzoek, vraagt het voorgestelde
onderzoek een grote expertise op de gebieden onderwijsinnovatie, onderwijsontwerp, ICT-designing,
en omgang met leerkrachten en schoolmanagement in de praktijk. Om deze reden is ter ondersteuning
van het AiO-onderzoek extra deskundigheid in de onderzochte scholen / instellingen noodzakelijk.
Ten behoeve van ondersteuning van het onderzoek van de AiO in de scholen wordt daarom een
beroep gedaan op de regeling in verband met een vervangingssubsidie (zie het Programma
Onderwijsonderzoek 2001, pagina 92). In dit verband wordt tijdens de vier onderzoeksjaren van de
AiO een lumpsum bedrag van f. 100.000,- gevraagd ter dekking van de salariskosten van dr. T. Mooij,
die dan deze ondersteuning zal kunnen geven.

Beknopt CV dr. T. Mooij
   Ton Mooij (1948) studeerde psychologie aan de Vrije Universiteit te Amsterdam (1968 – 1974).
Van 1971 – 1974 was hij tevens student-assistent data-theorie en dataverwerking aan de VU. Na zijn
doctoraal (1974) werd hij aangesteld bij de Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, Instituut voor
Toegepaste Sociale wetenschappen (ITS). Hij hield zich vooral bezig met onderwijsonderzoek en –
ontwikkeling en promoveerde in 1987 op het proefschrift: “Interactional multi-level investigation into
pupil behaviour, achievement, competence, and orientation in educational situations”.
   Ton Mooij is sinds 1993 lid van de door de Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen
(KNAW) erkende onderzoeksschool Interuniversitair Centrum voor Onderwijskundig Onderzoek (ICO).
Sinds 1998 neemt hij deel aan de thema‟s “Active and self-directed learning” en “ICT-tools for
designing”. Tevens is hij lid van de associaties voor European Research on Learning and Instruction
(EARLI) en de European Educational Research Association (EERA). Daarnaast is hij onder andere lid
van de onderzoeksschool “Nijmeegs Universitair Onderzoeksinstituut voor Opvoeding en Onderwijs”
(NUOVO), divisie 2. In 1999 richtte hij te Lahti het EERA-netwerk “ICT and Education” op. Sindsdien
is hij van dit netwerk ook de internationale convenor. Wat betreft ICT was hij initiator van diverse
software-designs en -programma‟s om onderwijs te optimaliseren.

                                                       3
     Hij is sedert jaren ook actief in het benutten en evalueren van vormen van audio-visueel en
multimediaal verrijken van onderwijs, via verschillende methodologische specificaties (kwantitatief
grootschalig of longitudinaal survey onderzoek, nationaal en internationaal interventie- en
evaluatieonderzoek, en kwalitatieve onderzoeksvormen, ook in samenhang met kwantitatief onderzoek
en beleidsonderzoek). Daarnaast adviseert hij in velerlei praktijk- en beleidssituaties, op diverse niveaus
van het onderwijssysteem. Ook organiseert hij symposia of conferenties in dit verband. Enkele van zijn
internationale publicaties zijn:
      Mooij, T. (1996). Predicting (under)achievement of gifted children. In A. J. Cropley and D. Dehn (Eds.),
Fostering the growth of high ability: European perspectives (pp. 459-477). Norwood: Ablex Publishing
Corporation.
      Mooij, T. (1997). Por la seguridad en la escuela. Revista de Educación, nr. 313, 29-52.
      Mooij, T. (1998). Pupil-class determinants of aggressive and victim behaviour in pupils. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 68, 373-385.
      Mooij, T. (1998). Élèves et agression aux Pays-Bas. Revue Française de Pédagogie, nr. 123, 47-61.
      Mooij, T. (1999). Integrating gifted children into kindergarten by improving educational processes. Gifted
Child Quarterly, 43(2), 63-74.
      Mooij, T. (1999). Preventing antisocial behaviour of young children at risk. Risk Management: An
International Journal, 1(2), 49-61.
      Mooij, T., & Smeets, E. (1999). Assessing entry characteristics in kindergarten. In F. Smit, H. Moerel, K. van
der Wolf, & P. Sleegers (Eds.), Building bridges between home and school (pp. 123-129). Nijmegen, The
Netherlands: University of Nijmegen, Institute for Applied Social Sciences.
      Smeets, E., & Mooij, T. (1999). Time on task, interaction and information handling in multimedia learning
environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21, 487-502.
      Mooij, T. (1999). Promoting prosocial pupil behaviour: 1: A multilevel theoretical model. British Journal of
Educational Psychology, 69, 469-478.
      Mooij, T. (1999). Promoting prosocial pupil behaviour: 2: Secondary school intervention and pupil effects.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 479-504.
      Mooij, T. (1999). Promoting prosocial pupil behaviour and the roles of counselling. International Journal for
the Advancement of Counselling, 21, 315-334.
      Mooij, T. (2000). ICT to optimise didactic management in early education. In C. Day and D. van Veen (Eds.),
Educational Research in Europe. EERA Yearbook 2000 (pp. 59-71). Leuven (Belgium) / Apeldoorn (The
Netherlands): Garant.
      Mooij, T., Terwel, J., & Huber, G. (2000). A social perspective on new learning. In R.-J. Simons, J. van der
Linden, and T. Duffy (Eds.), New Learning (pp. 191-208). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
      Mooij, T. (2000). Screening children‟s entry characteristics in kindergarten. Early Child Development and
Care, 165, 23-40.
      Mooij, T., & Smeets, E. (2001). Modelling and supporting ICT implementation in secondary schools.
Computers & Education, 36, 265-281.
      Smeets, E., & Mooij, T. (2001). Pupil-centred learning, ICT, and teacher behaviour: observations in
educational practice. British Journal of Educational Technology 32, 403-418.


