Adapting scenario-based curriculum materials to community college technical courses

Community College Journal of Research and Practice

Volumn 31, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 583-601

  Yarnall, Louise ^a   Toyama, Yukie ^a   Gong, Bowyee ^a   Ayers, Catherine ^b   Ostrander, Jane ^b  

^a SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^b Physical Sciences Mathematics and Engineering Division   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011437006     PISSN: 10668926     EISSN: 15210413     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10668920701428881     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Ausburn, L. (2002). The freedom versus focus dilemma in a customized self-directed learning environment: A comparison of the perceptions of adult and younger students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 26(3), 225-235.
2. Barton, P. E. (1996). A school-to-work transition system: The role of standards and assessments. In L. B. Resnick & J. G. Wirt (Eds.), Linking school and work: Roles for standards and assessment (pp. 125-143). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3. Bosanquet, A. M. (2006). The curriculum? That’s just a unit outline, isn’t it? Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 269-284.
4. Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.). San Francisco: Joosey-Bass.
5. Cohen, A. M. (2005). UCLA community college review: Why practitioners and researchers ignore each other [even when they are the same person]. [Electronic Version] Community College Review, 33(1), 51-62.
6. Crabtree, A. (2003). Designing collaborative systems: A practical guide to ethnography. London: Springer-Verlag.
7. Craft, E. & Mack, L. (2001). Developing and implementing an integrated, problem-based engineering technology curriculum in an American technical college system. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 25(5/6), 425-439.
8. Deil-Amen, R. (2006). To teach or not to teach “social skills”: Comparing community colleges and private occupational colleges. Teachers College Record, 1080(3), 397-421.
9. Doolittle, P. E. & Camp, W. G. (1999). Constructivism: The career and technical education perspective. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 16(1), 23-46.
10. Ehn, P. (1992). Scandinavian design: On participation and skill. In P. S. Adler & T. A. Winograd (Eds.), Usability: Turning technologies into tools (pp. 96-132). New York: Oxford University Press.
11. Freeman, S. A., Field, D. W., & Dyrenfurth, M. J. (2001). Using contextual learning to build cross-functional skills in industrial technology curricula. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 38(3), 62-75.
12. Gold, N. (2002). Assessing the impact and effectiveness of professional development. In A. R. Gullickson, F. P. Lawrenz, & N. Keiser (Eds.), The ATE program: Issues for consideration: A monograph (pp. 81-102). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
13. Grubb, W. N. (1996). Creating coherent workforce preparation systems from the quagmire of education and job training. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED400442).
14. Harbour, C. P. (2005). Adjunct faculty in community colleges: An academic administrator’s guide to recruiting, supporting, and retaining great teachers. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.
15. Kember, D. (2004). Interpreting student workload and the factors which shape students’ perceptions of their workload. Studies in Higher Education, 29(2), 165-184.
16. Kreber, C. (2005). Reflection on teaching and the scholarship of teaching: Focus on science instructors. Higher Education, 50(2), 323-359.
17. Leslie, D. W. & Gappa, J. M. (2002). Part-time faculty: Competent and committed. In C. L. Outcalt (Ed.), Community college faculty: Characteristics, practices, and challenges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 118, 59-67.
18. Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Almond, R. G., Haertel, G. D., & Penuel, W. R. (2003). Improving educational assessment. In B. Means & G. D. Haertel (Eds.), Evaluating educational technology: Effective research designs for improving learning (pp. 149-180). New York: Teachers College Press.
19. Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and college outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 50(4), 545-595.
20. Schank, R. (1997). Virtual learning: A revolutionary approach to building a highly skilled workforce. New York: McGraw-Hill.
21. Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS). (1991). What work requires of schools: A SCANS report for America 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
22. Strom, P. & Strom, R. (2002). Overcoming limitations of cooperative learning among community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 26(4), 315-331.
23. Taylor, R. (2005). Creating a connection: Tackling student attrition through curriculum development. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 29(4), 367-374.
24. Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and curses of student attrition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
25. van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., van Werven, I., & Dekkers, H. (1997). Teachers’ craft knowledge and curriculum innovation in higher engineering education. Higher Education, 34(1), 105-122.
26. Wilkes, M. & Bligh, J. (1999). Evaluating educational interventions. British Medical Journal, 318(7193), 1269-1272. Retrieved May 30, 2006, from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1115653