Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
By
Nelson Dordelly-Rosales
Graduate Student
Educational Communications and Technology
E-mail:
nrd537@mail.usask.ca
Technology and Humanistic 2
Table of Contents
Introduction
Page
1. What are the prevailing conflicting conceptions to curriculum?........... 4
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………. 29
Bibliography
Technology and Humanistic 3
Introduction
This paper deals with three issues that are usually taken for granted in education:
that different conceptions of curriculum are necessary for education to thrive, that
technology is used with different conceptions of curriculum to enhance education, and
that technology and humanistic educational orientations are conflicting conceptions of
curriculum.
This paper proves that notable authors have identified diverse conceptions among
educators’ thought and that technology is used with different curriculum orientations to
enhance education. The prevailing conceptions of curriculum: Humanistic, Social-
Reconstructionist, Technology, and the Academic orientation have undergone a
significant evolution, and additional curriculum orientations have emerged (i.e., the
development of cognitive processes, and the eclectic posture). The curriculum decision-
making process must necessarily be multifaceted using technology in different ways. The
integration of different curriculum conceptions has been successfully developed in
education among outstanding institutions of different countries.
This paper has three general purposes. One is to examine the prevailing conflicting
orientations to curriculum. The second purpose is to analyze how technology is used with
different curriculum orientations. A third purpose is to demonstrate, through practical
examples, that integrating technology and the humanistic curriculum conception has been
possible, and successfully developed in the light of a constructivist tendency.
approaches to questions persistently asked in education: What can and should be taught
to whom, when, and how? (Bobbit 1928) and what goals, how to organize learning
experiences, how to evaluate the student? (Tyler 1949). Every curriculum represents a
In the history of curriculum as a field of study (Short, 1991), the scholars have
examined different conceptions and have attempted to build taxonomies to describe their
academic efforts. According to Eisner & Vallance (1974), Posner (2004) and McNeil
(1985, 2006), among others, there are conflicting curriculum conceptions that teachers
should examine before getting involved in educational endeavors. It is assumed that every
educator working at some level of education has a curriculum orientation and that every
knowledge and a wealth of experiences. Each orientation shows how educators perceive
forms of thought that each teacher brings to the educational process influence how that
Eisner & Vallance (1974) said that “controversy in educational discourse most
often reflects a basic conflict in priorities concerning the form and content of curriculum
and the goals toward which schools should strive; the intensity of the conflict and the
conflicting conceptions of curriculum” (p.2). These authors, rather than presenting only
Technology and Humanistic 5
one prescription or only one way of thinking, they present five curriculum conceptions:
develop a repertoire of cognitive skills and forms of thought that are applicable to a wide
range of intellectual problems). (2) Technology (it is preoccupied with the development
bring the system under control so that goal it seeks to attain can be achieved). (3) Self-
(curriculum is conceived to be an active force having direct impact on the fabric of its
human and social context). (5) Curriculum as Academic Rationalism (the major goal of
academic rationalists is to enable students to use and appreciate the ideas and works that
More recently, Posner (2004) identified and analyzed the following curriculum
is the development of the intellect and the disciplines of knowledge constitute the
content best suited to this purpose; subject matter should represent domains of
disciplined and systematic inquiry). (4) Behavioral (the content of the curriculum
development of the mind is the central purpose of education; that is, people should learn
how to make sense of the world and to think more productively and creatively.
curriculum: (1) The humanistic (the goals of education are dynamic personal processes
related to the ideals of self-actualization, personal growth, integrity, and autonomy). (2)
The social- reconstructionist (the goal of education is to develop the social, political, and
economic spheres of society; the curriculum should challenge the social order; learners
should understand how the curriculum is used to consolidate power and to define
society). (3) The technology (in 2006 McNeil changed this conception for the systemic
materials in the achievement of specified ends or purposes. To this author, one premise of
systemic curriculum is that the major components of an education system must work
together to guide the process of helping students achieve higher levels of understanding:
If system components are not aligned, the system will be fragmented, will send mixed
messages, and will be less effective. (4) The academic (the nucleus of knowledge and the
chief content or subject matter of instruction are academic subjects such as, language and
literature, mathematics, the natural sciences, history, social sciences, and arts).