14.2 materiële kosten

                      jaar               Duurzame               Reizen               Reizen              gebruiks-
                                         Goederen               Buitenl.             binnenl.            goederen
Aanvraag              2002                                      f. 1.500,-           f. 2.000,-          f. 3.500,-
Raming                2003                                      f. 3.500,-           f. 3.000,-          f. 4.000,-
Raming                2004                                      f. 3.500,-           f. 3.000,-          f. 3.000,-
Raming                2005                                      f. 3.500,-           f. 3.000,-          f. 4.000,-
Raming                2006                                      f. 3.500,-           f. 1.000,-          f. 5.000,-
Noch de kosten voor computertijd bij rekencentra noch de aanschaf van personal computers zal worden
gesubsidieerd. Huisvesting, overhead en afschrijvingen komen ook niet in aanmerking voor subsidie.

Uitleg en motivatie van de aangevraagde materiële kosten:
Reizen buitenland: in relatie tot presentatie van papers op internationale conferenties,
netwerkvorming, verder onderzoek met en ontwikkeling van LINE.

                                                         4
Reizen binnenland: in relatie tot het wekelijks bezoeken van de scholen / instellingen waar het
onderzoek plaatsvindt (door AiO en vaak ook Mooij), voor conferenties en netwerkvorming voor
(verder) onderzoek en ontwikkeling van LINE.
Gebruiksgoederen: onderwijsboeken, copieën, documentatie in verband met VMBO en MBO,
dissertatie (2006), vervaardigen handboek praktijk, toesturen handboek of projectinformatie aan
geïnteresseerden in praktijk en onderzoek (ook portokosten e.d.).



Hoofdaanvrager: dr. T. Mooij                  Mevr. dr. C. Ramakers     Plaats: Nijmegen
                                              Plv. dir. ITS


Handtekening:                                                           datum:   26 - 9 – 2001


