000			03439cam a22004692u 4500
001			5484800
003			BD-DhUL
005			20170420161113.0
007			he u||024||||
008			080220s1986 xxu ||| b ||| | eng d
037			_aED287439 _bERIC
040			_aericd _beng _cericd _dMvI _dBD-DhUL
082			_a378.199 _bSTA
091			_amfm
100	1		_aStark, Joan S.
245	1	0	_aDesigning the Learning Plan _h[microform] : _bA Review of Research and Theory Related to College Curricula / _cJoan S. Stark and Others.
260			_a[Washington, D.C.] : _bDistributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, _c1986.
300			_a99 p. ; _c30 cm.
500			_aAvailability: NCRIPTAL, Suite 2400 School of Education Building, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2748 (Technical Report No. 86-C-001.0, $10.00). _5ericd
500			_aSponsoring Agency: Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. _5ericd
500			_aContract Number: OERI-86-0010. _5ericd
500			_aERIC Note: From the NCRIPTAL Program on Curricular Integration and Student Goals. _5ericd
520			_aA summary of major writings on college and pre-college curriculum literature are presented in this report, which is an early step in establishing a framework for the research program of the NCRIPTAL (National Center for Research in Postsecondary Teaching and Learning) Program on Curricular Integration and Student Goals. Section 1 on the literature of college curricula includes: historical and background reports (e.g., Carnegie Council on Policy studies); prescriptive views of quality, related to recommendations of national reports; strategy views, related to the educational process (e.g., national report recommendations, disciplinary approach, and discussions of student development); studies of curricular change (e.g., those at Alverno College, and liberal arts outcomes research). Definitions of curriculum are offered in the second section, which focuses on pre-college literature, as well as discussions in the literature of: the nature of curriculum development or planning; theoretical assumptions and approaches to curriculum planning and curriculum; cognitive psychology and curriculum development; and the teacher as curriculum planner. The final section proposes six assumptions for use in models of curriculum research, identifying such variables as student involvement, the organization of a discipline, and student outcomes. Fourteen pages of references are included. (LB)
533			_aMicrofiche. _b[Washington D.C.]: _cERIC Clearinghouse _emicrofiches : positive.
650	1	7	_aCollege Curriculum. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aCollege Instruction. _2ericd
650	1	7	_aCurriculum Development. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aDefinitions. _2ericd
650	1	7	_aEducational Research. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aHigher Education. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aInstructional Improvement. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aPlanning. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aResearch Design. _2ericd
650	1	7	_aResearch Needs. _2ericd
650	0	7	_aSecondary School Curriculum. _2ericd
653	0		_aAlverno College WI _aCollege Outcomes Assessment
655		7	_aInformation Analyses. _2ericd
710	2		_aNational Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, Ann Arbor, MI.
856	4	1	_uhttp://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED287439
942			_2ddc _cBK
984			_aANL _cmc 2253 ED287439 _d77000000292520
999			_c190117 _d190117