Promoting Student Agentic Engagement through Curriculum: Exploring the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum Initiative
Saved in:
| Title: | Promoting Student Agentic Engagement through Curriculum: Exploring the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum Initiative |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Fitzpatrick, J., O'Grady, E., O'Reilly, J. |
| Source: | Irish Educational Studies. 2018 37(4):453-473. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 21 |
| Publication Date: | 2018 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Elementary Education Grade 4 Intermediate Grades Grade 5 Middle Schools Grade 6 |
| Descriptors: | Learner Engagement, Curriculum Implementation, Student Empowerment, Foreign Countries, Integrated Curriculum, Decision Making, Curriculum Development, Elementary School Students, Grade 4, Grade 5, Grade 6 |
| Geographic Terms: | Ireland |
| DOI: | 10.1080/03323315.2018.1512882 |
| ISSN: | 0332-3315 |
| Abstract: | Building on the various works of theorists pertaining to curriculum negotiation, the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum (NIC) initiative detailed in this article attempts to redress the imbalance within curricular decision-making whereby student voice and learner agency is largely absent. The NIC initiative enquires into students' concerns about life and constructs a curriculum to address these concerns as a mechanism that can be shaped to make learning more meaningful through agentic engagement. Based on a longitudinal study of two primary schools, this small scale, exploratory research details the influence of this process on learners and educators and the challenges that were faced during its implementation. The findings of this study examine two main issues: the first is how student voice, particularly around the decision-making of pedagogical activities, can be practically implemented to enhance the perceived relevance of a curriculum; and secondly the process of negotiation between teachers and students to achieve this. Recommendations for the promotion of learner agency and further research are discussed in the context of Irish curriculum reform. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Number of References: | 55 |
| Entry Date: | 2018 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1199757 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHXT9waVoNT2qVaciydQZWNAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCIiEi_eHBCBEzAH3AIBEICBmidt49CW9j0sxfxHLGTDmobyTmk2WsaEnivsgI5okSLbtbyvonk5iGEUXyWwKhCTrAf8yVrNQd1OpT5BS-dZ1XmFIp23E0YmyoT_J40ErLsaCHImANDPKquIa4AdNd48Rkm56IG3T9zzo2R4Y3HMxF4Y6ETtSsez_wd0WmxazKp5Zdb2-g5uNApeGhIBn3-uS7dmDxA2N-D-K8Q= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0133509140;u1001dec.18;2018Dec13.11:08;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0133509140-1">Promoting student agentic engagement through curriculum: exploring the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum initiative </title> <p>Building on the various works of theorists pertaining to curriculum negotiation, the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum (NIC) initiative detailed in this article attempts to redress the imbalance within curricular decision-making whereby student voice and learner agency is largely absent. The NIC initiative enquires into students' concerns about life and constructs a curriculum to address these concerns as a mechanism that can be shaped to make learning more meaningful through agentic engagement. Based on a longitudinal study of two primary schools, this small scale, exploratory research details the influence of this process on learners and educators and the challenges that were faced during its implementation. The findings of this study examine two main issues: the first is how student voice, particularly around the decision-making of pedagogical activities, can be practically implemented to enhance the perceived relevance of a curriculum; and secondly the process of negotiation between teachers and students to achieve this. Recommendations for the promotion of learner agency and further research are discussed in the context of Irish curriculum reform.</p> <p>Keywords: negotiated curriculum; learner agency; praxis; student voice; agentic engagement; curriculum integration</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-2">Introduction</hd> <p>The need, and challenge, to promote curricular agency for learners and educators is well articulated (Lodge and Lynch 2000; Gleeson 2010; O'Grady et al. 2014). This is often set in the context of a democratic curriculum that seeks to enhance student and teacher ownership through active citizenship (Michel 2015) with the ultimate goal of schools acting as knowledge-building organisations from the earliest years of schooling (Chen and Hong 2016). Building on the work of many initiatives that have been undertaken to progress this, the 'Negotiated Integrated Curriculum' (NIC) initiative detailed in this article attempts to illustrate a practical example of how these ambitions might be achieved in an Irish primary school setting. The decision to locate this research in the primary sector followed, in part, from ongoing reforms in the Irish lower secondary school curriculum (Department of Education and Skills 2015) focused on the development of key skills and various principles of learning that are framed within a vision of a democratic curriculum. It is important therefore to examine curricular structures at the primary level that might support the primary-secondary transition to this new curriculum. The orienting research question for this paper is:</p> <p>How can the NIC process address the noted lack of agentic engagement for learners within a constrained curriculum to better promote meaningful learning for them?</p> <p>To situate the framework for this initiative, the conceptual understandings of curriculum and agency that underpin the promotion of student voice in the curriculum will be detailed. The methodology of how this research was conducted, illustrating the steps taken to promote student voice and agency will then be described. The findings section will explore how increased student voice in their own learning influenced their agentic engagement through NIC as well as discuss the complexities and challenges of implementing this initiative with some considerations offered in relation to supporting the transition to secondary school.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-3">Curriculum foundations</hd> <p>As the etymology of the term curriculum derives from the Latin verb 'currere' as 'a course to be run', a curriculum designates the course followed by learners and implies a clear track to be followed. Therefore curriculum can be viewed as simply 'content' but also the process that involves 'all the actual, day-to-day interactions of students, teachers, knowledge and milieu' (Cornbleth 1990, 24). Curriculum as content and process is a largely contested area in which learners rarely have much say. Stenhouse (1975) comments on the content-focused conception of curriculum as a 'product model' where a focus on learning 'objectives' and a suitable plan to meet these objectives reduces curriculum to a technical exercise. This curriculum perspective is described by Stenhouse (1975) as a 'specification' and no more than a book of instructions to teachers typically prioritising state exams, college entry, and vocation. Habermas (1984) considers this focus on knowledge as 'technical' with a primary focus on the survival of a society and reproducing it often towards controlling and managing learning environments. This technical conception is considered hegemonic, both in Ireland and internationally, with decision-making concerning what is taught and how largely residing with state control and policymakers. Young people are led to believe that the purpose of education is to master or 'collect' (Bernstein 1975, 41) facts, principles, and skills that have been selected for inclusion by policymakers. Freire (1970) develops this as a 'banking theory' where teachers are seen as purveyors of knowledge which reduces the student to a passive recipient of information, devoid of any agency. Indeed in the Irish context, this is particularly relevant as Gleeson (2010, 373) comments that 'Ireland provides a classic example of the technocratic model insofar as curriculum as an "anthology of subjects" is seen as a decontextualised product whose construction is mistakenly regarded as apolitical and neutral'. Boomer et al. (1992, 10) offer a useful model of the technical conception which he describes as the 'motived curriculum', Figure 1.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Motivated curriculum model.</p> <p>Here, the teacher's intended learning (a function of his/her experience and the planned curriculum) is imposed upon the child's intention in an attempt to 'motivate' them towards the core curriculum and associated learning. The model highlights the limited extent in which the core (or indeed associated) interests of the child are engaged with, resulting from the inevitable tension between intentions and the limited flexibility in decision-making for child and teacher alike.