Education by competences, curriculum and didactic: case study in two countries, Colombia and the Dominican Republic
Authors
Izaskun Uzcanga
Centro Greta-STEAM/Fundación Propagas, Instituto Tecnológico de Santo Domingo (INTEC), Dominican Republic
[email protected]Detalles
Published
Abstract
The STEM program (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) have been increasing in order to promote better education for all in these areas considered critical in building capacity for innovation and competitiveness in the countries and to form citizens who can participate responsibly in a democracy. In Colombia the STEM program, Little Scientists, was born in 2000. In 2011 begins a brother working in the Dominican Republic who has been strengthening an inter-agency team designed to promote improved basic education in STEM. At work strategy paper presents the role they have played academics, business and government actors. Also some of the learning achieved are illustrated. The fact of having developed the work in two countries, network with more than 10 countries where this type of activity takes place, can outline strategies and best practices to consider.
Keywords
How to Cite
Downloads
Metrics
References
Abell, S., Rogers, M., Deborah, H., & Gagnon, M. (2009). Preparing the next generation of science teacher educators: a model for developing PCK for teaching science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-93.
Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty. New York: Crown Publishers.
Baudelot, C., & Establet, R. (2009). L’élitisme républicain. París: Seuil.
Brown, J. Collings, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational research, 18(1), 32-42.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education. Washington: American Educational Research Association.
Davis, E., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
Duque, M., & Celis, J. (2012). Educación en ingeniería para la ciudadanía, la innovación y la competitividad en Iberoamérica. Matemáticas, ciencias, tecnología e ingeniería y el rol de las Facultades de Ingeniería. Bogotá: ASIBEI.
Duschl, R., Schweingruber, H. & Shouse, A. (2007). Taking science to school: learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Washington: NAP.
Dylan, W. (2011). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington: Solution Tree Press.
Farrell, D., & Grant, A. (2005). Addressing China’s looming talent shortage: McKinsey.
Furman, M. (2009). Planificación inversa: Expedición ciencia argentina. Recuperado de http:// expedicionciencia.org.ar/la-institucion/
Gough, A. (2014). STEM policy and science education: scientistic curriculum and sociopolitical silences. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1-14. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11422-014-9590-3
Grossman, P. (1990). The making of a teacher: teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Jayaram, K., Moffit, A., & Scott, F. (2012). Breaking the habit of ineffective professional development for teachers: McKinsey. Recuperado de https://mck.co/2Mx5wvj
Harlen, W. (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education: Association for Science Education. Recuperado de https://www.ase.org.uk/?
Li, M. & Shavelson, R. (2002). Validating the link between knowledge and test Items from a protocol analysis. Paper presented at the AERA.
Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95-132). Springer, Dordrecht.
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2013). Programa fortalecimiento de la cobertura con calidad para el sector rural, Fase II: sustentos del programa y estrategias para la implementación 2013. Bogotá: Ministerio de Educación Nacional de Colombia.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington: National Academies Press.
OECD. (2013). OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy. Sweden 2012. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2014). OECD Reviews of Innovation Policy. Colombia 2014. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Putman, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational research, 29(1), 4-15.
Schwab, K. (2012). The Global competitiveness Report 2012-2013. Ginebra: World Economic Forum.
Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational researcher, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300302
Shulman, L. (1993). Teaching as community property: Putting an end to pedagogical solitude. Research library, 25(6).
Suchaut, B., & Bougneres, A. (2014). Sept minutes pour apprendre à lire : à la recherche du temps perdu. Document de travail, École d’économie de Paris, Institut des Politiques Publiques.
The World Bank. (2010). Innovation Policy. A Guide for Developing Countries. USA: The World Bank.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by design. New Jersey: Pearson.
Wince-Smith, D. (2005). Innovate America : Thriving in a world of challenge and change. In Proceedings of the Global Innovation Ecosystem 2007 Symposium. Recuperado de https://bit. ly/2wptTjx
Worth, K., Saltier, E., & Duque, M. (2009). Design and implementing inquiry based science units for primary school. París: La main à la pâte.