Student perceptions of personalised learning: development and validation of a questionnaire with regional secondary students
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Bruce Waldrip (1)
Peter Cox (3)
Craig Deed (3)
Jeffrey Dorman (2)
Debra Edwards (3)
Cathleen Farrelly (3)
Mary Keeffe (3)
Valeria Lovejoy (3)
Lucy Mow (3)
Vaughan Prain (3)
Peter Sellings (2)
Zali Yager (3) - 关键词：Learning plans ; Perceptions ; Personalised learning ; Questionnaire development ; Regional students
- 刊名：Learning Environments Research
- 出版年：2014
- 出版时间：October 2014
- 年：2014
- 卷：17
- 期：3
- 页码：355-370
- 全文大小：534 KB
- 参考文献：1. Aelterman, A. N., Engels, J.P., Verhaeghe, K., Panagiotou, H. S., & Van Petegem, K. (2002). / Het welbevinden van de leerkracht (OBPWO project, Gent).
2. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2011). / National Assessment Program-em class="a-plus-plus">Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) national report. Sydney: ACARA. Accessed Jan 18, 2012 http://www.nap.edu.au/Test_Results/National_reports/index.html.
3. Bendigo Education Plan (2005). Loddon Mallee Region, Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
4. Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). / Review of Australian higher education (Final report). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
5. Campbell, R., Robinson, W., Neelands, J., Hewston, R., & Mazzoli, L. (2007). Personalised learning: Ambiguities in theory and practice. / British Journal of Educational Studies, / 55, 135-54. CrossRef
6. Creemers, B., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). / The dynamics of educational effectiveness: A contribution to policy, practice, and theory in contemporary schools. London: Routledge.
7. Department for Children, Schools and Families. (2008). / Personalised learning-em class="a-plus-plus">A practical guide. Accessed June 18, 2011. http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/education/tf-mentors/ActivitiesforMentoring/Personalised/PracticalGuide.aspx.
8. Department for Education. (2006). 2020 vision: / Report of the teaching and learning in 2020 review group. Date accessed 20/10/10. http://publications.education.gov.uk/default.aspx?PageFunction=productdetails&PageMode=publications&ProductId=DFES-04255-2006& (accessed 20 October 2011).
9. Department for Education and Skills (DfES). (2004) / A national conversation about personalised learning. Nottingham: DfES. https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/eOrderingDownload/DfES%200919%20200MIG186.pdf (accessed 11 September 2011).
10. Duckworth, K., Akerman, R., MacGregor, A., Salter, E., & Vorhaus, J. (2009). / Self regulated learning: A literature review (London, Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning). OECD/CERI, 83-00. Paris: OECD.
11. Edwards, A. (2005). Relational agency: Learning to be a resourceful practitioner. / International Journal of Educational Research, / 43, 168-82. CrossRef
12. Edwards, A. (2007). Relational agency in professional practice: A CHAT analysis. / An International Journal of Human Activity Theory, / 1, 1-7.
13. Edwards, A. (2011). Building common knowledge at the boundaries between professional practices: Relational agency and relational expertise in system of distributed expertise. / International Journal of Educational Research, / 50, 33-9. CrossRef
14. Engels, N., Aelterman, A., Deconinck, E., Schepens, A., & Van Petegem, K. (2000). / Het wel- / bevinden in de schoolsituatie bij leerlingen secundair onderwijs (OBPWO project, Gent).
15. Engels, N., Aelterman, A., Van Petegem, K., & Schepens, A. (2004). Factors which influence the well-being of pupils in Flemish secondary schools. / Educational Studies, / 30, 127-43. CrossRef
16. Fisher, M., King, J., & Tague, G. (2001). Development of a self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education. / Nurse Education Today, / 21, 516-25. CrossRef
17. Fraser, B. J. (1986). / Classroom environment. London: Croom Helm.
18. Fraser, B. J. (1990). / Individualised Classroom Environment Questionnaire. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
19. Fraser, B. J. (2007). Classroom learning environments. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), / Handbook of research on science education (pp. 103-24). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
20. Gilbert. C., August., K., Brooks, D., Hargreaves, D., Pearce, N., Roberts, J., Rose, J., & Wise, D. (2006). / 2020 vision: Report of the teaching and learning in 2020 review gro - 作者单位：Bruce Waldrip (1)
Peter Cox (3)
Craig Deed (3)
Jeffrey Dorman (2)
Debra Edwards (3)
Cathleen Farrelly (3)
Mary Keeffe (3)
Valeria Lovejoy (3)
Lucy Mow (3)
Vaughan Prain (3)
Peter Sellings (2)
Zali Yager (3)
1. Faculty of Education, University of Tasmania, Newnham Drive, Newnham, Launceston, TAS, 7250, Australia
3. Faculty of Education, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia
2. Faculty of Education, Federation University, Churchill, VIC, 3842, Australia - ISSN：1573-1855
文摘
This project sought to evaluate regional students-perceptions of their readiness to learn, assessment processes, engagement, extent to which their learning is personalised and to relate these to academic efficacy, academic achievement, and student well-being. It also examined teachers-perceptions of students-readiness to learn, the assessment process, engagement, and the extent to which students-learning is personalised. The sample involved students in years 7-0 from six Victorian secondary schools. An instrument Personalised Learning Environment Questionnaire (PLQ) was developed to measure students-perceptions of the factors effecting the implementation of Personalised Learning Plans (PLPs). It employed the latest scales to assess a range of PLP indicator variables, with all scales modified for use in an Australian context, and the total number of items kept to a minimum. Only scales more sensitive to PLPs were used to minimise the length of the instrument. There were three outcome variables: academic efficacy, academic achievement, and student well-being. The PLPs were assessed through scales that assess several contributing, distinct dimensions: selfdirected learning readiness, personal achievement, goal orientation, learning environment, personalised teaching and learning initiatives, curriculum entitlement and choice, and perceptions of assessment for learning. The trail PLQ was administered to 220 students, resulting in a 19 scale questionnaire with three or four items per scale. This paper reveals good data to model fit for the majority of items and each scale had good reliability. The paper describes the analytic techniques and results, how the instrument was refined and identifies common and uncommon student perceptions based on a post hoc analysis. The main study consisted of 2,407 students from four schools in the Bendigo Education Plan. They responded to this refined 19 scale version of the PLQ that was developed from the trial PLQ. All scales had satisfactory internal consistency reliability.