</p> <p>In contrast to this technical conception of knowledge, Habermas (1972) details two other contrasting views of knowledge as either practical or emancipatory. The practical interest of knowledge largely focuses on understanding and meaning making within a 'historical-hermeneutic' social context. Developing from this practical position are the emancipatory interests of knowledge which are primarily concerned with agency and the empowerment of individuals. This emancipatory view has been described as 'curriculum as praxis' (Grundy 1987) that attempts to redress power imbalance within curricula where often an underlying power relationship is inherent between those that design the curriculum and those who implement it (as well as the learners themselves). Indeed, Young (2010, 4 cited in Beck 2013, 179) describes the learning that takes place, decided by those far removed from those that learn, as '"knowledge of the powerful" ... [that] refers to the knowledge authorised by those in power - and leads to questions about who has the power? Is it legitimate and on what basis?'</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-4">Student voice and the negotiated curriculum</hd> <p>The role of student voice in schooling has rarely affected the curricular decisions made by students and has traditionally been accorded to informing aspects of school governance or classroom practices with little accountability to either the school leaders or teachers to implement this feedback (Cook 1992; Beane 1997; Taylor and Robinson 2009). Often student voice has been found in school councils (Hodgkin 1998) or at a classroom level where a teacher might view students as 'producers of knowledge' that can research certain topics (Fielding 2004; Thomson and Gunter 2006). Indeed, Taylor and Robinson (2009, 162) state that 'at the level of the institution and at the level of the classroom the aim is to increase students' representation at, and participation in, processes and practices from which they have historically been excluded'. There has been some significant research conducted within an Irish context to help promote student voice (Enright and O'Sullivan 2010; Fleming 2013) but this work is often limited by a need for a sustained engagement within the school community to collaboratively negotiate what is learned and how.</p> <p>While all aspects of student voice are impactful and welcomed, the involvement of student voice in planning at a localised classroom level is deemed to have the most meaning for students and impact on future change (Beane 1997; McIntyre, Pedder, and Rudduck 2005; Ruddock 2007). Currently, there are several projects (Fleming 2013) taking place to reconceptualise 'voice' as learners making curricular decisions in collaboration with their teachers 'to have some choice about how and what they learn' (Levin 2000, 13). These initiatives are founded on the belief that 'only the learners know their own minds, intentions and experience' and that 'teachers must genuinely ask learners to tell them what they know, think and hope so that they can plan together for profitable work' (Cook 1992, 160). Indeed, Beane (1997, 50) believes that 'curriculum planning must sooner or later involve direct participation by young people so that students have a genuine say in the curriculum and that their say count for something'.</p> <p>Cook (1992) views learners as educational decision-makers and believes that negotiation in education is the interlocking of teacher and learner intentions with a focus on bringing about the best possible learning for the learners. Boomer, Onore, Lester and Cook (1992, 10) represents these practical and emancipatory considerations in his 'negotiated' curriculum model, as shown in Figure 2.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 2. Boomer's negotiated model.</p> <p>Here the tension between the learning intentions of teacher and child is resolved by dialogue to reach a shared intent. Further dialogue identifies core learning and products. Significant flexibility is allowed in this model for the emergence of incidental and unforeseen learning and evaluation of the curriculum is an ongoing process in which both teacher and child are involved. While this can clearly support authentic student voice and ownership, there remains the practical issue of providing a structure that can facilitate planning for learning within the limitations and constraints imposed by the planned curriculum. This is particularly the case where the desired core learning and products will involve the crossing of disciplinary boundaries and necessitates subject integration to respond to the diversity of children's intentions in a typical classroom.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-5">Curriculum integration</hd> <p>In addition to the necessity to engage with students' intentions and involving them in decision-making, students can also be disempowered by the discrete bodies of knowledge that are communicated to them without any context as to its relevance. Bernstein (1975) identifies this as 'classification' referring to the maintenance of subject boundaries in highly differentiated, separated traditional subjects. For students to be suitably empowered to bridge these boundaries between bodies of knowledge:</p> <p>Students need to know how these complex bodies of knowledge fit together if they are to decide what knowledge is relevant for a particular purpose, and if they are to have the capacity to transcend the present to imagine the future. (Wheelahan 2007, 648)</p> <p>This has led to further arguments for moving beyond a constrained view of curricula toward greater integration (Pate et al. 1997). 'Thematic' and 'integration' are often terms used interchangeably and there is a significant spectrum of integration models to be considered. Thematic curricula represent ways of dissipating some of the boundaries present in the traditional, multidisciplinary curriculum which enables learners to make inherent connections across subjects and requires teacher collaboration (Drake 1998). The connections come within the discipline content and are only connected to other disciplines by the common theme (Fogarty 1991a). Fogarty (1991a) has developed 10 models of curriculum design that help students to make valuable connections while learning with the primary focus on moving toward an integrated curriculum. Fogarty (1991b) believes that integrating the curriculum is more than connecting different subjects; it is the integration of thinking, reasoning, social and problem-solving skills.</p> <p>Integrated curricular approaches are not without criticism of which the lack of research into such approaches has emerged as a significant critique. For example, St. Clair and Hough (1992) and Czerniak et al. (1999, 423) point to a lack of empirical evidence surrounding integrated curricula where most of the literature could be characterised as 'testimonials'. Perhaps the most passionate criticism against integrated curriculum comes from George (1996, 16) in his article 'Arguing Integrated Curriculum', in which he claimed that all the documented benefits of an integrated curriculum are 'unfounded, unsubstantiated, or both' and proceeds to provide a list of critiques. He argues, amongst other things, that there is little evidence that an integrated curriculum provides for more student-led learning, student involvement, depth of understanding, academic achievement, or citizenship. Furthermore, while he admits that the idea of an integrated curriculum may be attractive to teachers, it is not realistic due to a lack of proper planning time and resources.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-6">Agentic engagement</hd> <p>The promotion of student voice within curricular decision-making and learner agency aspires towards Grundy's (1987) 'curriculum as praxis'. For learners within a 'curriculum as praxis', agency can be viewed as a conscious decision to shape the curriculum 'in the sense that the individual could, at any phase in a given sequence of conduct, have acted differently' (Giddens 1984, 9). This agency:</p> <p>depends upon the capability of the individual to "make a difference" to a pre-existing state of affairs or course of events. An agent ceases to be such if he or she loses the capability to "make a difference", that is, to exercise some sort of power. (Giddens 1984, 14)</p> <p></p> <p>Allen (1995, 286) elaborates on the need for an empowering curriculum for learners as:</p> <p>in the age of empowerment, education can no longer ask children to abide by NO TALKING rules; rather, children must be encouraged to voice their concerns, opinions, and plans as learners; to discuss decisions; to talk and act like citizens in a democracy.</p> <p>This can be further developed through Lawson and Lawson's (2013, 455) conceptual framework of student engagement. In their comprehensive review of the literature they characterise the dominant form of student engagement as 'compliant' where 'teaching and learning occurs in a unidirectional fashion and in accordance with culturally inscribed and proscribed scripts and roles for teachers and students'. This transmissive form of teaching is reflected in Boomer's (1992) 'Motived Curriculum' (Figure 1) model and described in detail by Nuthall (2005) as 'Ritualised Routines' that result in a cognitive economy whose primary aim is to achieve the correct answer as efficiently as possible.</p> <p>Lawson and Lawson (2013, 445) draw upon multiple authors to argue that authentic, action-oriented approaches that involve students' active contribution to teaching and learning practices can result in 'agentic engagement' which:-</p> <p>manifests when students actively express their thoughts, opinions, and interests during activity; when they direct their own learning; when they engage communally, collectively, and critically with others; and when they use culturally relevant tools and technologies.