Reality, Models and Complex Teaching Learning Environments
Abstract
Complex teaching and learning environments are a result of a number of factors, including the increasing complexity of entrepreneurial processes and the greater diversity of the workforce, especially in Europe. In meeting the new challenges associated with increasing complexity, linearized and chopped up pieces of curricula are less and less effective. New modes of teaching and learning that help to develop deep comprehension of the systems character of these complex and dynamic processes are necessary. This chapter reports on the construction, implementation and evaluation of a complex teaching-learning environment that uses advanced technology to support requirements in the German dual system of apprenticeship.
Keywords
complex learning computer-based instruction instructional modeling mastery learning vocational educationPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Achtenhagen, F. (1992). The relevance of content for teaching-learning processes. In F. K. Oser, A. Dick & J. L. Patry (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching — the new synthesis (pp. 315–328). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Achtenhagen, F. (1994). How should research on vocational and professional education react to new challenges in life and in the workplace? In W. J. Nijhof & J. N. Streumer (Eds.), Flexibility in training and vocational education (pp. 201–247). Utrecht: Lemma.Google Scholar
- Achtenhagen, F., Nijhof, W. J., & Raffe, D. (1995). Feasibility Study: Research scope for vocational education in the framework of COST social sciences. European Commission, Directorate General: Science, Research and Development. Social Sciences, COST Technical committee, Vol 3. Brussels, Luxembourg: ECSC-EC-EAEC.Google Scholar
- Achtenhagen, F. (in press). Criteria for the Development of Complex Teaching-Learning Environments. Instructional Science.Google Scholar
- Achtenhagen, F., & Grubb, W. N. (in press). Vocational and occupational education: Pedagogical complexity — institutional diversity. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Fourth Handbook of Research on Teaching. Washington: AERA.Google Scholar
- Block, J. H. (1972). Mastery Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
- Bloom, B. S. (1971). Mastery learning. In J. H. Block (Ed.), Mastery Learning (pp. 47–53). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
- Buttler, F. (1992). Tätigkeitslandschaft bis 2010 [Structure of jobs until 2010]. In F. Achtenhagen & E. G. John (Eds.). Mehrdimensionale Lehr-Lern-Arrangements (pp. 162–182) [Multidimensional teaching-learning arrangements]. Wiesbaden: Gabler.Google Scholar
- Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning. Teachers College Record, 64, 723–733.Google Scholar
- Keller, F. S. (1968). Good-bye teacher! Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis, 1, 79–84.Google Scholar
- Seel, N. (1999). Instruktionsdesign: Modelle und Anwendungsgebiete [Instructional Design: Models and Applications]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 27, 2–11.Google Scholar
- Westbury, I., Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, H. (Eds.) (1999). Teaching as a Reflective Practice — the German Didaktik Tradition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar