Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

The need for innovation in didactics: inclusion and technologies

Vol. 9 No. 2 (2018): ESS - The need for innovation in didactics: inclusion and technologies

Innovation of settings in higher education

Submitted
dicembre 9, 2018
Published
2019-01-21

Abstract

In recent years, Italian universities have been called upon to experiment with innovative processes and changes that have involved different aspects. This contribution focuses in particular on the factors related to teaching that influence the design of university settings, characterized by student’s profile evolution,  the pervasiveness of the media and the ever-increasing demand to develop skills. and achieve the stated training goals are some aspects that have influenced the teaching. BYOD, inverted classroom, feedback, experience learning are considered relevant factors for the re-definition of settings for university teaching

Starting from two approaches, teacher or student-centered, some scenarios that could characterize in the next decades the following university settings: the lecture hall, the small classroom in presence, the online synchronous environments and the asynchronous online environments.

References

  1. Author (2012)
  2. Author (2015)
  3. Author (2016)
  4. Author (2018)
  5. Beck A.T., Rush A.J., Shaw B.F. and Emery G. (1979). Cognitive Therapy of Depression. New York: Guilford Press
  6. (trad. it.: Terapia cognitiva della depressione. Torino: Boringhieri, 1987).
  7. Bergmann, J. & Sams, A. (2012). Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. Eugene, Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education.
  8. Bertolini, P. (Ed.). (1996). Dizionario di pedagogia e di scienze dell'educazione. Bologna: Zanichelli.
  9. Bonwell, C. C & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. Washington: Jossey-Bass.
  10. Bowman, L.L., Levine, L. E., Waite, B. M., & Gendron, M. (2010) Can students really multitask? An experimental study of instant messaging while reading. Computers & Education, 54, 927-931. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.024
  11. Bransford, J. D. , Brown, A. L. & Cocking R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: National Academy Press.
  12. Burak, L. (2012). Multitasking in the University Classroom. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from https://vc.bridgew.edu/mahpls_fac/74
  13. Canton, J. (1997). Experiential learning in higher education: Linking classroom and community. Available from: www.ericdigests.org.
  14. Davidson, J. (2001). Innovative school design for small learning communities. Horace, 18(1).
  15. Bellanca, James. 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (Leading Edge Book 5) (posizioni nel Kindle 2562-2564). Solution Tree Press. Edizione del Kindle.
  16. Dede, C. (2008). Comparing framework for 21st Century Skill. In Bellanca, J. (eds). 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn. Solution Tree Press.
  17. Felisatti, E. & Serbati, A. (eds.) (2017). Preparare alla professionalità docente e innovare la didattica universitaria. Milano: Franco Angeli.
  18. Hoover, J. D., & Whitehead, C. (1975). An experiential-cognitive methodology in the first course in management: Some preliminary results. In R. H. Buskirk (ed.), Simulation Games and Experiential Learning in Action. University of Texas: Bureau of Business Research.
  19. Hugh, T. (2008). Didactics of microlearning, in Hugh, T. (eds), Didactics of Microlearning: Concepts, Discourses and Examples, Vaxmann.
  20. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J. E. & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Costructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching, in “Educational Psychologist”, 41, 2, pp. 75-86.
  21. Klopfer, E., & Squire, K. (2008). Environmental Detectives—the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(2), 203–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9037-6
  22. Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J. & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. Econ Educ.31(1), pp.30–43. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220480009596759
  23. Laurillard, D. (2002).Rethinking University Teaching. A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. New York and London: Routledge.
  24. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203125083
  25. Lave, J., Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: University Press. [trad.it.: L’apprendimento situato. Dall’osservazione alla partecipazione attiva nei contesti sociali. Trento: Erickson 2006].
  26. Marrs, K., A. Gavrin, and G. M. Novak. 2004. Just-in-time Teaching in biology: Creating an active learner classroom using the Internet. Cell Biology Education. 3, 49-61.
  27. Meirieu, P. & Bars, S. (2001). La Machine-ècole. Paris: Gallimard.
  28. Nair, P., Fielding, R., & Lackney, J. (2005). The language of school design: Design patterns for 21st century schools (2nd ed.). Minneapolis, MN: DesignShare.
  29. Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 1573–1952.
  30. Novak, G, Patterson, E.T., Gavrin, A.D., and Christian, W. (1999). Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology,Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  31. Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(37), 15583–15587. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903620106
  32. Paviotti, G., Rossi, P. G., & Zarka, D. (2012). Intelligent Tutoring Systems: An Overview. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia. Retrieved from http://www.intelligent-tutor.eu/
  33. Pearlman, B. (2008). Designing New Learning Environments to Support 21st Century Skills. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills. Rethinking how students learn. Solution Tree Press.
  34. Pontecorvo, C. (1975). Analisi del processo didattico. Brescia: La Scuola.
  35. Ramella, F. (2013). Sociologia dell'innovazione economica. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  36. Reguzzoni, M. & Scurati, C. (eds.) (1975). Innovazione e sperimentazione. Milano: Centro per l’innovazione educativa.
  37. Rivoltella, P.C. (2016). Cos’è un EAS. Brescia: La Scuola.
  38. Rivoltella, P.C. (2013). Fare didattica con gli EAS. Brescia: La Scuola.
  39. Ryan, D., & Risquez, A. (2018). ‘Lessons Learnt’: the student view in the #VLEIreland project. Irish Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.22554/ijtel.v3i2.40
  40. Seibert J. H. & Sypher B. D. (1989). The Importance of Internship Experiences to Undergraduate Communication Students. Paper presented at the 1989 annual meeting of the International Communication Association, San Francisco. Available from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED315826
  41. Tolks, D., Schäfer, C., Raupach, T., Kruse, L., Sarikas, A., Gerhardt-Szép, S., Kllauer, G., Lemos, M., Fischer, M. R., Eichner, B., Sostmann, K.,...Hege, I. (2016). An Introduction to the Inverted/Flipped Classroom Model in Education and Advanced Training in Medicine and in the Healthcare Professions. GMS journal for medical education, 33(3).
  42. Paviotti, G., Rossi, P. G., & Zarka, D. (2012). Intelligent Tutoring Systems: An Overview. Lecce: Pensa Multimedia. Retrieved from http://www.intelligent-tutor.eu/

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...