From the psychological point of view, many authors emphasize in the development
book analyzes how to develop cognition from different learning and instructional
others). This author explains that these are different theories that represent choices as to
Technology and Humanistic 7
how to approach the education of students, and that these theories are “provisional and
From the works of Eisner and Vallance in 1974 to the works of Posner in 2004,
Learning
Driscoll (1994) Theories
conceptions do not necessarily exhaust the ways in which educational positions can be
especially the technology and the humanistic approaches has been an alternative: A
personal conception is necessary in education with the expectation that it should serve as
undergone a significant evolution in the last years and an eclectic posture or integration
seems interesting and worth doing. Why? Because curriculum is an interpretive term –
because it has many meanings that are not anchored in any specific philosophical
perspective that integrates different assumptions (focused on how to make students more
active and collaborative problem-solvers, and how to think more productively and
for “wisdom.” The inherent purpose of curriculum decision making is to create for
teachers and students a learning environment that embodies what the authors identify as
the “democratic good life” (p.12). After briefly examining the current condition of U.S.
To consider the “good conduct” and “enduring values” implications and consequences of
their decision; to think about the relationship between educational means and ends; and to
engage in sophisticated practical reasoning (Henderson and Kesson, 2004, p. ix).
offer for their readers the “5C’s of wise curriculum judgments: compassion,
collaboration, character, challenge, and calling” (p. 12). It is through these 5C’s that
curriculum decision makers can remain focused on securing the democratic good life for
Technology and Humanistic 9
themselves and their students. They encourage curriculum decision-makers to rise to the
compassionately working together with diverse others. Through their explanation of the
5Cs, the authors provide for the reader a more clearly articulated examination of the
education. Technology has entered people’s daily personal and professional live through
word processing, e-mail, online libraries, video, DVD-CD’s multimedia, and the Web,
among many others. Technology has been successfully used to achieve the goals of
education; however, teachers have diverse ideas about how technology should be used in
teaching and learning. McNeil (1985, 2006) identified four different conflictive
instructional design and technology are closely interlocked for educational purposes
Technology and Humanistic 10
(Driscoll, 1994). Bloom (1956) explains three basic processes: cognitive, affective and
processes, Magoulas (2006) in Brazil has developed the “Modeling Learner’s Cognitive
theory and the Bloom’s taxonomy. This case is concerned with making the instruction
suitable to the individual learner’s characteristics. The researcher proved that technology
is used to automate the learners’ Cognitive Ability Level (CAEL) diagnostic based on the
Gagne and Briggs (1979) suggested that learning tasks for intellectual skills can be
rule application, and problem solving. The primary significance of the hierarchy is to
addition, Gagne and Briggs’ theory outlines nine instructional events and corresponding
cognitive processes:
To Gagne and Briggs (1979), these events should satisfy or provide the necessary
conditions for learning and serve as the basis for designing instruction and selecting
appropriate media (computer software, multimedia shareware, TV, world wide websites,
Technology and Humanistic 11
etc). The following Graphic # 2 shows examples of software designed to help the
students in their learning processes. Educational Technology then it is defined as the use
of accumulated knowledge to process resources to meet human needs and improve the
Graphic # 2
Software
Learning Theory
Example
Stimulus/Response Theory
“Outnumbered!”
(B.F.Skinner)
“Welcome to Events of Instruction
Physics” (Robert Gagne)
Zone of Proximal Development
“Study Works”
(Lev Vygotsky)
“Decisions! Democratic Principles in Education
Decisions!” (John Dewey)
Discovery Learning
“Operation Frog”
(Jerome Bruner)
“Science Toolkit:
Constructivist Theory
Earthquake”
(Jean Piaget )
Module
Source: Conway, 1997
techniques of teaching and learning. Thanks to this support, educators are able to
accomplish behavioral and cognitive goals in ways they never could before (Bruer,
tools, a demand for new methodologies that embrace both cognitive and humanistic
perspectives.
Technology and Humanistic 12
processes are recognized by many educators. Educators and students are building their
own social capital through technology, creating communities of learning and developing
instructional designs. Teachers and students are all using technology to varying extents.
In this sense, Panitz (2001) has listed distinct benefits of using technology in socialization
– academic, social, and psychological – that can be expected from the use of groups.
