Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- PART I FOUNDATIONS
- PART II METHODOLOGIES
- PART III THE NATURE OF KNOWLEDGE
- PART IV MAKING KNOWLEDGE VISIBLE
- PART V LEARNING TOGETHER
- PART VI LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
- 28 Motivation and Cognitive Engagement in Learning Environments
- 29 Learning as a Cultural Process
- 30 Prospects for Transforming Schools with Technology- Supported Assessment
- 31 Internet Use in Schools
- 32 Teacher Learning Research and the Learning Sciences
- 33 Scaling Up
- 34 Conclusion
- Afterword: After How Comes What
- Epilogue: The Fundamental Issue in the Learning Sciences
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
33 - Scaling Up
Evolving Innovations Beyond Ideal Settings to Challenging Contexts of Practice
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
By
Edited by
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Contributors
- 1 Introduction
- PART I FOUNDATIONS
- PART II METHODOLOGIES
- PART III THE NATURE OF KNOWLEDGE
- PART IV MAKING KNOWLEDGE VISIBLE
- PART V LEARNING TOGETHER
- PART VI LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS
- 28 Motivation and Cognitive Engagement in Learning Environments
- 29 Learning as a Cultural Process
- 30 Prospects for Transforming Schools with Technology- Supported Assessment
- 31 Internet Use in Schools
- 32 Teacher Learning Research and the Learning Sciences
- 33 Scaling Up
- 34 Conclusion
- Afterword: After How Comes What
- Epilogue: The Fundamental Issue in the Learning Sciences
- Author Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
“Scaling up” involves adapting an innovation that is successful in one setting to be effectively used in a wide range of contexts. In contrast to experiences in other sectors of society, scaling up successful programs has proved very difficult in education (Dede, Honan, & Peters, 2005). Innovations at one fast-food location may easily transfer to every store in that franchise and perhaps to any comparable type of restaurant. However, a new type of teaching strategy that is successful with one practitioner often is difficult to generalize even to other instructors in the same school, let alone to a broad range of practitioners. In general, the more complex the innovation and the wider the range of contexts, the more likely a new practice is to fail the attempt to cross the chasm from its original setting to other sites where its implementation could potentially prove valuable (Moore, 1999). In other words, scalable designs for educational transformation must avoid what Wiske and Perkins (2005) term the “replica trap”: the erroneous strategy of trying to repeat everywhere what worked locally, without taking account of local variations in needs and environments. This involves resolving problems of magnitude (fostering the necessary conditions for change in large numbers of settings with average resources at considerable distances from one another) and variation (diverse and often unfavorable conditions across settings).
In the context of innovations in teaching and curriculum, Coburn (2003) defines scale as encompassing four interrelated dimensions: depth, sustainability, spread, and shift in reform ownership.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences , pp. 551 - 566Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2005
References
(2004). Reasons and rationalizations: The limits to organizational knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , & (2002). Facing the challenges of whole-school reform: New American Schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
, , , , & (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1997). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Carrigg, F., Honey, M., & Thorpe, R. (2005). Moving from successful local practice to effective state policy: Lessons from Union City. In , , & (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 1–26). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
(2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher 32(6): 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(2003). No cliché left behind: Why education policy is not like the Movies. Educational Technology 43 (March–April), 5–10.Google Scholar
(2004). Design for defenestration: A strategy for scaling up promising research-based Innovations. Chicago, IL: NORC.Google Scholar
(2005). Why design-based research is both important and difficult. Educational Technology, 45, 5–8.Google Scholar
Dede. C., & Honan, J. (2005). Scaling up success: A synthesis of themes and insights. In , , & (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 227–239). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
, , (Eds.). (2005). Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement. New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Dede, C., & Nelson, R. (2005). Technology as Proteus: Digital infrastructures that empower scaling up. In , , & (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 110–132). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
, , , , & (2004). Design-based research strategies for studying situated learning in a multi-user virtual environment. Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference on Learning Sciences, pp. 158–165. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Fishman, B. (2005). Adapting innovations to particular contexts of use: A collaborative framework. In , , & (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 48–66). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
, , , & (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, S. B. (2005). Designing for scalable educational improvement: Processes of inquiry in practice. In , , & (Eds.), Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 67–96). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
(2000). Corporate failure by design: Why organizations are built to fail. New York: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In & (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 283–315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
, & (2004). The new division of labor: How computers are creating the next job market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Means, B., & Penuel, W. R. (2005). Research to support scaling up technology-based educational innovations. In , , & , Eds, Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 176–197). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
(Ed.). (2003). Systems theories and modeling (Volume II of Systems thinking). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
, , , & (2001). “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (Eds.). (2000). Modeling for learning organizations. New York: Productivity Press.Google Scholar
, & (Eds.). (2004). Evolution: From molecules to ecosystems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2003). Learning for the 21st century. Washington, DC: Partnership for 21st Century Skills. Retrieved November 20, 2004, from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/downloads/P21_Report.pdf.
(2003). King Arthur's round table: How collaborative conversations create smart organizations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
, , & (2003) Use, support, and effect of instructional technology study: An overview of the USEIT study and the participating districts. Boston, MA: Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative. Retrieved August 29, 2004, from http://www.bc.edu/research/intasc/studies/USEIT/description.shtml.Google Scholar
(2004). Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (2000, April). The role of educative curriculum materials in reforming science education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
, , , , , & (2000). Schools that learn: A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. New York: Currency Press.Google Scholar
, , & (2002). Foundations for success: Case studies of how urban school districts improve student achievement. Washington, DC: Council of the Great City Schools. Retrieved on November 27, 2004, from http://www.cgcs.org/reports/Foundations.html.Google Scholar
(2002). Local theories of teacher change: The pedagogy of district policies and programs. Teachers College Record, 104(3), 377–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, & (1996). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wiske, M. S., & Perkins, D. (2005). Dewey goes digital: Scaling up constructivist pedagogies and the promise of new technologies. In , , & , Eds, Scaling up success: Lessons learned from technology-based educational improvement (pp. 27–47). New York: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- 9
- Cited by