Learning progression
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Introduction
Learning progression describes the "path" or "islands" that students travel as the progress toward mastery of some learning goal.
Duncan and Hmelo-Silver (2009:606-7) [1] define learning progressions in terms of four components:
- First, LPs are focused on a few foundational and generative disciplinary ideas and practices. [...]
- Second, these progressions are bounded by an upper anchor describing what students are expected to know and be able to do by the end of the progression; this anchor is informed by analyses of the domain as well as societal expectations. They are also bounded by a lower anchor describing the developers’ assumptions about the prior knowledge and skills of learners as they enter the progression. [...]
- Third, LPs describe varying levels of achievement as the intermediate steps between the two anchors. These levels are derived from syntheses of existing research on student learning in the domain as well as empirical studies of the progression (such as cross-sectional studies and teaching experiments). [...]
- Fourth, LPs are mediated by targeted instruction and curriculum. They are not developmentally inevitable and as such do not describe learning as it naturally develops in the absence of scaffolded curriculum and instruction. While the representation of LPs may seem rather linear, it is not assumed that students’ progress is a single developmental trajectory. Rather there may be several viable paths and the progress is likely more akin to ecological succession than to constrained lock-step developmental stages.
In a more recent article, Duncan (2015:411) [2] provides a more concise definition:
There are four key features that characterize LPs in science (Corcoran, Mosher, & Rogat, 2009). [3] First, LPs focus on a few central and generative disciplinary ideas and scientific practices. Second, LPs are bounded by a lower anchor that describes assumptions about the prior knowledge and skills of learners as they enter the progression and an upper anchor that describes the expected outcomes by the end of the progression. The upper anchor is predominantly determined by societal expectations and analyses of the domain. Third, LPs describe the development of students' understandings as intermediate steps or levels between the two anchors. These levels are derived from empirical studies and analyses of research on student learning in the domain. Fourth, LPs are mediated by targeted instruction and curriculum and are not developmentally inevitable. That is, they describe learning as facilitated by carefully designed learning environments.
Bibliography and references
Cited
- ↑ Duncan, R. G. and Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2009), Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 46: 606–609. doi:10.1002/tea.20316
- ↑ DUNCAN, R. G. and GOTWALS, A. W. (2015), A Tale of Two Progressions: On the Benefits of Careful Comparisons. Sci. Ed., 99: 410–416. doi:10.1002/sce.21167
- ↑ Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform. New York: Center on Continuous Instructional Improvement, Teachers College, Columbia University.