Diverse school organizations and universities that strive for high social capital are
using technology for cultural fit, lasting relationships, and collaboration. Many cases of
reported in the literature. Roberts in his book “Online Collaborative Learning,” analyzes
diverse cases, among them, the case “An Intuitive Approach to Virtual Learning
Environment” which describes flexible e-learning and add intuitive features for
The Syracuse University’s experience described by the researchers Hurd and Stein
(2004) in their recent book “Building and Sustaining Learning Communities” is another
excellent example in which technology is used with different approaches for socialization
and social-reconstruction: creating an online learning community, leading the change, the
relationships, among others. In this case, the researchers have demonstrated that social
developing the academic and social skills necessary to achieve their goals. As part of
service working with students at a public system at Syracuse” (p. 5) The Syracuse
University’s efforts to expand learning communities are one important way in which the
professors seek to build a wide variety of educational opportunities and all students
table, the issue of how technology helps to develop social capital in education, how they
can through educational technology come to know and trust one another, and become
agents of social change to improve or enhance their own communities? Analyzing the
answers to these questions, as a graduate student of this program I was able to expand my
own conceptions. Diverse curriculum frameworks are required to enable all students to
achieve their maximum potential literacy and, to create their own knowledge, to develop
in directions unique to their own needs, interests, abilities, and perspectives; that is, to
students constructs new ideas or concepts based on current knowledge. In this version of
1996, p.30). This latter goal is, in part, achieved through apprenticeship education or
Technology and Humanistic 14
this way, the students acquire a measure of scientific and technological connoisseurship
a red of social interaction, and to pursue some invention projects based on their needs and
learning theory and the subject matter (the disciplines) - guides the development and
different plans for the systematic use of various devices and media or a designed
this applied technology are: Computer assisted instruction, systems approaches using
The use of technology in the academic curriculum focuses on what to teach and how
to help teachers with the purpose of transmitting the culture and the academic subject
matter to the students: how to better transmit the professional body of knowledge to the
students? In this sense, Tyler (1949) has explained his “technology” for curriculum and
instructional planning. According to him, if teachers were able to know and to use
curriculum planning processes which are compatible with the goals they choose to
implement, then the congruence between the goals and practices of technology education
variables and procedures have gained great influence over the kinds of factors used in
Technology and Humanistic 15
both judging and developing learning opportunities. Technology can make the practice
and drill activities associated with the academic rationalism conception more effective:
The technology can tutor, but the teacher still serves as the expert to clarify subject matter
and to extend ideas through follow-up discussions and seminars” (White & Purdom, p.
Summary, n.d.).
the capacity of society to produce goods and services, and which is embodied in
section (e-learning) creates an infrastructure for the digital representation of the new
curriculum and thus, represents the prerequisite for the second section, content. The
general goal is the realization of the digital representation of the new curricula for human
To speak of technology and humanistic education in the same phrase may seem for
some people paradoxical. The question is: Are indeed educational technology and
humanistic perspectives are far from being a paradox; they are in fact intimately
argued to be) fundamental and stable” (2001, p.1). These humanistic professionals, in
fact, regard these issues as of the nature of being human. According to them, this issue
technology for people at different ages and the design of various educational technologies
(computer software, multimedia shareware, TV, World Wide Web sites, etc.) from the
perspective of basic research and theory in human cognitive and social development.
Developments of the latter decades of the last century and emerging issues of the
education together and explore how they are related (Francis, 2001). In fact, technology
includes a wide range of human activities and can be seen as distinctly human in that it
makes full and direct use of some of our most powerful human faculties. Rogers (1983),
the author of “Freedom to Learn” and a leading scholar in the humanistic curriculum
orientation, is well known as a pioneer in using most recent technology as a tool for
learning and for research. His recorded interviews and sessions have become world-
follow the spirit of Rogers and thus, appears particularly worthwhile and legitimate from
a cultural viewpoint.
Search for Learning Environments” (Magoulas, 2006). This case deals with a new
technique, called dominant meanings, and shows how it can be used to make
Technology and Humanistic 17
individualized a query and search result. The main goal is to adapt information to the
particular needs of individual learners. According to the researcher, to meet the students’
needs educators must enrich their knowledge bases with information from a variety of
resources.
technology in depth the ways they affect students’ being. Underlying this issue is a belief
that technology is a general and knowable system and the issue, freedom to learn, implies
the convergence of all humanistic principles which guide educational technology built on
intellectual curiosity, on the power of critical thought, and on certain optimism about how
the technique and the human are integrated and mutually self supporting.
and they have considered that “Technology” and “Humanist” are antagonist positions.
The situation has changed today: technology is used with different conceptions to
complementary and they integrate curriculum for “wisdom” using technology that best
support the students as active and collaborative problem-solvers. Technology has been a
response of many human needs. The advances in this sense have made it possible to reach
explains the process of how to develop the educational process: according to him it
involves using data about the learners themselves, their society, and subject-area experts
to develop the purposes which the school should seek to attain. Next, a selection of
goals. After they are selected, they are organized in a logical manner, hoping to be
obtaining the maximum cumulative effect. The curriculum is then improved and refined
for designing, testing, and operating schools as educational systems (Eisner and Vallance,
1974). The focus is on the more practical problem of efficiently packaging and presenting
interconnects with the cognitive processes orientation in its focus of attention. The
students who are given the freedom to learn, freedom to explore areas based on their
personal interests, and who are accompanied in their striving for solutions by a
supportive, understanding facilitator, not only achieve higher academic results, but also
skills (Rogers, 1983). This approach, also known as experiential learning, requires
specific personal attitudes on the side of the instructor who takes over the role of a
facilitator; these attitudes are highly transparent, open communication, positive regard
towards students and the seeking for deep understanding (Rogers, 1983). This orientation
is related to the experiential and the constructivist in which the focus is on answering the
questions: “What experiences will lead to the healthy growth of the individual? And How
can people learn to make sense of the world and to think more productively and
creatively” (Posner, 2004, p.45). Educators within this orientation are person centered,
autonomy and growth oriented (Eisner and Vallance, 1974), and the function of the
individual learner” (p.106). Thus, the question is, how can the use of technology best
Technology and Humanistic 20
the personal development; the work of educators is to essentially fit the curriculum to the
students’ needs and interests as they mature. The focus of the humanistic curriculum is on
the “capabilities of the student to develop thinking (in the critical sense of it)” (p.116).
individual discover things for himself/herself. Within this orientation, personal content
and enriching experience is a major focus of concern. It emphasizes personal growth, but
the development of personal integrity and autonomy is seen as problematic in the face of
Sagor (1993) has identified five central feelings that are crucial to an individual’s
emotional well-being: these are the need to feel competent, the need to feel that they
belong, the need to feel useful, the need to feel potent, and the need to feel optimistic.
These five feelings (competence, belonging, usefulness, potency, and optimism), should
facilitate learning in the following areas: Self Actualization Needs (full potential morality,
Needs (self respect, personal worth, autonomy, self esteem, confidence achievement,
respect of others, respect for others), Social Needs (love, friendship, comradeship, sexual
(warmth, shelter, food, breathing, water, sleep, sex, homeostasis, excretions). Thus,
curriculum makers in the humanistic orientation should deal with these needs and should
facilitate the means and ways for the students to achieve their goals within a “freedom to
learn” environment.
Each curriculum orientation offers a coherent view of the “what” and/or the “how”
that are not anchored in any specific philosophical doctrine – the decision-making
education.
As Schwab (1978) has pointed out, curricula based on a single orientation have
limitations due to the diversity of thoughts and actions of people involved in the process
of education. In order to repair possible limitations of each orientation, this author offers
the “eclectic” as an approach to curriculum. In order to avoid the tunnel vision associated
with any specific orientation, he calls for plurality. He challenges any curriculum to be
plural in order to address each of what he calls the four places of education, i.e., the
learner, the teacher, the subject matter, and the milieu or context (social and institutional).
Technology and Humanistic 22
In this sense, the book “Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice by
Roberts (2004) examines several cases based on plurality of thought: (1) “Supporting
online collaborative learning environment offer many insights for improving education).