15. Namen, adressen en expertise van mogelijke referenten
U kunt hier enkele namen van mogelijke referenten opgeven.

Prof. dr. J. Lowyck, KU Leuven

Prof. dr. M. Valcke, Rijksuniversiteit Gent




                                                   5
Project description

12.1 Scientific relevance
    The concept of instructional line is used to denote a hierarchical arrangement of instructional
procedures and curricular materials regulating specified learning activities for students (cf. Cronbach,
1983; Van Merriënboer, 1997; Mooij, 1994). Within these lines, normed learning activities (e.g., parts
of CITO tests) construct a pedagogical-didactic kernel structure, representing a generally normed
reference basis for assessing or evaluating individual or group-based learning progress (Mooij, in
preparation). In schools, teachers can apply this kernel structure in developing local instructional
lines. In these local lines, situational characteristics or activities can be integrated within the normed
learning activities to stimulate learning and learning outcomes of students. In combination with
flexible grouping of students, local lines are particularly important to integrate students with special
learning characteristics e.g., less or more learning capacity or learning speed, or language or other
kinds of disadvantages.
    Educational arrangements based on a kernel structure and local instructional lines are assumed to
optimize learning processes because teachers can adapt learning to students‟ initial levels of
competency, and can provide more differentiating and self-regulating learning activities in individual
or social respects (cf. Mooij, Terwel, & Huber, 2000). Qualitative and quantitative research evidence
in development and intervention projects has verified this hypothesis (e.g., Bergqvist & Säljö, 1998;
Byrne, 1998; Mooij, 1999a, 1999b; Tymms, Merrell, & Henderson, 2000). However, a main problem
is that the refined instructional and diagnostic procedures require much more registering and
administration than before. In this respect Information and Communication Technology (ICT) can
support the pedagogically required instructional changes and also assist teachers and students in the
„new‟ educational situations (cf. Van den Dool & de Rijcke, 2000; Ely, 1999; Lally, 2000; Sinko &
Lehtinen, 1999; Smeets & Mooij, 1999, 2001).
    A first software prototype conceptualizing instructional lines was developed and tested in early
education (Mooij, 2000). Furthermore, research in secondary education (Mooij & Smeets, 2001)
revealed five models of successive ICT implementation, a) incidental and isolated use of ICT by one
or more teachers, b) increasing awareness of ICT relevance for the school, at all levels, c) emphasis
on ICT co-ordination and hardware within school, d) emphasis on instructional innovation and ICT
support, and 5) use of ICT-integrated teaching and learning, independent of time and place. Follow-up
developmental research (Mooij, in preparation) was directed at the specification of design
characteristics of software offering integrated instructional support to teachers and students, at all
school levels. One of the results is given in Table 1. In this Table, instructional categories and user
groups are related to characteristics ICT should have to promote teaching and learning, in flexible and
integrated ways. Capacities include administering, registering, organizing, and evaluating everyday
learning information with respect to instructional lines and diagnostics (individual, normed, and
unnormed or evaluative), grouping of students, planning of combinations of curriculum contents and
students, support of specific students, and specifications of students‟ progress in specific periods of
time.
    An internet-based prototype („LINE‟: Learning In a Networked Environment) has recently been
developed to realise the ICT support indicated in Table 1. On the basis of the research evidence with
the former prototype, it is hypothesized that using LINE will support teachers‟ instructional
management and teachers‟ learning about instructional and learning processes, and their capabilities
in restructuring organizational and school conditions to further support learning processes of students
(cf. also Remillard, 2000). Moreover, using LINE will stimulate students‟ motivation and learning
processes and effects, in particular with students who traditionally achieve relatively low or high
compared with peers. In the present research the focus is on the teachers‟ implementation and
innovative use of LINE.




                                                    6
Table 1 – ICT design characteristics to integrate and optimize teaching and learning at different
levels

 Instructional        (Potential) use by        ICT characteristics assumed to optimize teaching and learning
 categories
 Curriculum           Teachers, school          Overview of all instructional lines.
 content              board, management,        Overview of all instructional lines actually in use in the location or school.
                      staff, regional bodies,   Overview of each local instructional line with (normed) activities/indicators.
                      students, and parents     Overview of each local instruct. line with evaluation activities (unnormed).
                                                Overview of local instructional lines developed by the students.
 Grouping of          See above                 Overviews of students.
 students                                       Overviews of small groups/groupings of students at the higher levels.
 Development or       See above                 Specification of curriculum content(s).
 achievement                                    Specification of student/group(s) of students.
 progress of                                    Specification of time period and initial competencies – end competencies.
 content and group                              Specification of differences in competency related to content(s) and group(s).
 combination(s)                                 Graphical representation/printing/storing of results in level-specific formats.
 Support of           Teachers,                 Selection of student.
 specific students    management, regional      Selection of one or more instructional lines.
                      bodies                    Specification of time period and initial competencies – end competencies.
                                                Graphical representation/printing/storing of results.
 Overviews of         Teachers,                 Selection of student/group(s) of students.
 students‟ progress   management, students      Selection of one or more instructional lines.
                                                Selection of activities actually worked with versus activities still to be done.