</p> <p></p> <p>Furthermore, agentic engagement can support students experience of 'cultural congruence' (Lawson and Lawson 2013) which reflects 'the degree to which student experience support for their social-cultural and personal identities while participating in activity' (Lawson and Lawson 2013). Cultural congruence is considered to support positive identity construction. This approach from Lawson and Lawson (2013) is unique in that it prioritises the socio-cultural realities of learners as the foundation of their entire curriculum and is not simply focused on bridging one theme to a subject they are studying.</p> <p>The nature of the structural approach that can support student agentic engagement through the integration of fields of knowledge in the negotiated, co-construction of curriculum to address their concerns and support meaningful learning will now be considered.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-7">The initiative: Negotiated Integrated Curriculum</hd> <p>A Negotiated Integrated Curriculum (NIC) is a form of thematically linked curriculum. Its central and distinctive features are a theme based on students' expressed concerns in relation to themselves and global issues; continuous negotiation with students about their questions, learning activities and their appropriate assessment methods to address these concerns; and the integration of traditionally discrete subject boundaries.</p> <p>The first of these components develops a theme through a democratic process to organise and integrate the content of multiple curricular subjects. The process follows the Beane (2005) NIC model, offering a clear methodology to operationalise the aspirations of Boomer's negotiated model and Beane's (1993) integrative model in a structured way. This model is structured into 10 steps, initiating a complex process to negotiate a new curriculum with students in a manageable way. The evolution of this process begins with Beane's (1993) assertion that the sources of curriculum ought to be problems, issues, and concerns posed by life itself and such concerns fall into two categories; personal and world concerns. To begin with, students are introduced to the concept of engaging in learning focused on issues of concern to them, in relation to their own lives and the world around them. The primacy of student concerns about themselves and society in this curriculum (Beane 1993) reflects the hope that this will enhance meaningful, agentic engagement by facilitating an authentic inquiry into complex issues that are likely difficult to address independently.</p> <p>Interestingly, in a review of the successful transformative change in extremely diverse settings, Wrigley, Thomson, and Lingard (2011) note that a focus on addressing student concerns seems one of the few commonalities in the cases they examined. It is also likely that a focus on student concerns can support student investment in the work that follows as Lawson and Lawson (2013) indicate that this is driven by intrinsic and utilitarian value, namely, students may find the work inherently meaningful and worthwhile and/or it will help them to address significant issues in terms of increasing understanding or taking action. Students then work with their teacher through the following ten stages:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Stage One: 'Personal Concerns' - students individually list personal concerns they have about themselves that they would like to learn more about to facilitate personal engagement with the process.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Two: Students share personal concerns in small groups to establish commonalities and facilitate the social construction of knowledge. It is made clear to students that they can choose what to share and what to keep private. These are presented to the class in mind-map format and the teacher collects the major ideas on the board.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Three: 'World Concerns' - students list concerns they have about the world around them that they would like to learn more about to facilitate real-life connections with their learning.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Four: Students share world concerns in small groups to further facilitate the social construction of knowledge and to provide personal and social significance for the integration of knowledge. These are presented to the class in mind-map format and the teacher collects major ideas on the board.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Five: 'Finding Themes' - themes are established in discussion with the class and using the material on the board to connect common personal and world concerns.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Six: 'Sharing Themes' - Themes are presented and rationalised to remove repetition and overlap.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Seven: 'Student Vote' - students vote on themes for curriculum development to engage with the democratic process of this work where students have a choice over their learning. Each student writes their top three themes before then placing a sticker on board beside the themes they have selected.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Eight: 'Connecting Questions to Themes' - students in small groups generate their own questions in relation to the chosen theme to facilitate the ownership and hermeneutic aspect of this work. Questions are pooled from all groups, overlap is removed and then the questions are stuck on posters to the walls of the class.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Nine: 'Selecting Activities' - students suggest initial learning activities to address the questions they raised allowing for a sense of learner agency and decision-making. These are written on post-it notes and placed underneath the relevant question.</item> <p></p> <item> Stage Ten: 'Unit Planning' - Students' questions and activities are used as the basis for curriculum planning by the teacher(s) separate to the students to allow for teacher agency, decision-making and the introduction of some non-negotiables.</item> </ulist> <p>Developing from this shared intent, the second component of a NIC involves teachers inviting students to help construct and enact the learning journey on a continual basis. Learning is predominantly co-operative, allowing for significant differentiation as student groups take on various tasks to contribute to developing collective understanding.</p> <p>NIC does not view disciplines as discrete bodies of knowledge but encourages students to see the interconnectedness and interrelationships among disciplines (Beane 1997). Vars (1987) believes that the curriculum should recognise that social problems and issues transcend disciplinary boundaries and a strong emphasis should be placed on student-centred integrative approaches to education. Boomer et al. (1992) consider that in a NIC, because knowledge is built around ideas from life itself and placed in the context of personally and socially significant concerns, it is more likely to have real meaning in the lives of young people, the kind of meaning they do not have now.</p> <p>Put simply, NIC can develop a collaborative curriculum that young people see as worth their time, effort and attention. What distinguishes NIC from a thematic curriculum is that themes are used to link the personal and world concerns of young people with subject content. Themes are derived from the concerns of students through a socially integrative and democratic process which can offer increased personal and social significance for the integration of knowledge (Beane 1997). Curriculum Integration promotes collaborative teacher-student curriculum planning which in turn can help redefine power relations in the classroom (Beane 1997).</p> <p>This research presents an in-depth empirical study of a practical approach to realise the aspirations considered above as detailed in the next section.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-8">Methodology</hd> <p>The methodology of this work is outlined in: the context for study; the NIC process; the phases of the research process; the ethical procedures used; and the measures taken to enhance the validity of this research.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-9">Context of study</hd> <p>The site where the research took place was within the Regeneration Communities of Limerick.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>] A report by the Department of Education (2014) into the <emph>Retention Rates of Pupils in Second Level Schools</emph> detailed the Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools (DEIS) initiative's action plan for educational inclusion. The plan provides an integrated School Support Programme (SSP) which brings together and builds upon a range of interventions for schools with concentrated levels of educational disadvantage. This work took place in collaboration with the Supporting Social Inclusion and Regeneration in Limerick (SSIRL) programme and was undertaken in negotiation with the leaders of SSIRL as an initiative that could address student engagement levels and promote more meaningful learning by incorporating increased student voice in coherence with the SSP programme.</p> <p>While acknowledging that this research took place in schools designated as DEIS, NIC is not designed to be a curriculum for the deficit but rather a structure to support increased student engagement, developed organically within the socio-cultural context of participating schools. The National Educational Welfare Board (2008) released a report stating that strategies to increase student engagement need to include early intervention at elementary school level when language development and social skills have major impacts on a child's future engagement levels at school.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-10">Research process</hd> <p>This study explored the NIC initiative on two primary school sites within Limerick working with students aged 9-12 years old (which equates to students at fourth to sixth grade levels in American elementary school). Purposive sampling (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison 2013) was deemed the most appropriate sampling method as this research is small scale involving two schools and representatives from the wider educational context. During the establishment of a Professional Learning Community (PLC) whereby the group of participating teachers and principals met regularly to discuss the evolution of the project, two primary schools volunteered to undertake the NIC process as part of the Supporting Social Inclusion and Regeneration in Limerick (SSIRL). A teacher from each school volunteered to take part and negotiated with the research team concerning the time they could commit to this research so that the initiative was undertaken over varying periods in both schools. The principal and teacher from one primary school agreed to allow research to take place in a combined class of 23 fifth and sixth class students (aged 10-12) for the remainder of the school year (approximately 15 weeks of school). The second Primary School extended an invite to carry out research with 28 fourth class students (aged 9-10) for a 5-week period. Overall the researcher spent 81 contact hours with 51 students and 3 teachers engaging with NIC across the two primary schools. These are detailed in Figures 3 and 4 as schools A and B, respectively.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 3. Outline profile of NIC process in school A.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 4. Outline profile of NIC process in school B.</p> <p>The process commenced in each school with one full 'NIC day' where the Beane (2005) NIC model initiated the negotiation process between teachers and students. These 10 stages facilitated the bottom-up creation of a curriculum unit from the lived concerns of students through continuous negotiation with their teacher. The remainder of the time spent in each primary school was spent exploring the themes, questions, and activities generated on the initial NIC day in a co-operative learning environment.</p> <p>A focus group was conducted with teachers and principals at the initiation of the research to better ground the study. Following this, the primary researcher was present for each NIC session in both primary schools and adopted a participatory teacher-researcher role throughout all NIC engagement in the schools in order to experience and participate in the learning environment from the perspective of an 'insider' (Atkinson and Hammersley 1994). All data was collected from the natural setting of the learners and teachers existing classroom. In an attempt to accurately capture the voice and interactions of the participants, video and audio recordings were utilised and the researcher maintained a picture log and research observation journal which contributed to a detailed collection of field notes. In addition to interactive participant observation across both primary schools, three interviews were carried out with each participating teacher at the beginning, middle, and end of the NIC process. Additionally, the principal of Primary School A and eight students from both primary school classes were interviewed at the end of the process.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-11">Qualitative approach</hd> <p>A critical, social constructivist approach underpinned this research and given the emphasis on promoting meaning, a qualitative methodology was adopted (Krauss 2005). The qualitative research methods employed by the researcher were: participant observation as a teacher collaborating with the school teacher to be better immersed within the school culture; interviews with teachers and principals to better understand their perceptions of the process; and a focus group with teachers and principals at the initiation of the research to better ground the study. In addition, student voice was promoted as students completed weekly reflections following each NIC session in a journal used by students to record their learning and experiences of NIC.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-12">Data analysis</hd> <p>At the data analysis stage of the research, inductive, thematic data analysis was employed to identify themes that developed and emerged over time. Convergent themes were recognised amongst different students across both schools and claims made by students were aligned with those made by teachers to measure convergence further. Respondent validation was carried out which involved taking the data, analyses, interpretations and conclusions back to the teachers and students for them to judge the accuracy and credibility of the account. In qualitative research, this technique is often considered to be the most useful technique to enhance credibility and minimise researcher bias (Lincoln and Guba 1985; Bryman 2008).</p> <p>An inductive approach to data interpretation was adopted to allow for the articulation of student and teachers voices rather than assuming a pre-imposed approach. Furthermore, thematic analysis was used to accurately articulate voice and report on experiences and the ways individuals make meanings of their experiences (Braun and Clarke 2006). Braun and Clarke's (2006) 'thematic analysis' was chosen as the guiding analytical framework for this research. The researcher transcribed each piece of qualitative data collected and developed coding categories by writing her own definitions for codes and assigning descriptive labels that captured the meaning of each code (Ryan and Bernard 1994). From this, a hierarchal list of defined codes with their supportive evidence was then organised into potential themes ensuring that all data relevant to these potential themes was linked accordingly. With the aid of Nvivo to manage the data, each theme was linked back and checked against the codes. A researcher diary helped to develop greater veracity around the analytical process by documenting a log of which stages of the data analysis were completed, and their associated timescales. Finally, the findings were directly linked back to the research question developed by the researcher to make explicit connections between the literature, the findings and the critical, social constructivist perspective underlying this work.</p> <p>At the data collection stage, methodological triangulation was the main verification method used to increase validity and reliability within a qualitative approach (Denzin 1978; Silverman 1993). In addition to participant observation, other methods such as journaling, interviews, and focus groups were implemented.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-13">Ethics</hd> <p>Informed consent was received from every participating student, teacher, and principal. Additionally, informed parental consent was received on behalf of each participating student. This research was not explicitly intrusive in nature and did not intend to cause any distress to students, teachers, or the wider participant community. In relation to students sharing their personal concerns and the associated risk of over-disclosure, students were assured before commencement and throughout the research that if there was any concern that they did not want to share then that was their prerogative. Additionally, confidentiality was prioritised for all participants in the study whereby any audio or video recordings were only accessed by the research team.</p> <p>The anonymity of participants was protected in their representation in the data but this study also attempted to ensure that participants were not <emph>misrepresented.</emph> Upon completion of the research project; the findings were presented to students in a suitable format highlighting their contribution and the resulting benefits. Data verification methods were employed whereby complete interview transcripts were brought back to participating principals and teachers for them to verify the accuracy of the content transcribed. Furthermore, a draft copy of the findings was supplied to the school's principal and participating teachers for respondent validation prior to its final publication.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-14">Discussion of findings</hd> <p>Although combining two different contexts, the findings from this research aimed to explore the common issues of both school settings to promote learner agency (with a view towards more meaningful engagement for them) and the mechanisms that appeared to promote that agency. Therefore, two distinct aspects of the study emerged: the first was the effects of promoting 'agentic engagement' (Lawson and Lawson 2013) through student voice in curricular decision-making and the second concerning the processes that were identified by both students and teachers as necessary to achieve increased agentic engagement.</p> <p>The first aspect explored in the discussion of findings is the <emph>product</emph> of the NIC initiative as the promotion of student voice (where learners made curricular decisions around curriculum content, how it is assessed, how they want to be taught, and how they want to learn). The second feature discussed is the <emph>process</emph> to achieve this as articulated through the negotiation of student agency (namely through a diminished power differential between teachers and students). This is illustrated in Figure 5 as a model of the process and product of the NIC initiative.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 5. Model of the process and product of the NIC initiative.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-15">Student voice</hd> <p>The most explicit product of this initiative to be addressed is the promotion of student voice within curricular decision-making. The need to advocate for greater student voice within curricular decision-making is highlighted by the feedback from students and teachers that the process in every NIC session is to actively seek input from students and incorporating this participation into future learning, was atypical from their usual experience of schooling. This was also recognised by teachers as novel, where they observed that students were initially reticent to engage with the process 'it took a while for them to believe that I was actually looking for their opinion' (Mary, teacher reflection) and 'they wouldn't be used to being asked for their thoughts and opinions several times a day' (Gary, teacher reflection). The invitation to give opinions about what they would learn, and how significantly these opinions directed pedagogical strategies, was widely cited by students in their reflections 'the most important thing I learned today was that our opinions really matter' (Sam, student reflection). Student voice in this process also helped to shape teacher's critical reflection on their classroom practices 'student reflections let me know what the students enjoyed and what they disliked and I genuinely take this into account when planning the next lesson' (Gary, teacher). The perceived novelty of shaping a curriculum so significantly around students' concerns, and the apprehension by students to voice their opinions is perhaps unsurprising as 'the traditional curriculum fosters dependence by cutting learners off from their needs and concerns' (Boomer et al. 1992,191). This is particularly true in an Irish context whereby an authoritarian disposition dominates schooling as it is largely felt that it is 'the only way in which order within the learning environment could be secured for all' (Downes and Gilligan 2007, 16).</p> <p>Enquiring into the concerns of young people also required sensitivity to the risk of students' disclosing issues of a private nature (that in retrospect they may regret) or issues of discomfort in sharing their concerns with others. For example, when discussing their 'personal concerns' one student noted 'I am concerned about my uncle in prison' and then chose not to share this with his group. However, as the process developed and students agreed on the norms for their group interactions (through class discussions and group work), they became more confident 'I was taken aback at how students responded and interacted when given their own voice' (Mary, teacher reflection). The promotion of student voice was largely founded on increasing the capacity for students to make meaningful decisions about their learning.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-16">Student decision-making</hd> <p>Another product of this initiative was the intention for students to take an active role in decision-making around the content they would learn, how they would learn it, and how they would be assessed. For example, students were involved in making decisions around the appropriate assessment strategies and criteria such as projects, presentations, plays, poems, and raps with one student noting that 'our group decided to put all our research facts into a poem instead of on a test' (Ava, student reflection). However, the impact of such student-led decisions was not without their challenges as they required a high level of scaffolding by teachers to acquire the capacities to design these assessment tasks.</p> <p>Although they found these strategies engaging, students were often frustrated with the explicit need to demonstrate their learning 'we had to change our play AGAIN today. Joanne said that the character of the thief didn't show any of the information we had researched' (Melanie, student reflection). These struggles were also shared by the teacher who reflected after grading a poem that 'it would have been easier to just give them a written test'. When asked about the aspect of this process that was the most challenging, Gary felt that 'assessment would be the main one. I felt that the assessment could have been more structured, especially for the first attempt ... [as] the first time we were [just] hoping they would show their learning' (Gary, teacher interview). Therefore, rubrics and learning outcomes were designed, with student input, to help guide these assessments.</p> <p>This negotiation of the assessment strategies highlights the significance of a broader concept of collective agency with teachers that also attempted to enhance their sense of professional autonomy. There were many aspects of this process that were agreed as 'non-negotiable' by teachers with their students such as time constraints, resource constraints, and aspects of the curriculum that must be addressed. 'The students loved carrying out the in-class survey on animals but didn't want to convert the results into graphs which is something we need to cover in maths so it <bold><emph>had to be done</emph></bold> [emphasis added]' (Mary, teacher reflection). The tensions highlighted by the need for students to identify, and produce, evidence of their learning balanced with the teacher's desire to address aspects of the traditional curriculum can convey its importance to address the best interests of young people. It is the greater sense of 'cultural congruence' within a curriculum that NIC attempts to address and communicate an appreciation for the socio-cultural and personal identities of learners (Lawson and Lawson 2013, 446).</p> <p>Arguably, the authority of any curriculum can be founded on its capacity to convince learners that the body of knowledge, or the process by which it is learnt, will hopefully empower them to pursue certain goals or help better address any concerns that they might have in the future. The corollary of this argument is that the relevance of a curriculum can become enhanced through learners given greater responsibility and autonomy to explore how it might address their future goals.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-17">Responsibility and autonomy</hd> <p>Stemming from the increased decision-making and control afforded to the learners was a sense of increased responsibility and autonomy as another product of this initiative. Students were carefully scaffolded to take on extra responsibilities which eventually reduced the obligations on the teacher. Students were initially cautious about this aspect of the process and were observed 'offering up very safe contributions to class discussions at the start of the process' (Gary, teacher interview). Teachers facilitated this by gradually trusting students to undertake tasks they traditionally oversaw. For example, learners were empowered to develop their own sense of responsibility when compiling their posters as beyond simply representing information they were trying to make sense of the various perspectives on their projects 'students are doing more than putting a poster together, they are researching national policy directives and analysing the impact this will have on Irish society as a whole' (Mary, Teacher).</p> <p>As the NIC process advanced, students were observed to rely less on the teacher for guidance and work more autonomously. For example, after completing a one-day PE curriculum that they designed themselves, Philip (student) reflected that 'I was amazed that we designed the entire PE day ourselves. Today was a huge success and I think we could have done it all without the teachers'. Towards the end of the negotiation process, both teachers and students referred to the changes that took place around student responsibility; 'usually I am running around setting up the room but the students knew exactly how they wanted it for the interviews and took over' (Gary, teacher, post-NIC session discussion) and Sarah (student, reflection) wrote that 'We had to do everything and the teacher did very little' when preparing for a guest speaker visit.</p> <p>This need for a teacher to cultivate their students' confidence to defend their decision-making and autonomously engage in learning activities is explicated in MacLellan's (2014, 68) review of interventions to enable learner self-confidence. The main factors to promote this self-confidence were synthesised into a teacher's focus on:-</p> <p>The learner's engagement in socially designed learning activities to promote non-academic self-concept; as well as facilitating the development of knowledge ... [and] activities in which learners have to explain their reasoning and argue for the veracity of the evidence on which they make their claims. (MacLellan's 2014, 68)</p> <p>The implicit capacity for learners to improve their non-academic self-concept through defending their choices was a central development in the meaning they found in their learning.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-18">Meaningful learning</hd> <p>An increased sense of 'agentic' decision-making (Giddens 1984) by students was also felt to be a product of this initiative by teachers which significantly heightened the responsibility afforded to students as well as the meaning they attached to their learning. 'Students are really engaged with the water charges theme at the moment and I think it's because they can really see the relevance of their learning to what's going on in the country at the moment' (Mary, teacher interview) and 'today we got to research answers to our own questions instead of answering questions out of a book. It was so much better' (Michelle, student reflection). Some examples of student reflections in how they found greater meaning in themes such as; family, health, animal welfare, future career, and social relationships with peers are detailed:</p> <p>I want to learn about cancer because my granddad had cancer and I want to know how he got it in his lungs and spine. (Paul, student journal)</p> <p></p> <p>I want to know how cruelty to animals, especially to horses, can be stopped. (Liam, student journal)</p> <p></p> <p>I want to know more about PE because when I grow up I want to be a fitness instructor. (Mark, student journal)</p> <p>An increased engagement was also observed by their teachers when learning about their concerns was shown to hold greater meaning for students.</p> <p>When the survey carried out by students determined that 83% of them lived with a parent or guardian that smoked, student engagement levels reached an all-time high and motivated students to research how their parents could give up smoking ... [and concerning a guest speaker from a nicotine patch company] I couldn't believe how engrossed the students were in what he was saying and the quality of the questions they asking him. (Gary, teacher interview)</p> <p>The intention to shape a curriculum around students' concerns was intended to bridge the personal experiences of students with what they learn and how they learn it as 'making room for personal concerns in the curriculum gives students a stake in the curriculum and encourages the integration of experience ... Significant self and social/world issues offer a meaningful context for bringing knowledge to young people' (Beane 1997, 96). However, this objective of promoting more 'agentic engagement' (Lawson and Lawson 2013, 446) required a continual and careful process of negotiation between teachers and students to promote a more meaningful learning environment.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-19">Negotiating student agency: 'trust was built with students by simply keeping our promises'</hd> <p>The processes to achieve such products were multi-faceted and lay in particular aspects of student agency such as student voice and empowerment which were new to students and teachers alike and, as such, had to be negotiated. Therefore this negotiation process appeared to result from a diminished power differential in the classroom; an environment of trust between the teacher and students; and pedagogical support from teachers.</p> <p>Throughout the negotiation process, to achieve the products described in the previous section, the collaborative approach of teacher-student curriculum planning contributed to a redefinition of power relations in the classroom. A conscious decision was made by teachers, using their sense of professional judgement, to take a step back and allow students to take more control over their learning. This redistribution of power in the classroom was implemented through a gradual process and was not easily achieved. When asked what he found to be most challenging about engaging with the negotiation process, Gary (teacher, interview) revealed that 'initially, it was the whole aspect of the students being in control'.</p> <p>To promote a greater awareness of the changing power dynamic, a 'reflection on action' task was introduced to both students and teachers. The researcher felt that teacher reflections provided a crucial lens and insight into this study. Through reflections, participating teachers admitted that 'authority', 'discipline' and 'control' made up their natural dispositions as teachers. At the end of their engagement with the NIC process, in a final interview, each teacher was asked 'How has your engagement with NIC effected how you will teach in the future?' Teachers made conscious decisions to change the following aspects of their pedagogy: 'Listening to student opinions more'; 'welcome more student input'; 'increased use of students learning via social interactions with peers'; and 'giving students more credit for making sound suggestions about how they want to learn'. In addition to a rebalance of power in the classroom, trust between the students and teachers also contributed to supporting student agency throughout the negotiation process.</p> <p>A reciprocal trust was gradually established in NIC classrooms through this process. For students to believe that their voice would be heard and for teachers to feel confident enough to take a step back, a greater sense of trust was felt to be cultivated. Participating teachers admitted to 'hand holding' and 'having a lack of faith in the student's abilities' in the past but after relinquishing some control and observing students taking on extra responsibilities; requirements essential to the success of the NIC process, Gary (teacher) stated that 'I wouldn't have trusted the students to do any of this before engaging with NIC' and also attributed a gradual building of trust down to 'simply keeping our promises'. Reflecting on the entire process, he stated that 'now that we are finished the NIC process, I can safely say that everything that was promised to the students on the first day was fulfilled'. This did not go unnoticed on the students behalf with Laura (student reflection) writing that 'we are still learning about all the things we asked to learn about on the first day'. This is indicative of multiple references made by students as to how learning suggestions they made on the initial NIC day were acknowledged and pursued, thus contributing to the role trust played in supporting student agency. Entrusting students to assume a more agentic role in their learning was nurtured further by teachers providing pedagogical support for their students.</p> <p>To promote a greater balance of power in the classroom, the NIC approach aims to achieve 'curriculum as praxis', (Grundy 1987) and bridge the gap between those who decide on the content and process of a curriculum and the learners within it. However, this was founded on the need for trust to be established between the teacher and their students. 'To achieve this praxis, however, it is necessary to trust in the oppressed and in their ability to reason. Whoever lacks this trust will fail to initiate (or will abandon) dialogue, reflection, and communication' (Freire 1970, 66). Yet, this attempt to promote greater learner agency may be mistakenly perceived as possibly diminishing the professional capacity of a teacher to guide, and scaffold what students learn, and thereby encroach of the agency of a teacher.</p> <hd id="AN0133509140-20">Conclusion</hd> <p>Although the NIC initiative is a small scale study, and only took place in an Irish context, it highlights many issues of curricular significance namely the hegemonic beliefs of, and curricular constraints for, an educator to involve student voice in the decision-making processes of what students learn and how they learn it. Students in this study appeared cautious, even sceptical, initially as to why their input was being sought which speaks to their disengagement from the process by which pedagogical decisions are made for them. The enhanced meaning and 'agentic engagement' (Lawson and Lawson 2013, 446) that students espoused within their learning during the NIC process indicates the extent to which students currently feel divorced from the curriculum and how this initiative offers a practical approach to address these issues to develop 'cultural congruence' (Lawson and Lawson 2013) and expose educators to how to meaningfully involve students in making pedagogical decisions.</p> <p>The enhanced meaningful engagement from students within this initiative was not without many challenges, most notably the careful scaffolding by teachers of students' capacity to make these pedagogical decisions, for example, in the structuring of the group work projects and agreed assessment criteria of their learning objectives. The promotion of greater autonomy for students also implied a greater responsibility for students to be accountable for the products of their learning and defend the decisions they made accordingly. However, this outcome of the NIC initiative was grounded in the more tacit process of the continual negotiation by the teachers with students as to what could be practically achieved and the trust that had to be gradually cultivated between the teachers and their students. It was the intention by the teachers to diminish the power differential between themselves and their students that helped to promote greater learner agency.</p> <p>In aspects of student agency such as decision-making, empowerment, and accountability it is recognised in this work that students cannot take on these roles divorced from their teachers. It requires a collective approach and the local collaborative planning involved in curriculum integration suggests that teachers might reclaim some measure of control and power from the policymakers that currently dominate the curriculum. Therefore, further work should be undertaken to further investigate how teacher agency can be enhanced through a NIC process. In addition, this paper focuses on the negotiation process at a primary educational level but is part of a wider study of the potential role of NIC as a bridging curriculum between primary and secondary school to lessen the curricular divide that currently exists between primary and post-primary education.</p> <p>Although not addressed in detail in this paper, future publications could examine the process of disciplinary integration within NIC to address many of the challenges of interdisciplinary teaching and learning in curriculum reform. Additionally, the nature of teacher professional agency and further empirical research conducted in several post-primary schools will be explored to contribute to the consideration of the potential of NIC to act as a necessary bridging curriculum between primary and lower secondary curricula.</p> <ref id="AN0133509140-21"> <title> Note </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> The regeneration communities of Limerick pertain to areas of social disadvantage eligible for funding to help regenerate their communities under the Limerick Regeneration Framework Implementation Plan Review.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <hd id="AN0133509140-22">Notes on contributors</hd> <p> <bold> <emph>Dr Joanne Fitzpatrick</emph> </bold> completed her doctorate in the School of Education in the University of Limerick.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Dr Emmanuel O'Grady</emph> </bold> is a lecturer of practitioner research and educational enquiry in Mary Immaculate College, Limerick.</p> <p> <bold> <emph>Dr John O'Reilly</emph> </bold> is a lecturer in the School of Education in the University of Limerick.</p> <ref id="AN0133509140-23"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Allen, J. 1995. " Friends, Fairness, Fun, and the Freedom to Choose: Hearing Student Voices." <emph>Journal of Curriculum and Supervision</emph> 10 ( 4 ): 286 - 301.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Atkinson, P., and M. Hammersley. 1994. " Ethnography and Participant Observation." In <emph>Handbook of Qualitative Research (Vol. 15)</emph>, 248 - 261. Thousand Oaks, CA : SAGE Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Beane, J. A. 1993. " Problems and Possibilities for an Integrative Curriculum." <emph>Middle School Journal</emph> 25 : 18 - 23. doi: 10.1080/00940771.1993.11495181</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Beane, J. A. 1997. <emph>Curriculum Integration: Designing the Core of Democratic Education</emph>. New York : Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Beane, J. A. 2005. <emph>A Reason to Teach: Creating Classrooms of Dignity and Hope: The Power of the Democratic Way</emph>. New York : Heinemann.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Beck, J. 2013. " Powerful Knowledge, Esoteric Knowledge, Curriculum Knowledge." <emph>Cambridge Journal of Education</emph> 43 ( 2 ): 177 - 193. doi: 10.1080/0305764X.2013.767880</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bernstein, B. 1975. <emph>Class, Codes and Action. Vol. 3: Towards a Theory of Educational Transmissions</emph>. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Boomer, G., C. Onore, N. Lester, and J. Cook. 1992. <emph>Negotiating the Curriculum: Educating for the 21st Century</emph>. London : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. " Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology." <emph>Qualitative Research in Psychology</emph> 3 ( 2 ): 77 - 101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bryman, A. 2008. <emph>Social Research Methods</emph>. 3rd ed. Oxford : Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chen, B., and H.-Y. Hong. 2016. " Schools as Knowledge-Building Organizations: Thirty Years of Design Research." <emph>Educational Psychologist</emph> 51 : 266 - 288. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2016.1175306</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cohen, L., L. Manion, and K. Morrison. 2013. <emph>Research Methods in Education</emph>. London : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cook, C. 1992. " On Beginning to Negotiate." In <emph>Negotiating the Curriculum: Educating for the 21st Century</emph>, edited by G. Boomer, 15 - 31. London : Falmer Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cornbleth, C. 1990. <emph>Curriculum in Context</emph>. London : Falmer Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Czerniak, C. M., W. Weber, A. Sandmann, and J. Ahern. 1999. " A Literature Review of Science and Mathematics Integration." <emph>School Science and Mathematics</emph> 99 ( 8 ): 421 - 430. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1999.tb17504.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Denzin, N. K. 1978. <emph>The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods</emph>. New York : McGraw-Hill.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department of Education. 2014. <emph>Retention Rates of Pupils in Second Level Schools</emph>. Dublin : DES.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DES (Department of Education and Skills). 2015. <emph>Framework for Junior Cycle</emph>. Dublin : DES.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Downes, P., and A. L. Gilligan. 2007. <emph>Beyond Educational Disadvantage</emph>. Dublin : Institute of Public Administration.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Drake, S. M. 1998. <emph>Creating Integrated Curriculum: Proven Ways to Increase Student Learning</emph>. Thousand Oaks, CA : Corwin Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Enright, E., and M. O'Sullivan. 2010. " 'Can I do it in my Pyjamas? 'Negotiating a Physical Education Curriculum with Teenage Girls." <emph>European Physical Education Review</emph> 16 ( 3 ): 203 - 222. doi: 10.1177/1356336X10382967</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fielding, M. 2004. " Transformative Approaches to Student Voice: Theoretical Underpinnings, Recalcitrant Realities." <emph>British Educational Research Journal</emph> 30 ( 2 ): 295 - 311. doi: 10.1080/0141192042000195236</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fleming, D. 2013. " Student Voice in Irish Post-Primary Schools - A Drama of Voices." Unpublished PhD thesis, University College Cork.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fogarty, R. 1991a. " Ten Ways to Integrate Curriculum." <emph>Educational Leadership</emph> 49 : 61 - 65.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fogarty, R. 1991b. <emph>The Mindful School: How to Integrate the Curricula</emph>. Palatine, IL : Skylight Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Freire, P. 1970. <emph>Pedagogy of the Oppressed</emph>. New York : The Seabury Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> George, P. S. 1996. " Arguing Integrated Curriculum." <emph>The Education Digest</emph> 62 ( 1 ): 16 - 21.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Giddens, A. 1984. <emph>The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration</emph>. Berkley : University of California Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gleeson, J. 2010. <emph>Curriculum in Context: Partnership, Power and Praxis in Ireland</emph>. Peter Lang : Oxford.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grundy, S. 1987. <emph>Curriculum: Product or Praxis?</emph> Lewes : Falmer Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Habermas, J. 1972. <emph>Knowledge and Human Interests</emph>. Boston, MA : Beacon Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Habermas, J. 1984. <emph>The Theory of Communicative Action</emph>. Boston, MA : Beacon Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hodgkin, R. 1998. <emph>Partnership with Pupils</emph>. London : Children UK (summer).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krauss, S. E. 2005. " Research Paradigms and Meaning Making: A Primer." <emph>The Qualitative Report</emph> 10 ( 4 ): 758 - 770.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lawson, M. A., and H. A. Lawson. 2013. " New Conceptual Frameworks for Student Engagement Research, Policy, and Practice." <emph>Review of Educational Research</emph> 83 ( 3 ): 432 - 479. doi: 10.3102/0034654313480891</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Levin, B. 2000. " Putting Students at the Centre of Education Reform." <emph>Journal of Educational Change</emph> 1 ( 2 ): 155 - 172. doi: 10.1023/A:1010024225888</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1985. <emph>Naturalistic Inquiry</emph>. Beverly Hills, CA : SAGE.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lodge, A., and K. Lynch. 