Muukkonen and others (in which three metaphors of learning –acquisition, participation
and knowledge creation – together constitute a broad base for envisioning the future
Learning”, (2003) edited by Barbara Wasson and others, addresses the reciprocal
relationship between technology and human learning. According to the editors of this
knowledge and perspectives on human activity and over time, these artifacts play an
important role in human evolution and cultural development. For these scholars,
perspective, the humanistic and the socio-cultural perspective, emphasize change as the
its double-edged focus: as a mediator for change, and the focus on understanding learning
Technology and Humanistic 23
change over time. Among the issues discussed by the researchers in this book are:
democratic environments.” The contributions of this book aim at improving the quality of
Diverse cases from different countries have proven how conflicting orientations to
curriculum have been successfully integrated. The use of Technology has supported in
different ways a curriculum in which students are active and collaborative problem-
solvers. The projects and initiatives selected for this paper are intended to be only a few
In Canada, for instance, two excellent websites show two Canadian Museums
which stand for different aspects of Canadian life using technology and humanistic
to be more comprehensive which contains various fields of Canadian life through history-
from celebrities to learning; from fashion to disease, etc. While the second website
and technology through various knowledge and interesting activities. Thanks to the
power of the World Wide Web, and the prevalence of English and French as international
In the United States of America, two excellent web sites, similar to the above, were
recently developed: “The IEEE Virtual Museum: History Center Using Web-based
the State University of New Jersey, and the ScienCentral, Inc., of New York. The
structure of the IEEE Virtual Museum integrates technology and humanistic approaches
for instructional purposes to promote Engineering at the K-12 Level and for an
bridge the gap between these two disciplines at the pre-college level. The IEEE has
chosen the World Wide Web as its medium because of its potential to reach the largest
number of educators and their students worldwide. In this way, science and technology
teachers learn how to bring the humanities into their classrooms, while humanities
(http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/history_center/).
successful with the new curriculum of the engineering faculty at the University of Vienna
researchers Motschnig-Pitrik and Holzinger (2002) involves advanced courses and web
design. The purpose has been to assess the relevance of combining Student-Centered
Teaching(S-C) as developed by the humanist Rogers (1969), with the use of the Internet
Student-Centered Teaching and New Media (any digital media objects that include
interactivity and are digitally distributed) in order to ensure effectiveness while equipping
teaching and learning with more and life-long personal meaning. According to the
researchers, there exists empirical evidence proving that students who are given the
freedom to explore areas based on their personal interests, and who are accompanied in
learning material. In this process, the facilitator (or the teacher) plays and important role
and s/he requires qualifications and social skills being very different from those needed
for conventional teaching. Due to the fact that the Internet opens up vast knowledge and
communication sources, this integrative approach largely frees the “instructor” from
acting as a pure knowledge transmitter, and it thus provides room for personal and group
processes in the presence phases. This case thereby optimally supports Student-Centered
Teaching, being directed towards learning as a whole person including intellect as well
as feelings, also known as experiential learning. “[I]n fact, all course participants
unanimously appreciated the convenient access to their shared documents, allowing them
to coordinate their cooperative project work between the presence phases and use the
latter for discussion, presentation, feedback, etc.,” (Motschnig-Pitrik and Holzinger (2002
p.1). Thus, students are able to share documents freely on the web such as to stay up to
date in their cooperative work. The experience of integrating curriculum orientations has
been so successful that researchers Motschnig-Pitrik and Holzinger (2002) have also
Technology and Humanistic 26
intended to develop and start to pursue strategies for introducing SCeL in other courses at
the department of computer science, medicine and business informatics as well as the
department of psychology at the University of Vienna. Thus, the basic idea underlying
exploit the advantages of the two approaches to achieve as deeper learning processes,
personal growth, social skills, and a higher degree of flexibility. The humanistic person-
centered approach proposed by the American scholar Carl Rogers (1902 – 1983) inspired
The key according to Rogers for integrating both approaches is the role of a good
coach who needs skills to pose good questions, activate students, mediate discussions,
visualize the results of group processes, act according to the group's feeling or thinking
about a situation, and transparently shift between his/her multiple roles and
Student-Centered Teaching, but perhaps most important is that the facilitator or coach
holds and communicate the three attitudinal conditions, namely realness, acceptance, and
match the personal attitudes and values of the facilitator (Rogers, 1983). Facilitators who
feel comfortable with the required attitudinal conditions/interpersonal values, and enjoy
Recently, Ghaoui (2004) from Liverpool John Moores University, UK, has
Approaches” in which she presents fourteen different real cases of integrating the
Technology and Humanistic 27
Germany, France, the UK, Japan, Australia, USA, Canada, Poland, Greece, Turkey, and
Portugal. The author highlights the importance of E-education (also known as online – or
e-learning), its human factors and innovative approaches “to promote the continuous
need to push for technology which serve people, instead on the other way around”
(Gahoui, 2004, p.viii). Motivated by this challenge, her book aims to emphasize the need
solutions from human computer interaction (HCI) research and principles, education,
The practical cases analyzed by this author highlight the human factors, the
innovation, and the inter-disciplinary orientation applied in the practice with diverse uses
of technology (focused on e-learning). Among these cases are the following: (1.) “An
(ODL) programs.” This case presents a holistic evaluation approach to ODL, taking into
Platform: Realizing of a Social ware with integration of the User as Editor’s concept.”