12.2 Problem elaboration
   Development of LINE occurred in HAVO / VWO. Implementation and validation checks of the
prototype and its assumptions should be carried out in schools where the development did not take
place. Two possibilities for research seem to exist. The first one is directed at intensifying research
and development in the same educational types as before, but in quantative and large-scaled ways.
This option requires an intensified effort for educational change in HAVO / VWO. The second
possibility is more developmental and concentrating on checking the functioning of the software with
students within lower streams of secondary education (VMBO) and middle vocational education
(MBO). These students are less advantaged than HAVO / VWO students, and they also differ more
between each other (Mooij, 2001; Schuyt, 1995). From both theoretical and practical points of view,
working with instructional lines and integrated software support for teachers and students is therefore
checked more strictly in VMBO and MBO than in HAVO / VWO. For this reason, and because of the
coherence between the projects in the present set, this second possibility was preferred to the first
one.
   VMBO and MBO complain about instructional problems for teachers, learning problems for
students, relatively high dropout rates, and the existence of a transition gap between curricula of
VMBO and MBO (cf. Rijn IJssel College, 2001; Stichting Samenwerking Voortgezet Onderwijs
Arnhem, Betuwe, Veluwe, 2001). A main cause seems to be that students‟ levels of learning and
practicing in VMBO are not adequately continued in MBO, despite the fact that the official
curriculum has just been rearranged to close the gap between VMBO and MBO.
   It is challenging to check the new theoretical and practical possibilities of LINE in trying to
optimize VMBO- and MBO-teachers‟ instructional and professional processes, to improve students‟
learning processes and outcomes. Relevant research questions then ask for the implementation
validity of the new software tool in VMBO and MBO. Can teachers and students learn to handle this
tool as it should be done to realize the assumed instructional optimization, for teachers and students?
These four questions are:

       1. Can teachers in VMBO and MBO learn to use the ICT-tool „LINE‟ to improve instructional and
          learning processes and outcomes for their students, and if yes, how?




                                                             7
      2. Is there, based on the outcome of the first question, a need to revise features of the software
         prototype, and if yes, which features, why, and how?

      3. Can teachers in VMBO and MBO use „LINE‟ to professionalize colleagues with respect to
         improving instructional and learning processes, and if yes, how?

      4. Can teachers in VMBO and MBO use „LINE‟ to restructure curriculum and organizational
         school characteristics to reduce the curriculum gap between the educational types, and if yes,
         how?

    These questions of project 3 fit nicely into the picture given by the other projects in the present set.
In relation to the approach in project 1, collaborative development and use of learning content is here
structured by the LINE program. With respect to project 2, project 3 also uses an existing program to
explore and verify instructional improvement. However, project 3 takes the pedagogical-didactic
kernel structure as a main source of reference in developing local instructional lines and learning
arrangements. Concerning project 4, overlap exists with respect to the specification of requirements to
the learning processes. The difference is that project 3 is not directed at the vocational situation.


