支持开放教育资源项目的方法

本文考察了英国教育技术互用性标准中心（CETIS）通过支持国家项目（即英国联合信息系统委员会（JISC）和高等教育委员会的英国开放教育资源试点项目,详见http：／／www．jisc．ae．uk／oer）,以促进发布开放教育资源方面的经验,并探索了如何让我们的支持模式对其他相关项目有所启发,并能改编用于鼓励开放课件运动的可持续性技术支持网络。作为一个涵盖英国众多大学的国家层面的创新举措,众多开放教育资源提供者参与了英国开放教育资源（UKOER）,这包括个别教育者、学科联合体和机构。考虑到这种多样性,从一开始我们就意识到没有任何一种技术解决方案能适合所有的项目。因此,也没有委托专门的工具、描述性标准、交流或分发机制（除要求所有制作的资源应该放在国家学习资源库中外,详见http：／／jorum．ae．uk）。为了支持这一项目,我们引导采取不同的方法和形成不同的社群,也许在支持发布开放教育资源方面,任何类似的跨机构创新都将会面临相似的问题。我们的项目支持方法已从具体的细节问题发展到提供基本的支持原则,从而预测其他问题,并推动最佳实践。我们的做法是：通过会议上的技术汇报和讨论机会,以及在博客上发帖,激发讨论;通过技术评论讨论,并记录针对这些公布在网上的讨论的总结性内容,从而调查个别项目的技术选择;针对通过以上方式所发现的问题,以及项目博客上凸显的问题,做出相应的反馈。考虑到如何使这一方法在更广泛的范围内应用,我们也反思了这种公开的工作模式所面临的挑战、这一方法的开支、适应性,以及我们所认为的其在支持开放教育资源管理和传播方面所扮演的角色。     

Teachers and the Very Able: case studies of four Scottish schools

High ability in children is a contentious issue in the Scottish educational system, which promotes equity through equality of opportunity in a non‐selective system. The aim of this research was to establish an understanding of the extent of available provision for very able children in a limited number of schools, and to chart teachers’ perceptions of high ability. Four Scottish schools were studied: one comprehensive high school and three primary schools, involving 17 teachers (primary principal and head teachers), one learning support teacher and three educational psychologists. Semi‐structured interviews, supported by open‐ended questionnaires, were the means of data collection. The data were submitted to a straightforward and qualitative content analysis. Results show tentatively that recognition of high ability is generally scarce in Scotland, that highly able pupils are often subjected to several decategorisations and that there is no consensus amongst teachers of how to understand high ability. A subgroup of able pupils was identified also, termed fast finishers’ by the participants.     

Validity of the VmaxST portable metabolic measurement system

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the validity of the portable VmaxST telemetry metabolic measurement device with that of a standard measurement system (Vmax29). Thirty asymptomatic, moderately active males provided written, informed consent and completed two maximal graded treadmill exercise tests (Bruce) using the VmaxST and the Vmax29 metabolic measurement systems. Tests were performed in random order on separate days to obtain peak values for time to exhaustion, heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, oxygen consumption (VO2), carbon dioxide production (VCO2), ventilation (VE), and respiratory exchange ratio (RER). Multivariate analysis of variance revealed no significant main effect (P = 0.88) between the two systems across any variable, suggesting similar measurement capabilities between the two systems. Linear regression analyses revealed moderate to high coefficients of determination for VO2 (r2 = 0.99), VCO2 (r2 = 0.99), VE r2 = 0.99), and RER (r2 = 0.89). Furthermore, Bland-Altman analyses demonstrated that the VmaxST yielded similar values to the Vmax29, suggesting good agreement between the two systems. Agreement was confirmed when the differences between the methods resulted in a small range as identified by the 95% limits of agreement. Findings from the current study confirm that the VmaxST is a valid device for measuring metabolic and physiological variables during exercise within a controlled laboratory setting.     

Widening access by changing the criteria for selecting medical students

Objective: To review the principles underlying medical student selection from the perspective of the imperatives of widening access policies.     

Instructional Tools in Educational Measurement and Statistics (ITEMS) for School Personnel: Evaluation of Three Web-Based Training Modules

In the current No Child Left Behind era, K‐12 teachers and principals are expected to have a sophisticated understanding of standardized test results, use them to improve instruction, and communicate them to others. The goal of our project, funded by the National Science Foundation, was to develop and evaluate three Web‐based instructional modules in educational measurement and statistics to help school personnel acquire the “assessment literacy” required for these roles. Our first module, “What's the Score?” was administered in 2005 to 113 educators who also completed an assessment literacy quiz. Viewing the module had a small but statistically significant positive effect on quiz scores. Our second module, “What Test Scores Do and Don't Tell Us,” administered in 2006 to 104 educators, was even more effective, primarily among teacher education students. In evaluating our third module, “What's the Difference?” we were able to recruit only 33 participants. Although those who saw the module before taking the quiz outperformed those who did not, results were not statistically significant. Now that the research phase is complete, all ITEMS instructional materials are freely available on our Website.     

The role of external studies in the Australian University structure

International Review of Education -