Education and self-regulation of learning for gifted pupils: Systemic design and development.

Gifted pupils differ from their age-mates with respect to development potential, actual competencies, self-regulatory capabilities, and learning styles in one or more domains of competence. The question is how to design and develop education that fits and further supports such characteristics and competencies of gifted pupils. Analysis of various types of educational interventions for gifted pupils reflects positive cognitive or intellectual effects and differentiated social comparison or group-related effects on these pupils. Systemic preventive combination of such interventions could make these more effective and sustainable. The systemic design is characterised by three conditional dimensions: differentiation of learning materials and procedures, integration by and use of ICT support, and strategies to improve development and learning. The relationships to diagnostic, instructional, managerial, and systemic learning aspects are expressed in guidelines to develop or transform education. The guidelines imply the facilitation of learning arrangements that provide flexible self-regulation for gifted pupils. A three-year pilot in Dutch nursery and primary school is conducted to develop and implement the design in collaboration with teachers. The results constitute prototypes of structured competence domains and supportive software. These support the screening of entry characteristics of all four-year old pupils and assignment of adequate play and learning processes and activities throughout the school career. Gifted and other pupils are supported to work at their actual achievement or competency levels since their start in nursery school, in self-regulated learning arrangements either in or out of class. Each pupil can choose other pupils to collaborate with in small groups, at self-chosen tasks or activities, while being coached by the teacher. Formative evaluation of the school development process shows that the systemic prevention guidelines seem to improve learning and social progress of gifted pupils, including their self-regulation. Further development and implementation steps are discussed.

Evaluation Framework EFI for Measuring the Impact of Learning, Education and Training

This article introduces the Evaluation Framework EFI for the Impact Measurement of learning, education and training: The Evaluation Framework for Impact Measurement was developed for specifying the evaluation phase and its objectives and tasks within the IDEAL Reference Model for the introduction and optimization of quality development within learning, education and training. First, a description of the Evaluation Framework for Impact Measurement will be provided, followed by a brief overview of the IDEAL Reference Model. Finally, an example for the implementation of the Evaluation Framework for Impact Measurement within the ARISTOTELE project is presented.

Of two contrasting philosophies that underpin openness in education and what that entails

From the conclusion: The ultimate question is a normative one: Which way do we want that openness in education to go? That question concerns educational resources, open educational practices and what other forms the educational system may spawn. For ultimately, we as stakeholders, in the learning of our children and grandchildren, in the professional development and Bildung of ourselves, should get the educational systems that we want, including appropriate forms of openness therein. Every individual then should decide for herself or himself to what extent this requires education as a public good and to what extent education as a private good, that is, as a commodity subject to market forces. It should not come as a surprise that we side with the humanitarian elaboration of openness. Indeed, we feel that governments as guardians of the public space should actively get involved in promoting this kind of openness, indeed, much as Delors in 1996 advocated for education as a whole.