12.3 Method
Implementation and development research
    The research method has to generate different kinds of information relevant to judge the
theoretical and practice conditions that support or hinder the instructional and learning improvement
by means of LINE. Recent implementation and development methodology supports a strategy in
which users collaborate with researchers and other specialists to secure validity of innovation
processes (cf. Van den Akker, 1999; Clark & Estes, 1999; Crook, 1998; Kensing, Simonsen, &
Bødker, 1998). Wilson (1999) expects that „use-oriented‟ strategies „(...) increase the likelihood of
successful implementation because they take the end use into account at the beginning design stages‟
(p. 13).
    Experience learns, moreover, that in innovation and implementation processes the expertise of the
researcher(s) is crucial to realize desired educational and professional changes. This happens because,
from a traditional system point of view, for teachers many changes cannot be realized whereas, from a
new learning point of view, and with adequate software, many „unexpected‟ changes do become
possible (cf. Simons, Van der Linden, & Duffy, 2000). In the course of time, developing teachers are
getting used to the new situation. The more the new situation is solving their (old) problems, the more
they are willing to inform colleagues and the more their colleagues are interested in the new features.
This „qualitative change in professional thinking and practice‟ requires close collaboration between
implementation research and school practice, as stated above.
    A first research step consists in a description of the beginning situation of participating teachers
and school staff by means of different instruments. Five sources will be used:
 1. feelings of satisfaction with instructional and learning characteristics and situations;
 2. description of instructional and learning characteristics in school and relevant school subjet(s);
 3. description of regular teaching and learning behavior in school and relevant school subject(s);
 4. description of professional and educational characteristics relevant to ICT use in teaching and
     learning;
 5. description of qualities of the learning environment hindering or promoting everyday teaching
     and learning, including the use of ICT.
Operationalization and selection of instruments will be carried out in close collaboration with the
other projects, to compare research processes and results between projects. If possible, reliable and
valid instruments developed earlier will be used (cf. Mooij & Smeets, 2001; Smeets & Mooij, 1999,
2001). Data collection will also be co-ordinated between projects.
    The second research step concentrates on in-school orientation and demonstration of LINE, and on
discussing the new instructional features to solve existing problems of teachers and students. In the
implementation schools, teachers from one experimental school subject (metal-work) and one non-

                                                     8
experimental school subject will be included here. Next, experimental teachers start to complete
databases of LINE to construct (local) instructional lines for their students. Then teachers and
students use the lines during lessons, whereas these lessons are observed by research. The first
exemplars of lines can be improved by their functioning in real school practice, and by evaluative
comments of teachers, students, and school management and administration. Teachers experienced
with LINE will coach colleagues to use LINE in their classes, and this step will again be observed by
research and evaluated collectively. As a final implementation step, LINE is used to reduce the gap
between VMBO and MBO. These activities will also be observed by research, and evaluated by
teachers, management, students, and school administration.
   The five kinds of instruments will be completed three times by (experimental and
nonexperimental) teachers and school staff, to better comprehend and analyse the development
process and (intermediate) effects. Further details on the research and development steps are
described in the research plan (section 13).

Selection of schools, school subject, and classes
   LINE will be implemented by teachers in one VMBO-school and one MBO-school in the city of
Arnhem. The schools are located in the same region, to check the reduction of the curriculum gap in
reality. The VMBO-school is part of a network of secondary schools.
   First contacts with the schools reveal that the implementation check could be most fruitful in
metal-work (metaaltechniek). A first reason is that this school subject has both theoretical and
practice instructional aspects. Secondly, both instructional aspects could be integrated to stimulate
studens who belong to the relatively „lowest‟ cognitive category. Thirdly, this subject is scheduled in
both educational types, which is relevant to reducing the gap. Therefore, attention will be
concentrated on lessons metal-work in VMBO classes 3 and 4, and MBO class 1.


12.4 Relevance
    The project contributes to the construction of expertise databases concerning the pedagogical-
didactic kernel structure and local instructional lines for VMBO and MBO. Moreover, the
implementation validity of a software prototype developed in HAVO / VWO will be checked in
VMBO / MBO. In particular the optimization potential of LINE for instructional and learning
processes is relevant, also with respect to the reduction of the gap between VMBO and MBO. It has to
be noted, however, that the study represents small-scaled developmental research; large-scaled
empirical checks are possible only after enough expertise information has been included in the
databases of the program and been implemented in schools.
        LINE is designed to model process characteristics at different levels of the educational system
simultaneously, beginning with the individual learner, next small groups of learners, etcetera. This
allows collection of data for integrated checking of multilevel process and effect hypotheses,
intervention research hypotheses, and school quality hypotheses (cf. Cronbach, 1983; Mooij, 1999a,
1999b; Tymms et al., 2000). VMBO- and MBO-schools aspiring to participate in the research
perceive these features as attractive and necessary. In Nijmegen, collaboration already exists with
primary and secondary schools and youth organizations, to implement LINE. The ministry of
Education, Culture, and Science is planning to subsidize a developmental ICT project (‘Proeftuin
ICT’) to these organizations.
    On the „European Conference of Educational Research‟ in Lille (September 2001), a roundtable
was held on theoretical and practice aspects related to this kind of software. Researchers from seven
countries were interested in creating a network to collaborate in this field. On the conference of „The
Association for Educational Communications & Technology‟ (AECT) in Atlanta, November 2001, a
relevant paper will be presented in the symposium „Computer-based Tools for Instructional Design‟.
This symposium has been organized by the ICO-group submitting the present set of research proposals.
    In the long run, by using LINE many theoretical and policy questions can be dealt with more easily
than nowadays. Some examples are given. First, instructional lines combined with flexible grouping
of students create an almost infinite number of instructional and learning arrangements. Second, the
software can integrate information from different kinds of situations, within and outside schools,

