Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning Between Means and Aims

  • Chapter
Dealing with Conceptualisations of Learning

  • 372 Accesses

Abstract

An increased political and professional interest in learning has manifested itself in a shift from content-based to outcome-based curricula and in an increased focus on evidence-informed teaching. Within schools, among teachers and in the overall field of education, the paradigmatic shift from content-based to outcome-based curricula has been followed by enhanced interest in, as well as debate about, how learning outcomes are operationalised into learning objectives or targets in study regulations and syllabus/lesson plans, and in formalised assessment of learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Becker, G. (1964). Human capital. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. (2010). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biesta, G. (2012). Giving teaching back to education: Responding to the disappearance of the teacher. Phenomenology & Practice, 6(2), 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (4th ed.). Berkshire: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P. (2007). Putting philosophy to work. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3–38). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1985/1916). Democracy and education. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The middle works (Vol. 9). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1986/1933). How we think. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), The later works: 1925–1953 (Vol. 8, pp. 105–352). Carbondale, IL & Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1991/1919). How we think. New York, NY: Prometheu Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (2008/1939). Theory of valuation. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The middle works (Vol. 9, p. 227). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • English, A. R. (2014/2013). Discontinuity in learning. Dewey, Herbart and education as transformation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2013). Defining student achievement. In J. Hattie & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to student achievement (pp. 3–6). London: Pouthledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, J. J. (2006). Mellem design og didaktik. Om digitale læremidler i skolen. SDU, ph.d.-afhandling.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, J. J. (2010). Læremiddellandskabet. Fra læremiddel til undervisning. København: Akademisk Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society. New York, NY & London: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugsbakk, G., & Nordkvelle, Y. (2007). The rhetoric of ICT and the new language of learning: A critical analysis of the use of ICT in the curricular field. European Educational Research Journal, 6(1), 1–12. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2007.6.1.1

  • Heimann, P. (1976). Didaktik als Unterrichtswissenschaft. Stuttgart: Klett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmke, A. (2013). Undervisningskvalitet og lærerprofessionalitet – diagnostisering, evaluering og udvikling af undervisning. Frederikshavn: Dafolo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbart, J. F. (1965/1841). Umriss Pädagogischer Vorlesungen (Text der zweiten Ausgabe). In H. von Walter Asmus (Ed.), Herbart Pädagogish-Didatische Schriften. Düsseldorf&München: Verlag Helmut Küpper Vormals Georg Bondi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heyerdahl-Larsen, C. (2000). Læreboken – Tvangstrøye eller helsetrøye? En teoretisk og empirisk fremstilling av lærebokens rolle i undervisningen. Hovedoppgave ipedagogikk. Oslo Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, S., & Künzli, R. (1994). Topik der Lehrplanung. Das Arauer Lehrplannormal. Bildungsforschung und Bildungspraksis, 16(2), 161–184. doi:http://www.lehrplanforschung.ch/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Topik-der-Lehrplanung.-Das-Arauer-Lehrplannormal.pdf

  • Keiding, T. B., & Qvortrup, A. (2014). Systemteori og didaktik. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keiding, T. B., & Qvortrup, A. (2015). DUT som didaktisk felt: en empirisk analyse af didaktiske temaer i perioden 2006–2013. I: Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 10(19), 8–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum. Theory and practice (6th ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvernbekk, T. (2011). The concept of evidence in evidence-based practice. Educational Theory, 61(5), 513–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (2006). Samfundets uddannelsessystem. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mincer, J. (1958). Investment in human capital and personal income distribution. The Journal of Political Economy, 66(4), 281–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olteanu, C., & Olteanu, L. (2013). Enhancing mathematics communication using critical aspects and dimensions of variation. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44(4), 513–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qvortrup, A., & Keiding, T. (2016). The mistake to mistake learning theory with didactics. In A. Qvortrup, M. Wiberg, G. Christensen, & M. Hansbøl (Eds.), On the definition of learning. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qvortrup, A., & Keiding, T. (2017). Didaktik som iagttagelse af undervisning og læring. Frederikshavn: Forlaget Dafolo. (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Qvortrup, A., Wiberg, M., Christensen, G., & Hansbøl, M. (Eds.). (2016). On the definition of learning. Odense: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redelius, K., & Hay, P. J. (2012). Student views on criterion-referenced assessment and grading in Swedish physical education. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy, 17(2), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College Record, 105(9), 1626–1640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rønsen, A. K. (2014). Vurdering som profesjonskompetence (Ph.D. thesis). University of Bergen, Norway.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skjelbred, D., Solstad, T., & Aamotsbakken, B. (2005). Kartlegging av læremidler og læremiddelpraksis. Tønsberg: Høgskolen i Vestfold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terhart, E. (2003). Constructivism and teaching: A new paradigm in general didactics? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(1), 25–44. doi:10.1080/00220270210163653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Oettingen, A. (2001). Det pædagogiske paradox – et grundstudie i almen pædagogik. Ã…rhus: Forlaget Klim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, S. M. R., Gable, R. A., Gear, S. B., & Hughes, K. C. (2012). Evidence-based strategies for improving the reading comprehension of secondary students: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(2), 79–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department for the Study of Culture, University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

    Ane Qvortrup

  2. Danish School of Education, Aarhus University, Denmark

    Merete Wiberg

Authors
  1. Ane Qvortrup
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Merete Wiberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

    Ane Qvortrup

  2. Aarhus University, Denmark

    Merete Wiberg

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Qvortrup, A., Wiberg, M. (2017). Learning Between Means and Aims. In: Qvortrup, A., Wiberg, M. (eds) Dealing with Conceptualisations of Learning. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6351-029-5_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6351-029-5_1

  • Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6351-029-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation