scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Ference Marton

Bio: Ference Marton is an academic researcher from University of Gothenburg. The author has contributed to research in topics: Experiential learning & Phenomenography. The author has an hindex of 48, co-authored 149 publications receiving 25571 citations. Previous affiliations of Ference Marton include Imperial College London & University of Hong Kong.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors describe an attempt to identify different levels of processing of information among groups of Swedish university students who were asked to read substantial passages of prose and also about how they set about reading the passages.
Abstract: Summary. This paper describes an attempt to identify different levels of processing of information among groups of Swedish university students who were asked to read substantial passages of prose. Students were asked questions about the meaning of the passages and also about how they set about reading the passages. This approach allows processes and strategies of learning to be examined, as well as the outcomes in terms of what is understood and remembered. The starting point of this research was that learning has to be described in terms of its content. From this point differences in what is learned, rather than differences in how much is learned, are described. It was found that in each study a number of categories (levels of outcome) containing basically different conceptions of the content of the learning task could be identified. The corresponding differences in level of processing are described in terms of whether the learner is engaged in surface-level or deep-level processing.

4,290 citations

Book
01 Mar 1997
TL;DR: A Pedagogy of Awareness as mentioned in this paper is a pedagogical approach to the understanding of the world around us that is based on the idea of Phenomenography. But it does not address the qualitative differences in learning.
Abstract: Contents: Prologue. Acknowledgements. What Does It Take to Learn? Qualitative Differences in Learning. The Experience of Learning. Revealing Educationally Critical Differences in Our Understanding of the World Around Us. The Anatomy of Awareness. The Idea of Phenomenography. Learning to Experience. A Pedagogy of Awareness. Epilogue.

3,488 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a distinction is made between two perspectives: from the first-order perspective, describing various aspects of the world and from the second-order viewpoint, describing people's experience of various aspects in the world.
Abstract: Arguments are put forward in this paper in favour of research which has as its aim the finding and systematizing of forms of thought in terms of which people interpret significant aspects of reality. The kind of research argued for is complementary to other kinds of research; it aims at description, analysis and understanding of experiences. The relatively distinct field of inquiry indicated by such an orientation is labelled phenomenography. A fundamental distinction is made between two perspectives. From the first-order perspective we aim at describing various aspects of the world and from the second-order perspective (for which a case is made in this paper) we aim at describing people's experience of various aspects of the world. Research in a variety of disciplines, sub-disciplines and “schools of thought” has provided us with experiential descriptions, that is, content-oriented and interpretative descriptions of the qualitatively different ways in which people perceive and understand their reality. It has, however, seldom been recognized that these various research efforts share a common perspective in their view of phenomena and a unifying scientific identity has in consequence not been attained. The focussing on the apprehended (experienced, conceptualized,) content as a point of departure for carrying out research and as a basis for integrating the findings is seen as the most distinctive feature of the domain indicated. Conceptions and ways of understanding are not seen as individual qualities. Conceptions of reality are considered rather as categories of description to be used in facilitating the grasp of concrete cases of human functioning. Since the same categories of description appear in different situations, the set of categories is thus stable and generalizable between the situations even if individuals move from one category to another on different occasions. The totality of such categories of description denotes a kind of collective intellect, an evolutionary tool in continual development.

3,097 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, two groups of 20 first-year students were asked to read three sections of a textbook, and after the first two sections the groups received different types of question, one group received questions which demanded a thorough understanding of the meaning of the passage, the other group was given detailed factual questions.
Abstract: Summary. Two groups of 20 first-year students were asked to read three sections of a textbook. After the first two sections the groups received different types of question. One group received questions which demanded a thorough understanding of the meaning of the passage. The other group was given detailed factual questions. After the final section of reading a common set of questions of both types was asked. Besides providing further evidence of qualitative differences in learning, the experiment showed that students did adapt their way of learning to their conception of what was required of them.

1,371 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: Lee S. Shulman as mentioned in this paper builds his foundation for teachi ng reform on an idea of teaching that emphasizes comprension and reasoning, transformation and reflection, and argues that this emphasis is justified by the resoluteness with which research and policy have so blatantly ignored those aspects of teaching in the past.
Abstract: Lee S. Shulman builds his foundation for teachi ng reform on an idea of teaching that emphasizes comprension and reasoning, transformation and reflection. "This emphasis is justified" he writes, "by the resoluteness with which research and policy have so blatantly ignored those aspects of teaching in the past". To articulate and justify this conception, Shulman responds to four questions: What are the sources of the knowledge base for teaching? In what terms can these sources be conceptualized? What are the processes of pedagogical reasoning and action? And What are the implications for teaching policy and educational reform? The answers -informed by philosophy, psychology, and a growing body of casework based on young and experienced practitioners- go far beyond current reform assumptions and initiatives. The outcome for educational practitioners, scholars,

13,211 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper provided a conceptual analysis of feedback and reviewed the evidence related to its impact on learning and achievement, and suggested ways in which feedback can be used to enhance its effectiveness in classrooms.
Abstract: Feedback is one of the most powerful influences on learning and achievement, but this impact can be either positive or negative. Its power is frequently mentioned in articles about learning and teaching, but surprisingly few recent studies have systematically investigated its meaning. This article provides a conceptual analysis of feedback and reviews the evidence related to its impact on learning and achievement. This evidence shows that although feedback is among the major influences, the type of feedback and the way it is given can be differentially effective. A model of feedback is then proposed that identifies the particular properties and circumstances that make it effective, and some typically thorny issues are discussed, including the timing of feedback and the effects of positive and negative feedback. Finally, this analysis is used to suggest ways in which feedback can be used to enhance its effectiveness in classrooms.

7,222 citations

Book
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a framework for the generation of ILOs for a course by identifying the kind of knowledge to be learned (declarative or functioning) and the level of understanding or performance to be achieved.
Abstract: generalize create, solve unseen problems, extrapolate to unknown domains 22831.indb 124 6/15/11 2:11 PM Designing intended learning outcomes 125 • the verb at the appropriate level of understanding or of performance intended; • the topic content the verb is meant to address, the object of the verb in other words; • the context of the content discipline in which the verb is to be deployed. The ILOs for the course The Nature of Teaching and Learning illustrate these points: 1 Explain why a particular course topic is important to teaching. 2 Apply a course topic to your own teaching. 3 Refl ect on your teaching in terms of a working theory you have gained from the course. 4 Evaluate a situation that has gone wrong and apply a solution. The fi rst refers to declarative knowledge: the students have to reach a level of understanding that requires them to explain something, not just describe or list it: the latter only display multistructural levels of understanding, but explaining requires students to be able to relate the topic to the context of teaching and is at a relational level of understanding. The second is a functioning knowledge example also at the relational level as it requires a level of understanding that enables the student to apply the topic to teaching. The other two are also about functioning knowledge and should be at the relational to extended abstract level of understanding, depending on the originality of the student’s response. The content in (3) is the student’s own working theory and the context the student’s own teaching, and in (4), the content is the theory used in evaluating and the context the problematic situation in teaching. As a note on the number of ILOs per course, we stated earlier that there should be no more fi ve or six ILOs for any course, even though there may be up to ten topics that need addressing. The answer is to write integrating ILOs that address several topics, or, as in ILOs (1) and (2) above, the ILO allows the student to select just one topic for demonstrating ability to achieve the ILO. Another thing to watch out for are redundant ILOs, such as ‘Describe and explain . . .’. ‘Describe’ is redundant because if the student can explain the topic, he or she can certainly describe it. The other matter one should keep in mind at this stage is that desirable but unintended outcomes, or outcomes unforeseen by the teacher, may emerge. This is the nature of extended abstract responses by the student, and they will be accounted for in the normal assessment, but others may simply be things that the student sees as important and relevant learning. This matter becomes a practical issue during assessment, and we address it in Chapter 10. You should now be in a position to design and write your own ILOs for a course you are teaching (Task 7.1). 22831.indb 125 6/15/11 2:11 PM 126 Designing constructively aligned outcomes-based teaching and learning Task 7.1 Writing course ILOs Take a course that you are teaching. Consider the course aim and write the course ILOs by identifying: a the kind of knowledge to be learned (declarative or functioning). b the content or topic to be learned. c the level of understanding or performance to be achieved. d any particular context in which the outcome verb is to be enacted. The following grid may be a useful framework to help you think. Kind of knowledge Level of Content topic Context Declar/function understanding (outcome verb) ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ Now go across the rows and write out the course ILOs by stating the intended level of understanding or performance (outcome verb), topic and the context in which the verb is to be enacted. There is no need to include the kind of knowledge in the ILO as that is defi ned by the verb(s) you use. To recap an example of a course ILO from our course The Nature of Teaching and Learning : Students should be able to: Refl ect (level of understanding and performance) on your teaching (context) in terms of a working theory you have gained from the course (content). Now write your course ILOs. Students should be able to: ILO1: _______________________________________________________ ILO2: _______________________________________________________ ILO3: _______________________________________________________ 22831.indb 126 6/15/11 2:11 PM Designing intended learning outcomes 127 Aligning ILOs at three levels: curriculum mapping Now that we have written the course ILOs, we have the task of checking to see that the three levels of intended outcomes, graduate, programme and course, are aligned. We can achieve this by curriculum mapping (Huet et al. 2009), which is a systematic means of ensuring alignment between programme ILOs and graduate outcomes, and course ILOs and programme ILOs. Graduate outcomes and programme ILOs Table 7.4 shows a simply way of checking the alignment between graduate outcomes and programme ILOs. The table is a device to ensure that the match between programme ILOs and graduate outcomes has at least been considered. Programme ILOs should not be forced to match graduate outcomes that don’t belong in the programme. Because of the different natures of different disciplines or professions, different programmes may have different emphases in addressing the graduate outcomes. It is not necessary that every programme should address all graduate outcomes to the same extent because some may not be relevant to the programme. Programme ILOs are simply the reasons that the programme is being taught, which is a matter of professional and academic judgment. However, university policy will prevail on this. Task 7.2 parallels Table 7.4: it asks you to align programme ILOs with the graduate outcomes of your university, if it has any. If the programme ILOs ILO4: _______________________________________________________ ILO5:_______________________________________________________ ILO6:_______________________________________________________ Review the ILOs to see whether: a the kind of knowledge, content and level of understanding or performance are relevant to achieve the course aim. b they cover all the main reasons for teaching the course. c they are clearly written, especially in identifying the level of understanding or performance to be achieved by the students, and the context (if appropriate). d the number is manageable for designing aligned teaching/learning activities and assessment tasks. How does this new set of course ILOs compare to your existing course ‘objectives’? Does the existing set need to be rewritten? 22831.indb 127 6/15/11 2:11 PM 128 Designing constructively aligned outcomes-based teaching and learning haven’t yet been articulated, discuss them with the programme coordinator and derive a set, then match them with the graduate outcomes. This should give you a clearer idea of how graduate outcomes can suitably be addressed in your teaching. How does your attempt gel with your university’s policy on this? Gelade and Fursenko (2007) also describe a tool for systematically mapping courses and programmes for graduate outcomes. Task 7.2 Aligning programme ILOs with graduate outcomes 1 Take a programme in which you are teaching and either list the programme ILOs if they are already articulated or, if they are not, sit down with the programme coordinator or programme committee chairperson and fi rst write the aims of the programme and a list of programme ILOs that meet those aims. 2 What are the graduate outcomes of your university? List them in the left-hand column in the grid below. 3 In the right-hand column list the programme ILOs that would address the graduate outcomes. Are all graduate outcomes addressed somewhere? Which are not? Does it matter?’ Graduate outcomes Programme ILO 1 2 etc. Table 7.4 An example of aligning programme ILOs with graduate outcomes Graduate outcomes Programme ILO Competent in professional Analyse and apply principles to real-life practice accounting situations Communicate effectively Communicate as a professional with clients and colleagues in real-life accounting situations Teamwork Operate effectively and ethically as a team member in real-life accounting situations Ethical professional As above 22831.indb 128 6/15/11 2:11 PM Designing intended learning outcomes 129 Programme ILOs and course ILOs The next level of alignment is between the programme and the course ILOs. As each programme is served by its constituent courses, it is important that, when aligning course ILOs to the programme ILOs, the course ILOs in total address all aspects of the programme ILOs. Often a programme ILO will be addressed by several courses, from different and increasingly more complex angles. You may attempt this in Task 7.3. Task 7.3 Aligning course ILOs with programme ILOs For individual teachers 1 List the programme ILOs of the programme. 2 List the course ILOs of the courses that you are teaching in a given programme. 3 Consider what programme ILO(s) each of the course ILOs addresses in the following table. Programme ILOs Course 1 ILOs Course 2 ILOs Course 3 ILOs

6,414 citations

Journal Article

3,099 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a distinction is made between two perspectives: from the first-order perspective, describing various aspects of the world and from the second-order viewpoint, describing people's experience of various aspects in the world.
Abstract: Arguments are put forward in this paper in favour of research which has as its aim the finding and systematizing of forms of thought in terms of which people interpret significant aspects of reality. The kind of research argued for is complementary to other kinds of research; it aims at description, analysis and understanding of experiences. The relatively distinct field of inquiry indicated by such an orientation is labelled phenomenography. A fundamental distinction is made between two perspectives. From the first-order perspective we aim at describing various aspects of the world and from the second-order perspective (for which a case is made in this paper) we aim at describing people's experience of various aspects of the world. Research in a variety of disciplines, sub-disciplines and “schools of thought” has provided us with experiential descriptions, that is, content-oriented and interpretative descriptions of the qualitatively different ways in which people perceive and understand their reality. It has, however, seldom been recognized that these various research efforts share a common perspective in their view of phenomena and a unifying scientific identity has in consequence not been attained. The focussing on the apprehended (experienced, conceptualized,) content as a point of departure for carrying out research and as a basis for integrating the findings is seen as the most distinctive feature of the domain indicated. Conceptions and ways of understanding are not seen as individual qualities. Conceptions of reality are considered rather as categories of description to be used in facilitating the grasp of concrete cases of human functioning. Since the same categories of description appear in different situations, the set of categories is thus stable and generalizable between the situations even if individuals move from one category to another on different occasions. The totality of such categories of description denotes a kind of collective intellect, an evolutionary tool in continual development.

3,097 citations