Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Motivation, Leadership and Curriculum design pp 161–172Cite as

Designing Student Learning for a Networked World

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to suggest the components of a framework that might help inform the design of student learning for, and in, a networked world. In thinking about how to design student learning within a networked world, we first need to consider broadly the knowledge, skills and dispositions that we want for our young people in order for them to operate with agency in this twenty-first-century world. Then, we need to explore what elements we should take into account when designing learning, specifically in terms of what we know about how young people learn and what engages them in learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Library Association. (1989). Presidential committee on information literacy: Final report. Chicago: American Library Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakia, M., Yang, E., & Mitchell, K. (2008). National educational technology trends study: Local-level data summary. US Department of Education. http://www.edpubs.org. Accessed 21 Oct 2009.

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (1995). A dispositional view of transfer. In Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning (pp. 21–34). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., McCormick, R., James, M., & Pedder, D. (2006). Learning how to learn and assessment for learning: A theoretical inquiry. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 119–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2003). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington: National Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities of practice. Organizational Science, 2(1), 40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burn, A., Buckingham, D., Parry, B., & Powell, M. (2010). Minding the gaps: Teachers’ cultures, students’ cultures. In D. Alvermann (Ed.), Adolescents’ online literacies: Connecting classrooms, digital media, and popular culture (pp. 183–202). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Candy, P. C. (2004). Linking thinking: Self-directed learning in the digital age. Canberra: Department of Education, Science and Training.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combes, B. (2009a). Digital natives or digital refugees? Why we have failed Gen Y? Paper presented at the 38th Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship: Preparing students for the future, Padua, Italy, 2–4 September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combes, B. (2009b). Generation Y: Are they really digital natives or more like digital refugees? Synergy, 7(1), 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cookson, P. W. I. (2009). What would Socrates say? Educational Leadership, 67(1), 8–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M., Abbot, C., Webb, M., Blakely, B., Beauchamp, T., & Rhodes, V. (2003a). ICT and attainment: A review of the research literature (A report to the DfES No 17). London: British Educational Communication and Technology Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, M., Abbot, C., Webb, M., Blakely, B., Beauchamp, T., & Rhodes, V. (2003b). ICT and pedagogy: A review of the research literature (A report to the DfES No 18). London: British Educational Communication and Technology Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delors, J. (1996a). Education: The necessary utopia. In Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-first Century. Highlights. http://www.unesco.org/delors/delors_e.pdf. Accessed 11 March 2011.

  • Delors, J. (1996b). Learning: The treasure within. Report to UNESCO of the international commission on education for the twenty-first century. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle, R. A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative explanation of transfer in a community of learners classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 451–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskill, P. J., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2002). Self-efficacy and self-regulated learning: The dynamic duo in school performance. In J. M. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 185–206). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (1997). Thinking, learning and reading: The situated sociocultural mind. In D. Krishner & J. A. Whitson (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic and psychological perspectives (pp. 235–259). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. (2007). Knowledge, the disciplines and learning in the digital age. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 6(2), 115–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2005). Improving the writing performance of young struggling writers: Theoretical and programmatic research from the center on accelerating student learning. Journal of Special Education, 39(1), 19–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong question. Educational Researcher, 26(5), 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, D. (2007). ICT and learning: Lessons from Australian classrooms. Computers and Education, 49, 385–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: Where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hipkins, R. (2005). Information literacy and student research. Set: Research Information for Teachers, 2, 27–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M., Kazakov, D., & Svehla, M. (2005). ICT in schools 2005. Report prepared for the 2020 Communications Trust. Wellington: BBC Marketing and Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladbrook, J., & Probert, E. (2011). Information skills and critical literacy: Where are our digikids at with online searching and are their teachers helping? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1), 105–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A., Arafeh, A., Smith, A., & MacGill, A. R. (2008). Writing, technology and teens. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, D., & Arafeh, S. (2002). The digital disconnect: The widening gap between internet- savvy students and their schools. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDougall, A., & Jones, A. (2006). Theory and history, questions and methodology: Current and future issues in research into ICT in education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(3), 353–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington, DC: United States Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehlenbacher, B. (2010). Technology and instruction: Designs for everyday learning. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Millard, E. (2003). Towards a literacy of fusion: New times, new teaching and learning? Reading, 37(1), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2008). Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf. Accessed 11 March 2011.

  • Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F., & Urdan, T. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pajares, F., & Vialante, G. (2008). Self-efficacy beliefs and motivation in writing development. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 158–170). New York: Guildford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, M., & Somekh, B. (2006). Learning transformation with technology: A question of sociocultural contexts? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(4), 519–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1995). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications. Englewood Cliffs: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Project Tomorrow. (2011). The new 3 E’s of education: Enabled, engaged, empowered. How today’s students are leveraging emerging technologies for learning. http://www.tomorrow.org/speakup/pdfs/SU10_3EofEducation(Students).pdf. Accessed 10 Nov 2012.

  • Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (2003). The definition and selection of key competencies: Executive summary 2003. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf. Accessed 11 March 2011.

  • Sadler, R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18(2), 119–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz, B; & Wiese, B. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time series analysis of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 64–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Meece, J. (2006). Self-efficacy in development in adolescence. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Adolescence and education (Vol. 5, pp. 71–96). Greenwich: Information Age.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistic instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spires, H. A., Lee, J. K., & Turner, K. A. (2008). Having our say: Middle grade student perspectives on school, technologies, and academic engagement. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(4), 497–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., Woolard, J., Graham, S., & Banich, M. (2009). Are adolescents less mature than adults? Minors’ access to abortion, the juvenile death penalty and the alleged APA flip-flop. American Psychologist, 64(7), 583–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valsiner, J. (1997). Culture and the development of children’s actions: A theory of human development (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wan, Z., Fang, Y., & Neufeld, D. (2007). The role of information technology in technology-mediated learning: A review of the past for the future. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18, 183–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841–873). New York: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–41). London: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

    Judine Ladbrook & Judy Parr

Authors
  1. Judine Ladbrook
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Judy Parr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judine Ladbrook .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore

    Caroline Koh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ladbrook, J., Parr, J. (2015). Designing Student Learning for a Networked World. In: Koh, C. (eds) Motivation, Leadership and Curriculum design. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-230-2_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation