In Search Of A Learner-Control Paradigm
For The Solomon Islands Science Classroom
Aaron Hayes
Abstract
This paper describes concern in Solomon Islands over the difficulties
experienced by students studying science at regional universities. It is
suggested that this is due to a strong background of teacher-control, minimising
the student's ability to function independently in the tertiary science learning
environment. A review of literature establishes current support for student
control over learning, and describes various levels at which the teaching
of learning strategies and metacognitive control by students have been shown
to be successful in enhancing meaningful learning. Suggestions are made for
the introduction of a learner-control paradigm into the Solomon Islands
science curriculum.
Introduction
Until recently, all Solomon Islands students gaining government scholarships
to regional universities were graduatesoftheForm6yearatKingGeorgeVINational
Secondary School in the capital, Honiara. The Form 6 curriculum was originally
based on the Cambridge senior syllabi, and senior mathematics and science teachers
at King George VI School have traditionally been experienced teachers contracted
from the U.K. Due to the competitive promotion system practised in the Solomons,
Form 6 students have always been recognised as being the 'cream' of Solomon
Islands academic talent, being the top one percent of those who complete primary
school.
Nevertheless, despite this combination of highly-able teachers and pupils,
well-equipped laboratories and a relative abundance of teaching resources,
a serious deficiency in senior mathematics and science education has become
evident in the attrition rate of Solomon Islanders studying the natural sciences
at regional universities.
79
Although documentary evidence is not available, anecdotes feeding back to
the schools and the Ministry of Education and Training indicate that a sizeable
proportion of Solomon Islands'first-year science students at the University
of the South Pacific, The University of Papua New Guinea, P.N.G.
UNITECH, and Capricornia Institute of Advanced Education have either
failed or performed poorly in first semester science subjects, following which
they have frequently given up and transferred to other faculties (e.g. arts,
commerce) where they have coped significantly better.
As a direct result of this, there has been a continuing dearth of Solomon
Islanders with science degrees, and a desperate need for nationals to work
in areas such as maths/science teaching, environmental science, marine
biology, industrial chemistry, medical science, information technology and
engineering. This in turn has propagated reliance on foreign recruitment of
professionals. Recent talk of establishing a university in Solomon Islands
appears to presume that virtually all science academics would have to be
expatriates: to the author's knowledge not a single Solomon Islander has
yet earned a research doctorate in any of the natural sciences.
In 1986 the Solomon Islands Ministry of Education and Training sent the
Heads of Science and Mathematics at King George VI School to two regional
tertiary campuses (U.S.P., Suva and Capricornia Institute, Rockhampton) to
investigate the reasons why students were failing to return with science
degrees. Their report (Fradd and Crawford, 1986), apart from describing
sociocultural adjustment difficulties common to all Solomon Islanders study-
ing overseas, identified the following factors affecting science students'
ability to pass first-semester subjects:
- poor note-taking ability
- poor problem solving ability
- poor time management skills
- inability to present logical arguments, especially to challenge
propositions presented by lecturers
- inadequacy of written and spoken English
- lack of confidence to speak up in tutorials.
80
Fradd and Crawford concluded:
Finally, it is a sad fact that a country of a quarter of a million people
finds difficulty in sending as few as fifty students a year capable of
tackling a university course. This reflects badly on the education
system of the country from primary schools upwards. The Sixth Form
syllabi at King George VI School are an excellent preparation for
university, particularly the U.S.P.
"If a house falls down, look at the foundations, not the roof."
(Fradd and Crawford, 1986, p. 7)
In this paper I will follow through on this recommendation to 'look at the
foundations'.
An Analysis of the Problem
Undergraduate science students require abroad range of cognitive and metacognitive
skills in order to achieve course objectives. Dozens of control decisions are necessary
to complete each learning task. During lectures, the student must make metacognitive
decisions for note-taking: which information is to be taken down, and how to divide
attention between listening and writing. Devising and sticking to a time management
programme is an executive control process. Selecting useful readings from a
bibliography, skimming through text, extracting information from tables, writing
theoretical essays and practical reports, carrying out acid-base titrations or sketching
an organism under the microscope: all require constant metacognitive monitoring
to optimise meaningful learning and performance. Writing a critical literature
review not only requires interpretation of text but evaluation of its contribution to
scientific knowledge. Many courses today assess students on their contribution to
tutorial sessions and seminars where they are expected to take part in academic
debate and evaluative discussions of experimental findings.
Most of these skills require the tertiary student to be in firm control of his
cognitive learning processes. He must be aware of what he is doing, and, more
importantly, why he is doing it. If the undergraduate's experience of science
education has been limited to the passive acquisition of propositional knowl-
8 1
edge by copying detailed blackboard notes, he will obviously find it difficult
to cope with the necessity that he take responsibility for his own learning at
university.
Observations made during my experience of teaching science at both King
George VI and Waimapuru National Secondary Schools led me to believe that
Solomon Islands secondary students generally do not acquire the executive
metacognitive skills and active learning strategies required for coping with the
independent learning required in a tertiary science faculty. Further, I have
observed that attempts by the secondary science teacher to introduce indepen-
dent learning strategies and metacognitive control processes in the classroom
are met with student resistance. Strong preference for passive, non-partici-
patory learning styles is prevalent throughout all form levels.
The source of this preference for teacher- controlled learning appears to be
found in the cognitive entry characteristics of incoming Form 1 students.
Students enter secondary school in the Solomons replete with deeply in-
grained habits and expectations which are tell-tale of a teacher-centred model
of learning in the primary school classroom.
Many habitual behaviours of students - relating generally to classroom
procedures, undertaking group activities, presentation of written work, and
interaction with the teacher - are incompatible with the enquiry process crucial
to science. Despite concerted effort on the teacher's part, carry-over primary
school behaviours prove difficult to alter. The following descriptions of
typical Form 1 student characteristics are based on my and colleagues'
experiences:
* Form 1 students are extremely resistant to any change in method
of setting out written work. For example many write "answer" or
"ans" after the solution to every maths problem. Despite being
told that this is unnecessary ("the number after the last '=' sign is
always the answer"), this and similar behaviours tend to be robust.
* Independent research assignments and discovery learning
projects result in anxiety and complaints from students. Incoming
Form 1 students have poor library skills and find it difficult to locate
8 2
information.
* Junior students are less than gratified by a science lesson unless
the teacher bases it on 'chalking and talking': delivering a
structured lecture while simultaneously chalking detailed notes.
They exhibit anxiety if a complete written transcript of the lesson
is not provided for copying into their workbooks to be rote-learned.
* If the science teacher leaves blanks or offers alternatives in
place of keywords in class notes, students will leave spaces in
anticipation of being told correct answers. If at the end of the lesson
the teacher still insists they search for their own words to fill the
blanks, many students leave the room in a state of anxiety.
* In mathematics, students' full attention is always given to copying
a worked example from the blackboard while the accompanying
didactic explanation is often ignored. Students leave the classroom
satisfied with their written record of the lesson, but at evening study
find they can't follow the reasoning required for independent prob
lem-solving.
* At times when it is perceived that the teacher is 'teaching' the
class, students are resistant to being lured into asking or answering
questions, offering observations or suggestions, or any other
participation than attending to the teacher and the blackboard.
* Students generally do not perform well when working in groups.
Students based at the same laboratory workstation frustrate the
cooperative purposes of group work by asking the teacher for
advice or assistance before consulting others in the group. Often one
or two students conduct the exercise while others in the group either
look on or copy out the instructions.
By the time the average student begins senior science (Form 4), he or she is
characterised by:
83
-inability to cope with multi-media stimuli
- inability to analyse or criticise presented information or generated
data
- tendency to amass propositional knowledge without forming
sufficient supportive concepts
- inability to reason according to the scientific method
- lack of interest in scientific careers, particularly research.
From my observations of student behaviours, I am led to conclude that the
incoming Form 1 student views the classroom as a locus of teacher control,
and assumes that the teacher is to bear most of the responsibility for his
academic success ('learning'), while his own small duty lies in conscientious
recording of information, and faithful rote-learning of notes and examples. It
is evident that the Form 1 entrant has little concept of being able to potentiate
his learning through his own control.
These essentially uniform entry characteristics probably result from the
combined influence of cultural learning styles and learning behaviours
ingrained at primary school.
Recent work by Peter Ninnes (1991) has identified four main traditional
learning strategies used by Western Province Solomon Islanders in the village
environment for acquisition of tribal ethics and skills:
1 observation
2 imitation
3 participation
4 listening
Ninnes identifies two primary learning contexts: that of the peer group and that
of the parents and extended family, and notes that the degree of learner
participation in the learning task depends on the context:
84
Partial participation in [Western Province Solomon Islanders] is
most common when children are in the presence of older, more
skilful people. Full participation is prevalent, on the other hand,
when children are part of a group of relatively equally skilled
individuals, such as the peer group.... Within the peer group there
is a relatively high proportion of learning by full participation and
a lower proportion by partial participation and observation.
(Ninnes, 1991, pp 242, 246)
It is significant to note the lack of full participation in learning in the presence
of elders with greater knowledge. This may explain various student behaviours
in the science classroom, such as declining to offer explanations for observa-
tions or attempt calculations under the teacher's eye. (Ninnes notes that
students will participate more fully in novel tasks in science if the teacher
leaves the room or feigns preoccupation with something else.)
In the same study, Ninnes found that while students had difficulty carrying out
science experiments from text book instructions and diagrams, the culturally-
appropriate teaching methods of verbal explanation and showing enabled students
to learn the techniques. However, when students had a choice between carrying out
practical work and copying blackboard notes they tended to opt for the latter. Ninnes
claims this is due to their belief that knowledge "arises from external sources" rather
than being elicited by their own investigations. He observes that knowledge to the
Solomon Islanders is customarily contained in closed systems, which can only be
added to and validated by qualified sources such as visions. This makes it
traditionally impossible for the average person (especially a child) to discover
knowledge for himself.
The externalisation of knowledge sources in Melanesia results in
students viewing schools as knowledge sources rather than as
sources of intellectual experiences. Consequently, students value
passive knowledge acquisition over active knowledge construction.
(Ninnes, ibid, p 253)
Clearly there is a dissonance between the traditional Melanesian approach to
learning and the process of scientific enquiry which science teachers wish to
nurture in their students.
85
Village schools are heavily influenced by the culture of the locality, and it is
intuitive that traditional passive learning styles will be preferred by both
students and teachers in a school within the community environment. In
addition, there are other reasons why teacher control features prominently in
village primary school classrooms:
- very few schools have a full staff of trained teachers: sometimes
only the head teacher has a teaching diploma, and the majority are
either untrained or have completed only short courses in classroom
techniques. Most untrained teachers have only a primary or junior
secondary education themselves, and tend to teach in an autocratic
style which mirrors their own experience as a student.
- teachers have a minimum of teaching resources available to them:
most villages have to support their own schools (provincial governments
pay teachers).
- competitive promotion means there is pressure from parents for
teachers to focus on preparing students for regurgitating knowledge
in the secondary selection exams: only a small fraction of Class 6
leavers are selected for Form 1.
While the primary school learning environment may indeed be valid for
training students to pass the selection exams, it appears to do little towards
developing the independent thinking skills important for scientific enquiry,
which a small percentage of the students will need desperately six years later
as they enter a university science faculty.
However, the justification of global curriculum changes to benefit a select
few, and the sheer enormity of the teacher training issue and the costs involved
mean there is little likelihood of revolutionary change in primary education
in the Solomons in the near future. For present purposes I shall assume the
cognitive entry characteristics currently perceived in incoming Form 1
students will remain standard for some time to come. It appears that any
marriage between students and the scientific process will have to come after
86
entry into Form 1.
What is needed in the secondary science curriculum is a learner-control
paradigm which leads the student ultimately to self-activated learning in the
tertiary context.
The Argument for Student Control
In recent decades, the concept of student control over learning has gained
an increasing research following as the age-old, teacher-centred construct
of 'teachers teaching pupils' is gradually abandoned by educators and
education researchers alike.
The teacher-centred perspective on classroom learning had a dominant role in the
history of education practice and research up until the 1970s. Nathaniel Cantor's
(1953) "Nine assumptions to orthodox teaching" lend support to the idea that
students can be reinforced into a learned helplessness when-among other behaviours
- their teachers act as if they assume that they personally are responsible for the
pupil's acquisition of knowledge (Cantor's assumption 6), and that knowledge
exceeds learning in importance (assumption 8; Cantor, 1953 pp. 67-70).
Ned Flanders, one of the pioneer researchers on teacher behaviours,
summed things up at the end of the sixties when he wrote:
...it does not seem very far out of line to suggest that teachers usually
tell pupils what to do, how to do it, when to start, when to stop, and
how well they did whatever they did.
(Flanders, 1970 p. 14).
Tyler (1950) was one of the first researchers to propose that learning is a
student-centred rather than teacher-dependent phenomenon. He proposed
learning to be an active process on the part of the learner, quite independent
of the teacher's pedagogical efforts. Work by Bloom (1976) also discounted
the quality of instruction as a primary learning control factor, and focussed
attention on the preparation and motivation of the learner.
8 7
As a result of the gradual change in the research focus from the teacher to
the student, the cognitive view of classroom learning has emerged, and with
it the imperative that learning hinges on students' internal cognitive
processes, rather than external factors such as teacher behaviour or time
allocated to learning tasks.
A major foundation for the call for greater student control over learning
processes was laid by Wittrock's(1974) generative learning model. Wittrock
theorises that students' existing cognitive schemata (prior knowledge)
actually interact with presented information to generate new schemata.
The model requires that the teacher have some degree of knowledge of the
student's existing understanding before attempting to present new informa-
tion, which the student is then responsible for assimilating into existing
knowledge to generate novel conceptual schemata.
Osborne and Wittrock (1983) extend the generative learning model to
consider the particular difficulties inherent in science teaching. They view
the challenge in science education as being modification of the student's
existing robust ideas about the world. Accordingly they have undertaken
considerable efforts to elicit precise information about children's pre-held
beliefs about science. They find that entrenched ideas about scientific
concepts are not only plentiful in children's minds, but also very hard to
alter. They observed that even senior science students continue to hold
erroneous propositional knowledge (e.g. that boiling water releases bubbles
of air), and that even when their incorrect ideas are confronted with
contradictory fact they still tend to retain their beliefs. Accordingly Osborne
and Wittrock underscore the notion that only the children themselves can alter
their own perceptual schemata, and even then only when new information is
presented in a convincing enough manner to warrant any changes.
Research also shows that teachers can not only target specific existing
schemata in their presentation of new ideas to students, but they can also teach
students more effective methods of concept assimilation. Tennyson and
Cocchiarella (1986) postulate from the research literature that the formation
of conceptual schemata is assisted by teacher provision of a best example
of the concept, and practice at using the best example with variant examples.
By searching out a best example (if not provided) and practicing using this
88
to refine the concept (if feedback is available), the student can assume some
degree of control over concept formation.
The benefits of such student-control over knowledge aquisition were demonstrated
by Larkin and Reif (1979), who taught students how to extract information from
textproblems(i.e. how to form perceptual schemata) and showed that these students
were better able to solve relational concept problems. They also found that training
given in the concept of physics problems was transferable to another area of
the curriculum (economics).
Students in executive control of learning processes (such as recognition of task
goals) also perform better than other students. Meece, Blumenfield and Hoyle
(1988) and C. Ames and Archer (1988) in separate studies underlined the fact
that students who perceive and pursue mastery goals in the classroom are liable
to be more active in the engagement of effective cognitive strategies. Russell Ames
(1983) concludes that students who have themselves assigned clear, attainable goals
to learning tasks are also more likely to seek help when required. Kinzie and Sullivan
(1989)report salient continuing motivation in students who had undergone a training
program in learner executive control. There is no doubt that students who are
taught to identify the purpose of a learning task, its components and the most efficient
way of going about mastering them, become highly motivated independent learners.
Bloom even goes so far as to imply that with such learners it makes little difference
how good (or bad) the teacher's methods are; they can continually outperform
dependent learners (Bloom, 1976 p 134).
The actual teaching of learning strategies and metacognition presumes the breakup
of knowledge into different types, each of which may be acquired using different
skills. Evans (1988) outlines popular division of knowledge into:
-propositional knowledge (facts and proposals)
-procedural knowledge (including automatic responses, specific
procedures and higher order processes)
-executive control
-monitoring
8 9
He points out that proficiency in the management of each of these cognitive
domains is not only adaptive for school achievement, but a lifelong
investment given the number of post-school learning tasks which confront
us in the age of technology.
Weinstein and Mayer (1986) review progress in the teaching of learning skills
developed through task analysis, and categorise learning strategies into the areas
of rehearsal, elaboration, organizational, monitoring and motivational. A
comprehensive learning skills program would incorporate instruction in strategies
from all of these domains, and probably include practice in word-pair associations,
mnemonics, paraphrasing, underlining, drawing diagrams, ordering, self-question-
ing and thought discipline. The teaching of learning skills is a labour-intensive
exercise and generally most cognitive strategies require practice under instruction
to be adequately mastered.
Evans (1988) notes the detached vs embedded approaches to the teaching of
learning skills, and the prevalence to date of the detached study skills
curriculum which has been disconnected from the rest of school learning in
terms of both class location and target material. The teaching of learning
control strategies as an integral (i.e. embedded) part of everyday classroom
subject teaching is an ideal which requires total commitment by the teacher
(and the school) to the learner-control paradigm. Maher and Schwebel
(1986) succinctly summarise the major resistance to commitment to the
development of cognitive skills:
Some teachers using traditional instructional material do occasion-
ally stimulate thinking in classroom discussion or in the solution of
problems. For the most part, however, this activity is incidental to the
main purposes of the school. The stimulation of thinking has not been
and is not now a conscious goal of schools
(Maher & Schwebel, 1986 p.195)
Implications
The foregoing survey of literature may be summarised by the following
propositions:
90
1 Students find it easier to assimilate new ideas when teachers aim
presentations at their existing knowledge base.
2 Learner-centred learning is more effective than teacher-centred
learning.
3 Students can be taught learning strategies. These might be rehearsal
strategies, note-taking skills, or executive control procedures.
4 Students who use learning strategies perform better on learning tasks
than students who don't.
5 When students recognise themselves to be in executive control of
learning, or when they perceive mastery goals set by the teacher, they
have greater motivation for the task at hand.
Two crucial implications of these propositions are generally absent from the
junior science classroom in Solomon Islands:
1. The tar getting of new teaching material at the level of
students' prior foundational knowledge.
2. The teaching of learner-control skills (both for the
acquisition of knowledge and the control of executive
/meta-cognitive procedures).
The tailoring of new science teaching material to students' established
schemata is a relatively simple matter in the higher forms, as there is a common
curriculum taught in all secondary schools from year to year, and promotion
to the next form level is conditional upon satisfactory achievement of learning
goals for the previous year. Appropriate targetting of new material is the
responsibility of the classroom teacher, and those with some experience are
able to do so very competently.
91
Difficulty arises with Form 1 students, who enter secondary school from a
broad range of educational backgrounds: those from Honiara primary schools
have had considerable exposure to science both at school and through the
media, whereas others from remote village schools are likely to interpret
natural phenomena in terms of 'custom stories' (myths and legends). The
majority of students entering Form 1 in the Solomons' 20-odd secondary
schools every year probably understand the operational principles of the
world around them considerably more erroneously than some of the children
encountered by researchers in Western countries, such as Osborne and
Wittrock (1983). Any serious attempt at addressing deficiencies in science
education in Melanesia must include a study on children's ideas about
science. It may well be that the gap between the knowledge of the village
primary school student and the content of the secondary science syllabus is so
huge that students shy away from attempts at assimilation of concepts which
might be opposite in nature to what they already believe (e.g. assimilation
of the theory of evolution with traditional creation beliefs).
A research study on Class 6 students' ideas about science appears to be an
urgent need, the results of which would assist Form 1 teachers with their
targetting of new material, enabling students to more easily assimilate new
concepts with old: an important first step on the road to learner-control.
Any proposal to teach specific learner-control skills is unlikely to gain
widespread support in Solomon Islands in the short term due to prevailing
attitudes in the greater educational community. By and large, Solomon
Islanders who have studied in the fields of humanities, commerce and applied
technology at overseas universities have done well, and gone on to become
successful community figures. Hence the notion that the education system
is functioning satisfactorily is generated, and the poor performance of
undergraduate science students is often put down to personal failure and swept
under the mat. It is unlikely that global reforms of the national curricula to
include metacognitive skills training will be initiated as long as it is perceived
that science is the only area not performing under the 'otherwise-successful'
current system. My suspicion is that a problem perceived as being exclusive
to science will be left to science teachers alone to address.
Fortunately, the introduction of science classroom reforms in Solomon
92
Islands is not unrealistic due to the function of the Science Curriculum Panel.
All science teachers in Solomon Islands are automatic members of the Panel,
which advises the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development
on science curriculum issues. While the Government has the ultimate say over
curriculum content, the Science Curriculum Panel's recommendations repre-
sent the best advice available to the Minister and are generally rubber-
stamped. Strategies for implementation of the curriculum are left entirely up
to the science teachers themselves, and are discussed at fortnightly Panel
meetings in Honiara during term. Decisions made at meetings are recom-
mended for implementation in all Solomon Islands science classrooms.
Collectively, science teachers in Solomon Islands are chartered to teach the
science curriculum in such a way as they judge will maximise the performance
of their students, both in the short and long term. Solomon Islands teachers are
the envy of their peers in many a neighbouring country, to have such a direct
say in what science is to be taught in schools, and how.
Within the Panel framework, it is entirely feasible for science teachers to
introduce their own programme for the teaching of metacognitive skills and
learning strategies.
Learning strategies may be taught within the context of normal subject
teaching (embedded) or in separate classes (detached), the latter being the
common practice in most schools promoting student control (Weinstein &
Mayer, 1986). White (1986) however has proposed embedded teaching of
learning strategies to be more effective, emphasising the importance of
relating executive control procedures to the immediate tasks at hand.
The detached approach to the teaching of learning strategies is not a viable
proposition for science departments in Solomon Islands schools. Already
strained by an eternal shortage of trained staff and daily timetables bursting
at the seams, schools are unlikely to attract domestic funding for 'extra'
subjects.
The alternative and realistic option is to implement embedded teaching of
metacognition and learning strategies by in-service training of existing
science teachers.
9 3
If the Science Curriculum Panel were to commission a study to identify the
critical learning skills lacking in Solomon Islanders entering tertiary science
programmes, a list could be drawn up of specific strategies and skills which
need to be taught within the secondary science curriculum. The Panel could
then look at various ways of subsuming the teaching of these strategies and
skills into everyday science lessons. This could mean writing a new draft
curriculum, or publishing addenda for each existing form level syllabus.
Systematic teaching of metacognitive control processes and active learning strate-
gies throughout the secondary science curriculum would equip students with six
years of preparation for independent learning in a regional science faculty. Such a
student-control paradigm would undoubtedly empower Solomon Islands students
for the challenge of undergraduate science studies, and hopefully give the nation a
greater return on its investment in education.
References
Ames, C , & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement Goals in the Classroom:
Students' Learning Strategies and Motivation Processes. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 80, 3, 260-267.
Ames, R. (1983). Help-seeking and achievement orientation: Perspectives from
Attribution Theory. In B. DePaulo, A. Nadler & J. Fisher (Eds), New Directions
in Helping. Vol 2: Help-seeking, pp 165-186. New York: Academic Press.
Bloom, B.S. (1976). Human characteristics and school learning. McGraw-
Hill.
Cantor, N. (1953). The teaching-learning process. New York: Dryden.
Evans, G. (1988). Getting Learning Under Control. Australian Educational
Researcher, 15, 1, 1-17.
Flanders, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teacher behaviour. Massachusetts: Addison
Wesley.
9 4
Fradd, M. & Crawford, N. (1986). Report on the visit by the Heads of Science
and Mathematics, King George VI School, Honiara, to the University of the
South Pacific, Fiji, and Capricornia Institute of Advanced Education,
Queensland. Solomon Islands Government Publication.
Kinzie, M.B., & Sullivan, H.J. (1989). Continuing Motivation, Learner
Control, and CAI. Education Technology Research and Design, 37, 2, 5-14.
Larkin, J.H. & Reif, F. (1976). "Analysis and Teaching of a General Skill for
Studying Scientific Text" , Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 432-.
Maher, C.A. & Schwebel, M. (1986). Facilitating Cognitive Development:
Issues and Implications. Special Services in the Schools, 3, 1-2, 193-209.
Meece, J.L., Blumenfield, P.C., & Hoyle, R.H. (1988). Students Goal
Orientations and Cognitive Engagement in Classroom Activities. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 80, 4, 514-523.
Ninnes, P.M. (1991). "Culture and Learning in Western Province, Solomon
Islands". Unpublished M.A. thesis. Flinders University of South Australia,
Bedford Park.
Osborne, R.J. & Wittrock, M.C. (1983). "Learning Science: A Generative
Process". Science Education, 67, 4, 489-508.
Tennyson, R.D. & Cocchiarella, M.J. (1986): "An Empirically Based Instruc-
tional Design Theory For Teaching Concepts", Review of Educational R e -
search, 56, 1, pp 40-71.
Tyler, R.W. (1950). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
Weinstein, C.E. & Mayer, R.E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies.
In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching (Third edition).
New York: MacMillan.
95
White, R.T. (1986). "The Origins of P.E.E.L." In Baird & Mitchell (eds):
Improving the quality of teaching and learning. Melbourne: Monash
University Press.
Wittrock, M.C. (1974). Learning as a generative process. Educational
Psychology, 11, 87-95.
96
|