This case demonstrates that different information services are integrated with components
for collaboration and personalization into an open user adaptive scientific portal. (3.)
case shows a humanistic model involving three user groups: teachers, students and
coordinators.
Technology and Humanistic 28
orientation). The cases discussed in this book are from UK, Brazil, Egypt, Canada,
and Denmark. The authors assure that Web-Based education has influenced educational
facilitated informal and workplace learning. In this context, learning takes place
asynchronously in group and with minimal traditional instructions being provided by the
course facilitators. This has been achieved because of the benefits of relationship and
Conclusion
conceptions, becomes necessary to approach the goals, contents, strategies and forms of
Although they require different teaching methods and different uses of technology, they
all have common goals: they interlock closely and integrate extensively to help the
students to fulfill their needs and to be engaged in a learning process. The decision-
to the needs of the students. They should be prepared to think more productively and
providing some freedom to learn. They should use the technology that best supports a
wisdom curriculum so that students learn to make sense of the world more productively
and creatively with a common goal: securing the democratic good life for themselves and
their students. This integrated posture encourages decision makers, teachers and students
Finally, with respect to the practical cases from different countries, the increasing
desire of prospective students to undertake programs and courses via Internet and access
online demonstrates that the complexity of mutual interaction between the learners as
Technology and Humanistic 30
human beings and knowledge through technology is one of the things that make
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Bruce, F. and Dodson, E. (2001) Technology and the Human Spirit: Confronting the New
Millenium. [Electronic Version]. Association of Humanistic Psychology. Retrieved Jan.
18th, 2006 from http://www.ahpweb.org/involve/centers/technologyandspirit.html
Driscoll, M.(1994). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). Cognition and curriculum reconsidered, 2e, New York: Teachers
College Press.
Gagne, R. and Briggs, L. (1979). Principles of Instructional Design. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
Gardner, Howard (1983) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, New
York: Basic Books.
Gardner, Howard (1999) Intelligence Reframed. Multiple intelligences for the 21st
century, New York: Basic Books.
Gendron, B. (1977) Technology and the Human Condition, NY: St.Martin. p. 23
Ghaoui, C. (2004). E-Education Applications: Human Factors and Innovative
Approaches. Hershey PA: Idea Group Inc.
Hewit, T. W. (2006). Understanding and Shaping Curriculum: What We Teach and Why.
Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hurd N. S. and Stein R. F. (2004). Building and Sustaining Learning Communities. The
Syracuse University Experience. MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.
Panitz, T. (2001). Learning Together: Keeping Teachers and Students Actively Involved
by Writing Across the Curriculum A Source Book of Ideas and Writing Assignments.
Stillwater, Oklahoma: New Forums Press.
Roberts, Tim S. (2004) Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice (London:
Idea Group Inc.)
Technology and Humanistic 32
Rogers, C.R. (1983). Freedom to learn for the 80s. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
Redmond A. (2004). The Education Living Learning Community in Hurd. S.N. and
Stein, R.F. Building and Sustaining Learning Communities (p.190)
Schwab, J. (1978). Education and the Structure of the Disciplines. In J. Westbury & N.
Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and liberal education. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Schwab, J. (1971). The Practical: Arts of Eclectic. School Review, 79, 493-542.
Short Edmund C. (1991). Forms of Curriculum Inquiry. New York: State University of
New York.
Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum Development: Theory and practice. New York: Harcourt
Brace and World.
Tim S. R. (Ed.). (2004). Online Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice. London:
Idea Group Inc.
Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S., and Hoppe, U. (Ed.). (2003). Designing for Change in
Networked Learning Environments, Proceedings of the International Conference on
Computer Support for Collaborative Learning. Computer –Supported Collaborative
Learning. Netherlands: Kugler Academic Publishers.
White, J.A. and Purdom, D. A. (n.d.) Viewing Modern Instructional Technology through
Conceptions of Curriculum [Electronic Version]. Retrieved Jan 18,th 2007, from
http://gozips.uakron.edu/~jsavery/emerging/it-and-curriculum.htm