No description available.

The first part of this study describes the synthesis of a research framework (known as the Transformation Framework) via the analysis of existing literature on technology-related transformation in learning and teaching. The Framework identified five Foundations that were desirable for any implementation of technology in an educational setting and also described three broad types of transformation that might be expected to occur (Institutional, Material and Behavioural). The remainder of the thesis contains a description of the application of the Framework to three science courses in the College of Science and Engineering at a large Scottish university at a point in time when they were attempting to initiate some transformation in learning and teaching, at least in part through the introduction of new technologies. The Framework was used to construct a series of specific interview questions that were designed to illuminate each possible area of transformation. Interviews were then conducted with the Undergraduate Deans who were responsible for the overall initiative of which these courses formed a part and the organisers of each of the three courses (Courses A, B and C). The interview questions were then used to construct an online survey that was used to poll the lecturers and teaching assistants involved in the delivery of each course. Finally, anonymised course marks were obtained for the three courses covering the years before, during and after the innovations were introduced. Using the Framework as a reference, the data sources were then analysed, primarily using NVivo (qualitative data) and SPSS (quantitative data), in order to identify where there may have been transformation perceived or observed, and the evidence supporting the existence of any such transformation was evaluated. Any identified transformations were then analysed further to ascertain any specific contribution that technology may have had to such change. The results provided broad support for the notion that the transformations that may occur are highly context-dependent, and are often influenced by the Foundations that are in place at the time. Course A could be described as “innovation-ready” and as such there was evidence to suggest that the technologies used had several Institutional, Material and Behavioural transformative effects. Course B was more cautious and perhaps less prepared, and yet some Institutional, Material and Behavioural transformations were observed, largely in those areas that were well attended at the Foundation stage. The Course C implementation was done at short notice, and hence with little preparation and as such was very low-key and only limited Material and Behavioural transformations were evident as a result. The research as described above highlights the fact that transformation is far more likely to occur if the proper Foundations have been put in place first, and the technology forms part of an implementation that is well thought-out by the organisers, well supported by the powers-that-be and well accepted by all those who will engage with it. The Framework itself has proved to be a useful and robust guide for this kind of study and it should have value in many different contexts in the future. Applications include not only the evaluation of existing implementations of technology in the classroom but also the planning and preparation of such implementations, informing both the design of a particular course and the choice of technology to achieve specific results.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Sydney, 2000. / Title from title screen (viewed Apr. 21, 2008). Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Faculty of Education. Includes bibliography. Also available in print form.

Research paper (M.A.) -- Cardinal Stritch College -- Milwaukee, 1980. / A research paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Education (Education of Learning Disabled Children). Includes bibliographical references (p.88-93).

My scholarship concerning improving student learning has been undertaken at each of six levels of organisation in higher education systems: Improving individual students as learners (Section 1) Improving individual teachers' ability to improve student .learning (Section 2) Improving the design of assessment so that it supports learning better (Section 5) Improving the design of all aspects of courses so that the learning of all students on the courses improves (Section 3) Improving the student support systems that underpin all courses, so that student performance and retention is improved (Section 4) Improving institutional strategies to improve student learning (Section 6) In operating at these different levels my work has progressed from focussing on the micro-level of an individual student undertaking a single learning activity in a specific context, to macro levels involving national and international comparisons of institutional strategies to improve student learning. I started working on 'study skills' (Section 1) in the mid 1970's and have worked on institutional learning and teaching strategies in the last decade (Section 6). My work on Sections 2-5 spans three decades. Research methodologies I have used include phenomenographic interviewing (Beaty, Morgan and Gibbs, 1997), depth interviewing (Gibbs and Durbridge, 1976a), psychometric development of inventories (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004a), use of existing inventories (Gibbs, 1982), use of evaluation questionnaires (Coffey and Gibbs, 2001), analysis of documents (Gibbs et al, 2000) and the use of management information systems to track student performance and progress (Gibbs and Lucas, 1997; Gibbs and Simpson, 2004b). Research designs include before and after testing of the impact of interventions (Gibbs, 1982; Gibbs and Coffey, 2004), longitudinal tracking of individual students (Beaty, Morgan and Gibbs, 1997), use of control groups (Gibbs and Coffey, 2004) and case-based studies (Gibbs, 2003a). I have undertaken and published reviews of the literature associated with five of the sections: Section 1 (Gibbs et al 1982), Section 2 (Gibbs and Gilbert, 1998), Section 3 (Gibbs, 1982), Section 4 (Gibbs, 2003d) and Section 5 (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004). Research in four of the six areas has been published in other countries: Section 1 in the USA (Gibbs, 1983) and Sweden (Gibbs, 1996a); Section 2 in Canada (Gibbs 1995d), Germany (Gibbs 1997a), Holland (Gibbs 1999a) and the USA (Gibbs and Angelo, 1998); Section 4 in Hong Kong (Gibbs and Simpson, 2004) and Section 6 in Portugal (Gibbs, 2003e), Spain (Gibbs, 2004b), and Australia (2005a). Evidence of the scale of impact of this research is outlined in each section. A citation analysis for the 18 selected publications is included as Appendix 1. A selection of 69 of my other publications are cited in support of the account in the sections below.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--Regis University, Denver, Colo., 2006. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on Sept. 14, 2006). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Canterbury, 2006. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references. Also available via the World Wide Web.

No description available.

No description available.