                                                  9
within the same expertise frame of reference. Third, the connection between general progress
indicators and local variability makes it a powerfool tool for preventive practices in regular and
special schools, and for standardization and quality evaluation of co-operation practices between e.g.,
school and youth care instances (cf. Griffin & Beagles, 2000).

12.5 References
Akker, J. van den (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, R. Maribe
   Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, and Tj. Plomp (Eds.), Design approaches and tools in education and
   training (pp. 1-14). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Bergqvist, K., & Säljö, R. (1998). Construction of curricular content in the individualised age-integrated
   classroom. Paper presented on the European Conference on Educational Research, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 17-20
   September 1998. Linköping / Göteborg, Sweden: Linköping University / Göteborg University.
Byrne, B. (1998). The foundation of literacy. The child’s acquisition of the alphabetic principle. Hove, UK:
   Psychology Press.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (1999). The development of authentic educational technologies. Educational
   Technology, 39 (2), 5-16.
Cronbach, L. J. (1983). Designing evaluations of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Crook, Ch. (1998). Children as computer users: The case of collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 30,
   237-247.
Dool, P. van den, & Rijcke, F. de (2000). ICT – Schoolportretten. Zoetermeer: Ministerie van Onderwijs,
   Cultuur en Wetenschappen / Inspectie van het Onderwijs.
Ely, D. P. (1999). Conditions that facilitate the implementation of educational technology innovations.
   Educational Technology, 39 (6), 23-27.
Griffin, S. L., & Beagles, Ch. A. (2000). Training and performance support systems (TPSS): a case study from
   needs assessment to return on investment. Educational Technology, 40 (5), 34-42.
Kensing, F., Simonsen, J., & Bødker, K. (1998). MUST: A method for participatory design. Human-Computer
   Interaction, 13, 167-198.
Lally, V. (2000). Analysing teaching and learning in networked collaborative learning environments: issues in
   work and progress. Paper presented on the European Conference on Educational Research, University of
   Edinburgh, September 2000. Sheffield, UK: University of Sheffield.
Merriënboer, J. J. G. van (1997). Training Complex Cognitive Skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational
   Technology Publications.
Mooij, T. (1994). Leerlingverschillen in leerstoflijnen. In P. R. J. Simons en J. G. G. Zuylen (Eds.), Actief en
   zelfstandig studeren in de tweede fase. Onderwijskundige en organisatorische vormgeving (pp. 162-174).
   Tilburg: MesoConsult.
Mooij, T. (1999a). Promoting prosocial student behaviour: 1: A multilevel theoretical model. British Journal of
   Educational Psychology, 69, 469-478.
Mooij, T. (1999b). Promoting prosocial student behaviour: 2: Secondary school intervention and student effects.
   British Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 479-504.
Mooij, T. (2000). ICT to optimise didactic management in early education. In C. Day and D. van Veen (Eds.),
   Educational Research in Europe. EERA Yearbook 2000 (pp. 59-71). Leuven / Apeldoorn: Garant.
Mooij, T. (2001). Veilige scholen en (pro)sociaal gedrag. Evaluatie van de campagne ‘De veilige school’ in het
   voortgezet onderwijs. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit, ITS.
Mooij, T. (in preparation). ICT management to optimise education and teacher professionalisation. Nijmegen: KU
   / ITS.
Mooij, T., & Smeets, E. (2001). Modelling and supporting ICT implementation in secondary schools. Computers
   & Education, 36, 265-281.
Mooij, T., Terwel, J., & Huber, G. (2000). A social perspective on new learning. In R.-J. Simons, J. van der Linden,
   and T. Duffy (Eds.), New Learning (pp. 191-208). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Rijn IJssel College (2001). Concept Projectplan aansluiting vmbo-bve gezondheidszorg / welzijn. Arnhem:
   Auteur.
Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers‟ learning? Two fourth-grade teachers‟ use of a
   new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100, 331-350.
Schuyt, C. J. M. (1995). Kwetsbare jongeren en hun toekomst. (Vulnerable youth and their future.) Rijswijk, The
   Netherlands: Ministerie van Volksgezondheid, Welzijn en Sport.
Simons, R.-J., Linden, J. van der, & Duffy, T. (Eds.) (2000). New Learning. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Sinko, M., & Lehtinen, E. (1999). The Challenges of ICT in Finnish Education. Jyväskylä, Finland: Atena.



