Teachers' perspectives on the implementation of expectations-based curricula /

This qualitative study examines teachers' experiences implementing new standardized curricula in Ontario schools. This new curricula contained several policy changes and an expectations based format which directed what knowledge and skills students were to demonstrate in each subject. This level of specificity of subject-content served to control teachers in relation to curricula; however, data suggested that at the same time, teachers had enormous flexibility in terms of pedagogy. Four secondary teachers who were implementing a Grade 10 course in the 2000-2001 school year participated in the study. The qualitative framework supported the researcher's emphasis on examining the participants' perspectives on the implementation of expectation-based curricula. Data collected included transcripts from interviews conducted with teacher participants and a representative of the Ontario Ministry of Education and Training, field notes, and a research journal. Many of the factors often cited in the literature as influencing implementation practices were found to have affected the participants' experiences of curriculum implementation: time, professional development, and teachers' beliefs, particularly concerning students. In addition, the format of the policy documents proved to both control and free teachers during the implementation process. Participants believed that the number of specific expectations did not provide them an opportunity to add content to the curriculum; at the same time, teachers also noted that the general format of the policy document allowed them to direct instruction to match students' needs and their own teaching preferences. Alignment between teachers' beliefs about education and their understanding of the new curriculum affected the ways in which many participants adapted during the implementation process.

An investigation of the nature and role of historicality in the thought of Dilthey and Heidegger

Introduction The question of the meaning, methods and philosophical manifestations of history is currently rife with contention. The problem that I will address in an exposition of the thought of Wilhelm Dilthey and Martin Heidegger, centers around the intersubjectivity of an historical world. Specifically, there are two interconnected issues. First, since all knowledge occurs to a person from within his or her historical age how can any person in any age make truth claims? In order to answer this concern we must understand the essence and role of history. Yet how can we come to an individual understanding ofwhat history is when the meanings that we use are themselves historically enveloped? But can we, we who are well aware of the knowledge that archaeology has dredged up from old texts or even from 'living' monuments of past ages, really neglect to notice these artifacts that exist within and enrich our world? Charges of wilful blindness would arise if any attempt were made to suggest that certain things of our world did not come down to us from the past. Thus it appears more important 2 to determine what this 'past' is and therefore how history operates than to simply derail the possibility for historical understanding. Wilhelm Dilthey, the great German historicist from the 19th century, did not question the existence of historical artifacts as from the past, but in treating knowledge as one such artifact placed the onus on knowledge to show itself as true, or meaningful, in light ofthe fact that other historical periods relied on different facts and generated different truths or meanings. The problem for him was not just determining what the role of history is, but moreover to discover how knowledge could make any claim as true knowledge. As he stated, there is a problem of "historical anarchy"!' Martin Heidegger picked up these two strands of Dilthey's thought and wanted to answer the problem of truth and meaning in order to solve the problem of historicism. This problem underscored, perhaps for the first time, that societal presuppositions about the past and present oftheir era are not immutable. Penetrating to the core of the raison d'etre of the age was an historical reflection about the past which was now conceived as separated both temporally and attitudinally from the present. But further than this, Heidegger's focus on asking the question of the meaning of Being meant that history must be ontologically explicated not merely ontically treated. Heidegger hopes to remove barriers to a genuine ontology by II 1 3 including history into an assessment ofprevious philosophical systems. He does this in order that the question of Being be more fully explicated, which necessarily for him includes the question of the Being of history. One approach to the question ofwhat history is, given the information that we get from historical knowledge, is whether such knowledge can be formalized into a science. Additionally, we can approach the question of what the essence and role of history is by revealing its underlying characteristics, that is, by focussing on historicality. Thus we will begin with an expository look at Dilthey's conception of history and historicality. We will then explore these issues first in Heidegger's Being and Time, then in the third chapter his middle and later works. Finally, we shall examine how Heidegger's conception may reflect a development in the conception of historicality over Dilthey's historicism, and what such a conception means for a contemporary historical understanding. The problem of existing in a common world which is perceived only individually has been philosophically addressed in many forms. Escaping a pure subjectivist interpretation of 'reality' has occupied Western thinkers not only in order to discover metaphysical truths, but also to provide a foundation for politics and ethics. Many thinkers accept a solipsistic view as inevitable and reject attempts at justifying truth in an intersubjective world. The problem ofhistoricality raises similar problems. We 4 -. - - - - exist in a common historical age, presumably, yet are only aware ofthe historicity of the age through our own individual thoughts. Thus the question arises, do we actually exist within a common history or do we merely individually interpret this as communal? What is the reality of history, individual or communal? Dilthey answers this question by asserting a 'reality' to the historical age thus overcoming solipsism by encasing individual human experience within the historical horizon of the age. This however does nothing to address the epistemological concern over the discoverablity of truth. Heidegger, on the other hand, rejects a metaphysical construel of history and seeks to ground history first within the ontology ofDasein, and second, within the so called "sending" of Being. Thus there can be no solipsism for Heidegger because Dasein's Being is necessarily "cohistorical", Being-with-Others, and furthermore, this historical-Being-in-the-worldwith- Others is the horizon of Being over which truth can appear. Heidegger's solution to the problem of solipsism appears to satisfy that the world is not just a subjective idealist creation and also that one need not appeal to any universal measures of truth or presumed eternal verities. Thus in elucidating Heidegger's notion of history I will also confront the issues ofDasein's Being-alongside-things as well as the Being of Dasein as Being-in-the-world so that Dasein's historicality is explicated vis-a-vis the "sending of Being" (die Schicken des S eins).

Landscape geochemical investigations in the vicinity of a lead deposit near Snertingdal, southern Norway

Landscape geochemical investigations were conducted upon portions of a natural uniform landscape in southern Norway. This consisted of sampling both soil profile samples and spruce tree twigs for the analysis of twelve chemical elements. These elements were cobalt, copper, nickel, lead, zinc, manganese, magnesium, iron, calcium, sodium, potassium and aluminum which were determined by atomic absorption analysis on standardized extraction techniques for both organic and inorganic materials. Two "landscape traverses" were chosen for a comparative study of the effects of varying landscape parameters upon the trace element distribution patterns throughout the landscape traverses. The object of this study was to test this method of investigation and the concept of an ideal uniform landscape under Norwegian conditions. A "control traverse" was established to represent uniform landscape conditions typical of the study area and was used to determine "normal" or average trace element distribution patterns. A "signal traverse" was selected nearby over an area of lead mineralization where the depth to bedrock is very small. The signal traverse provided an area of similar landscape conditions to those of the control traverse with significant differences in the bedrock configuration and composition. This study was also to determine the effect of the bedrock mineralization upon the distribution patterns of the twelve chemical elements within the major components of the two landscape traverses (i.e. soil profiles and tree branches). The lead distribution within the soils of the signal traverse showed localized accumulations of lead within the overburden with maximum values occurring within the organic A horizon of soil profile #10. Above average concentrations of lead were common within the signal traverse, however, the other elements studied were not significantly different from those averages determined throughout the soils of the control traverse. The spruce twig samples did not have corresponding accumulations of lead near the soil lead anomaly. This is attributable to the very localized nature of the lead dispersion pattern within the soils. This approach to the study of the geochemistry of a natural landscape was effective in establishing: a) average or "normal" trace element distribution patterns b) local variations in the landscape morphology and c) the effect of unusually high lead concentrations upon the geochemistry of the landscape (i.e. within the soil profiles and tree branches). This type of study provides the basis for further more intensive studies and serves only as a first approximation of the behaviour of elements within a natural landscape.

Expanding the research horizon in higher education : master's students' perceptions of research assistantships

This study explores how effectively current research assistantships impart research methods, skills, and attitudes; and how well those experiences prepare the next generation of researchers to meet the evolving needs of an ever-expanding, knowledge- based economy and society. Through personal interviews, 7 graduate student research assistants expressed their perceptions regarding their research assistantships. The open- ended interview questions emphasized (a) what research knowledge and skills the graduate students acquired; (b) what other lessons they took away from the experience; and (c) how the research assistantships influenced their graduate studies and future academic plans. After participants were interviewed, the data were transcribed, memberchecked, and then analyzed using a grounded theory research design. The findings show that research assistantships are valuable educational venues that can not only promote research learning but also benefit research assistants' master's studies and stimulate reflection regarding their future educational and research plans. Although data are limited to the responses of 7 students, findings can contribute to the enhancement of research assistantship opportunities as a means of developing skilled future researchers that in tum will benefit Canada as an emerging leader in research and development. The study is meant to serve as an informative source for (a) experienced researchers who have worked with research assistants; (b) researchers who are planning to hire research assistants; and (c) experienced and novice research assistants. Further, the study has the potential to inform future research training initiatives as well as related policies and practices.