2000. " Power: A Central Educational Relationship." <emph>Irish Educational Studies</emph> 19 ( 1 ): 46 - 67. doi: 10.1080/0332331000190107</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MacLellan, E. 2014. " How Might Teachers Enable Learner Self-Confidence? A Review Study." <emph>Educational Review</emph> 66 ( 1 ): 59 - 74. doi: 10.1080/00131911.2013.768601</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McIntyre, D., D. Pedder, and J. Rudduck. 2005. " Pupil Voice: Comfortable and Uncomfortable Learnings for Teachers." <emph>Research Papers in Education</emph> 20 : 149 - 168. doi: 10.1080/02671520500077970</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Michel, A. 2015. " Learning for an Active Citizenship and Working Life: Main Challenges and Ongoing Innovations." <emph>European Journal of Education</emph> 50 ( 4 ): 379 - 382. doi: 10.1111/ejed.12154</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Educational Welfare Board. 2008. <emph>School Attendance and Participation: What Works and Why?</emph> Dublin : National Welfare Board.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nuthall, G. 2005. " The Cultural Myths and Realities of Classroom Teaching and Learning: A Personal Journey." <emph>Teachers College Record</emph> 107 : 895 - 934. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00498.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> O'Grady, E., J. O'Reilly, J. Portelli, and C. Beal. 2014. " Putting the Learner into the Curriculum, not the Curriculum into the Learner: A Case for Negotiated Integrated Curriculum." <emph>International Journal of Pedagogical Innovations</emph> 2 ( 2 ): 51 - 63. doi: 10.12785/IJPI/020201</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pate, R. R., S. G. Trost, G. M. Felton, D. S. Ward, M. Dowda, and R. Saunders. 1997. " Correlates of Physical Activity Behavior in Rural Youth." <emph>Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport</emph> 68 ( 3 ): 241 - 248. doi: 10.1080/02701367.1997.10608003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ruddock, J. 2007. " Student Voice, Student Engagement, and School Reform." In <emph>International Handbook of Student Experience of Elementary and Secondary School</emph>, edited by D. Thiessen and A. Cook-Sather, 587 - 610. Dordrecht : Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ryan, G. W., and H. R. Bernard. 1994. " Data Management and Analysis Methods." In <emph>Handbook of Qualitative Research</emph>, edited by N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln, 769 - 802. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Silverman, D. 1993. <emph>Interpreting Qualitative Data: Methods for Analysing Talk, Text, and Interaction</emph>. London : Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> St. Clair, B., and D. Hough. 1992. <emph>Interdisciplinary Teaching: A Review of the Literature</emph>. Springfield : Southwest Missouri State University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stenhouse, L. 1975. <emph>An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development</emph>. London : Heinemann.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Taylor, C., and C. Robinson. 2009. " Student Voice: Theorising Power and Participation." <emph>Pedagogy, Culture and Society</emph> 17 : 161 - 175. doi: 10.1080/14681360902934392</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomson, P., and H. Gunter. 2006. " From 'Consulting Pupils' to 'Pupils as Researchers': A Situated Case Narrative." <emph>British Educational Research Journal</emph> 32 : 839 - 856. doi: 10.1080/01411920600989487</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vars, G. F. 1987. <emph>Interdisciplinary Teaching in the Middle Grades: Why and How</emph>. Columbus, OH : National Middle School Association.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wheelahan, L. 2007. " How Competency-Based Training Locks the Working Class out of Powerful Knowledge: A Modified Bernsteinian Analysis." <emph>British Journal of Sociology of Education</emph> 28 ( 5 ): 637 - 651. doi: 10.1080/01425690701505540</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wrigley, T., P. Thomson, and R. Lingard, eds. 2011. <emph>Changing Schools Alternative Ways to Make a World of Difference</emph>. London : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By J. Fitzpatrick; E. O'Grady and J. O'Reilly</p> </aug> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1199757 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Promoting Student Agentic Engagement through Curriculum: Exploring the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum Initiative – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fitzpatrick%2C+J%2E%22">Fitzpatrick, J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22O'Grady%2C+E%2E%22">O'Grady, E.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22O'Reilly%2C+J%2E%22">O'Reilly, J.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Irish+Educational+Studies%22"><i>Irish Educational Studies</i></searchLink>. 2018 37(4):453-473. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 21 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2018 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+4%22">Grade 4</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Intermediate+Grades%22">Intermediate Grades</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+5%22">Grade 5</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Middle+Schools%22">Middle Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Grade+6%22">Grade 6</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Learner+Engagement%22">Learner Engagement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Implementation%22">Curriculum Implementation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Empowerment%22">Student Empowerment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Integrated+Curriculum%22">Integrated Curriculum</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Decision+Making%22">Decision Making</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Development%22">Curriculum Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Students%22">Elementary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+4%22">Grade 4</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+5%22">Grade 5</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+6%22">Grade 6</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Ireland%22">Ireland</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/03323315.2018.1512882 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0332-3315 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Building on the various works of theorists pertaining to curriculum negotiation, the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum (NIC) initiative detailed in this article attempts to redress the imbalance within curricular decision-making whereby student voice and learner agency is largely absent. The NIC initiative enquires into students' concerns about life and constructs a curriculum to address these concerns as a mechanism that can be shaped to make learning more meaningful through agentic engagement. Based on a longitudinal study of two primary schools, this small scale, exploratory research details the influence of this process on learners and educators and the challenges that were faced during its implementation. The findings of this study examine two main issues: the first is how student voice, particularly around the decision-making of pedagogical activities, can be practically implemented to enhance the perceived relevance of a curriculum; and secondly the process of negotiation between teachers and students to achieve this. Recommendations for the promotion of learner agency and further research are discussed in the context of Irish curriculum reform. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: Ref Label: Number of References Group: RefInfo Data: 55 – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2018 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1199757 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1199757 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/03323315.2018.1512882 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 21 StartPage: 453 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Learner Engagement Type: general – SubjectFull: Curriculum Implementation Type: general – SubjectFull: Student Empowerment Type: general – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Integrated Curriculum Type: general – SubjectFull: Decision Making Type: general – SubjectFull: Curriculum Development Type: general – SubjectFull: Elementary School Students Type: general – SubjectFull: Grade 4 Type: general – SubjectFull: Grade 5 Type: general – SubjectFull: Grade 6 Type: general – SubjectFull: Ireland Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Promoting Student Agentic Engagement through Curriculum: Exploring the Negotiated Integrated Curriculum Initiative Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Fitzpatrick, J. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: O'Grady, E. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: O'Reilly, J. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2018 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0332-3315 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 37 – Type: issue Value: 4 Titles: – TitleFull: Irish Educational Studies Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