                                                        10
Smeets, E., & Mooij, T. (1999). Time on task, interaction and information handling in multimedia learning
    environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 21, 487-502.
Smeets, E., & Mooij, T. (2001). Student-centred learning, ICT, and teacher behaviour: observations in educational
    practice. British Journal of Educational Technology 32, 403-418.
Stichting Samenwerking Voortgezet Onderwijs Arnhem, Betuwe, Veluwe (2001). Projectaanvraag vervolg
    differentiatiemodel basisberoepsgerichte leerweg met leerwegondersteuning. Arnhem: Auteur.
Tymms, P., Merrell, C., & Henderson, B. (2000). Baseline assessment and progress during the first three years at
    school. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6, 105-129.
Wilson, B. G. (1999). Evolution of learning technologies: From instructional design to performance support to
    network systems. Educational Technology, 39 (2), 32-35.

12.6 Relation with PROO-programme
    The project belongs to PROO theme „ICT en Onderwijs‟, categories „Innovatie ontwerpend‟ and
„Expertise‟ (cell 5: „Scholing, nascholing, learning on the job binnen een lerende organisatie en
binnen employability settings‟, pages 47 and 50-51 of the programme booklet). As specified, teachers
and management are coached by implementation expertise and checked by research in their own
schools, to learn to get along with instructional ICT variations made possible by LINE. They also
learn to professionalize colleagues and to change instructional and grouping characteristics in school,
to optimize learning processes for students.


13. Research

   13.1 Detailed planning for first year

   The first year project and research activities are listed in Table 2.

Table 2 – Development and research activities

Project activity / research step:    Procedure:                                Planning:        Output:
      1. Collaboration between       * researchers meet to specify a common 2002; 04 –          Conceptual
      researchers from the four      framework of concepts, variables, and     09               framework
      projects to specify the        instrumentation for the common aspects                     (common and
      common theoretical aspects     in the four projects                                       specific);
      and to select reliable and     * specification of concepts, variables                     Operational-
      valid instruments (see         and instruments specific to the present                    izationed
      section 12); followed by co-   project                                                    variables and
      ordinated collection of        * data collection with teachers (metal-                    instruments;
      common and project
                                     work, one comparable school subject)                       Pretest scores;
      specific data as ‘pretest
                                     and staff in schools participating in the                  First research
      scores’ in schools
      participating in research      research                                                   information
      2. In-school pedagogical-      * expert demonstration of LINE               2002; 10      Process
      didactic and LINE software            * discussion about characteristics                  description for
      orientation, with teachers            and use of instructional lines and                  research and
      and staff, concerning the             learning activities including                       teacher
      use and potentials for                diagnostics and evaluation                          handbook
      optimizing teaching,                  * selecting and defining
      learning, and diagnostic              intructional and learning variables
      evaluation processes and              in metal-work
      effects, including reducing    * possible start in own school
      the gap between VMBO           * decisions and appointments
      and MBO




                                                       11
3. Using LINE to construct            * teachers construct lines                  2002; 10 –   Instructional
instructional lines in metal-work     * expert coaches construction process       12           lines on
in VMBO (classes 3 – 4) and           and outcomes; research describes                         internet;
MBO (class 1)                         * operationalization of instructional and                Process
                                      learning variables metal-work                            descriptions
4. Using LINE during lessons in       * teachers and students use lines during    2003; 01 –   Process
metal-work in VMBO and MBO            lessons                                     03           description for
                                      * research observes / evaluates                          research and
                                                                                               teacher
                                                                                               handbook
5. Evaluation by teachers, school     * discussions and decisions about           2003; 03     Process
management, students, school          improving lines / implementation in                      description for
administration, expert                lessons                                                  research and
                                      * decisions about next step                              teacher
                                                                                               handbook


13.2 Global planning for remaining period

   The project steps and research activities for the remaining years are listed in Table 3.

Table 3 – Development and research activities

Project activity / research step:     Procedure:                                  Planning:    Output:
6. Experienced teachers coach         * teachers coach colleagues                 2003; 04 –   Process
other teachers in own school to       * research observes / evaluates             06           description for
use LINE                                                                                       research and
                                                                                               teacher
                                                                                               handbook
7. Evaluation by teachers, school     * discussions and decisions about           2003; 07     Process
management, students, school          improving lines / implementation in                      description for
administration, expert                lessons / coaching of colleagues                         research and
                                      * decisions about next step                              teacher
                                                                                               handbook
8. Coached teachers use LINE          * teachers and students use lines during    2003; 09 –   Process
during lessons in VMBO and            lessons                                     12           description for
MBO                                   * research observes / evaluates                          research and
                                                                                               teacher
                                                                                               handbook
9. Evaluation by teachers, school     * discussions and decisions about           2003; 12     Process
management, students, school          improving lines / implementation in                      description for
administration, research              lessons / coaching of colleagues                         research and
                                      * decisions about next step                              teacher
                                                                                               handbook
       10. Second collection of       * data collection with teachers (two        2004; 01-    Intermediate
       common and project             school subjects) and staff in schools       03           scores and
       specific data as               participating in the research                            description of
       ‘intermediate scores’          * data analysis and reporting results                    processes
11. Creation of instructional lines   * teachers construct lines                  2004; 02 –   Process
to bridge the gap VMBO - MBO          * expert coaches construction process       05           description for
                                      and outcomes; research describes                         research and
                                      * operationalization of instructional and                teacher
                                      learning variables metal-work                            handbook




                                                      12
12. Evaluation by teachers, school * discussions and decisions about               2004; 06     Process
management, students, school       improving lines / implementation in                          description for
administration, expert             lessons / coaching of colleagues                             research and
                                   * decisions about next step                                  teacher
                                                                                                handbook
13. LINE is used to vary                * teachers and students use lines during 2004; 08 –     Process
instructional and curriculum            lessons                                  12             description for
characteristics of schools, to          * research observes / evaluates                         research and
reduce the gap between VMBO             * conceptualizing drafts of handbook                    teacher
and MBO                                 and qualitative evaluation of pilot                     handbook
14. Evaluation by teachers, school      * final discussion / improvements LINE 2005; 01         Process
management, students, school            * conclusions about school use in the                   description for
administration, expert                  future                                                  research and
                                                                                                teacher
                                                                                                handbook
      15. Third collection of           * data collection with teachers (two       2005; 02     Final research
      common and project                school subjects) and staff in schools                   scores
      specific data as ‘final scores’   participating in the research
      16. Quantitative and              * multilevel educational theoretical and   2005; 03 –   Drafts
      qualitative analyses              statistical analysis aspects and           07
                                        descriptions;
                                        * empirical evidence and testing of
                                        hypotheses
                                        * writing of concepts etc.
17. Conclusions                         * answering the four research questions    2005; 08 –   Dissertation /
                                        on the basis of the empirical evidence     2006; 03     Handbook /
                                                                                                (concepts of)
                                                                                                articles


13.3 Dissemination plan

Type of product                                   Production period         Expected appearance
Paper on international conference                       2003                       2003
Article in international journal                        2003                       2004
Paper on international conference                       2004                       2004
Article in international journal                        2004                       2005
Paper on international conference                       2005                       2005
Article in international journal                        2005                       2006
Dissertation                                         2002 – 2006                   2006
Handbook for teachers (in Dutch)                     2002 - 2006                   2006


Number of words: 4187




                                                        13

								
To top