integrating cal with other instructional activities in schools

Compur. Educ. Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 381-389, 1988 0364s1315,&l 53.00+0.00 Printed in Great Britain Pergamon Press plc

INTEGRATING CAL WITH OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES IN SCHOOLS

D. WOODHOUSE’ and A. J. JONES? ‘School of Mathematical and Information Sciences and ?School of Education,

La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3083, Australia

(Received 3 August 1987)

Abstract-In many schools, work with or about computers has been added to the existing curriculum in such a way as to remain a distinctly separate aspect of educational activity. There is now sufficient experience of computer use in schools to permit the re-planning of curricula so that computer work becomes an integral part of curriculum content and method. In this paper, the authors offer some advice on this integration process, including educational and administrative prerequisites, curriculum development, stages of learning, models of integration, and techniques of organisation.

1. INTRODUCTION

Not long ago, computers did not feature in the school curriculum, either as a topic of study or as an aid to learning. Their rapid introduction over recent years has been a piecemeal affair, and different schools, different school systems, different subject areas and different teachers are at vastly different stages in their use of computers. One result of this is that computers have frequently been added to the existing curriculum in such a way that they seem to be an optional extra, or a departure from normal educational practice. Eventually, however, all schools and teachers should revise their curricula so as to integrate computer use as part of the educational activity. In this paper we offer some advice intended to assist in this process. We shall be concerned only with computers as an aid to learning (“CAL”), not computers as a topic of study (“computer science”).

2. CURRICULUM INTEGRATION: AN INTERNATIONAL CONCERN

A curriculum is a deliberate and systematic programme of teaching and learning. School curriculum planning is a continuing process which takes place against a background of established practice, perennial constraints and unforeseen difficulties. Its aim is to provide a framework within which teachers can prepare instructional activities (although, even when a satisfactory framework is constructed, there are usually unresolved problems, provisional decisions and compromise arrangements that are subject to continual minor revision).

In many places, educational responsibility is being decentralised. This trend is very noticeable in Australia, and in Victoria there is pressure on schools to take responsibility for such major activities as curriculum design and staff appointments. In a paper designed to guide Victorian schools in curriculum design, Fordham[l] used the term “curriculum” to refer “not only to the content of courses but also to the effects on student learning of such matters as staffing policy, facilities, teaching and learning styles, school organisation, and assessment and reporting pro- cedures”. While this definition is broader than we propose, it does emphasise the need for a comprehensive approach to school-based curriculum planning.

Any increase in school-based planning entails an increase in information dissemination to avoid fruitless repetition and to facilitate fruitful cross-fertilisation. The National Advisory Committee on Computers in Schools believed “there is an urgent need to establish formally a national mechanism for the dissemination of,information about curriculum issues, which will arise from the introduction and extension of computing in schools”[2]. The Australian Curriculum Information Network (ACIN) is now in the process of being established, but this is not specifically computer-oriented (except that is is available on-line to schools)[3].

Another result of the Advisory Committee’s report was the establishment of the Australian Computer Education Program, which has emphasised the integration of computer activities across

381

382 D. WOODHOUSE and A. J. Joprzs

the curriculum. “This process has only just begun, with the development of numbers of predominantly schooi-based models of such curriculum development”[4]. Even so, “integration * . . across the curriculum” tends to be a process of grafting computer applications into other disciplines, rather that the joint design activity we are advocating. Much contemporary advisory material produced by Departments of Education is technically-oriented, rather than curriculum- oriented.

In France, a measure of integration has been enforced by the national decision not to teach Info~atics as a separate discipline[S]. This has meant that the potential “info~atics-enthusiast” teacher has had to further her/his ideas and wishes through existing disciplines.

A statement of policy issued by the Ministry of Education in Toronto, Canada. in February 1987 included the folIowing directive: “Educators developing courses of study for all subjects offered in the Intermediate and Senior Divisions shall also incorporate computer applications, where appropriate”[6,p. 11. It continues: “Ail subject guidelines now being developed for the Intermediate and Senior Divisions will include suggestions on the use of computers, including statements on the most appropriate applications for students and for specific disciplines”[6, p. 21. An appendix to the statement reminds teachers and course developers that learners are individuals with varying learning styles, rates of learning, needs and other characteristics, and that computer imple- mentations should make allowances for these factors.

In West Germany, the state of Lower Saxony is concentrating on the integration of software into existing school subjects, with a combination of teachers, curriculum planners and private consultants working to produce software to supplement other material used in the classroom[7].

In the U.K., one of the Microelectronics Education Programme’s aims was “to encourage the use of technology as an aid to teaching and learning”[8J. To this end, it has examined the need for and methods of curricuium change, and the proper management of school computing resources to support such change.

Nonetheless, much work remains to be done to provide a theoretical framework within which curricula can be redesigned. Research is currentty under way into such areas as the management of curricuium change, and the often unsuspected influence on the curriculum of the structures and models which are present within educational softwaref91. Terry[tO] states *‘good curriculum development cannot take place without some appreciation of how people learn”, while Hallfl I] observes that “the efficiency of computer applications is likely to be increased where the software in use supports both what we know about children’s learning and the teacher’s own educational theory.”

3. PREREQUISITES FOR INTEGRATION

Integrated curriculum planning requires administrative and educational support.

3. I Administrative aspects

To be most effective, planning for integration should be a collaborative activity. Teachers need to consider the effect their plans wiI1 have on all members of the school community, not just on themselves. Many schools have very little computing equipment, so co-operation, collaboration and goodwill among the teaching staff are necessary if more than one subject department is to use the computing facilities. This requires the usual strategy of planning within a single subject department to be broadened, so that several departments plan together.

Even though most Australian schools do not teach a lot of computing, the lack of forward thinking and collaborative curriculum planning is becoming evident in the manner that Logo, word processing and information retrieval are used and taught. In part the problems are beyond the capacity of any one school to resolve, because they involve mgre than one level of schoofing. For instance, many primary schools now teach some word processing. Often this is attempted with insufficient hardware, which results in students not having an adequate amount of continuing keyboard access. There is currently considerabIe debate about whether primary students should be taught keyboarding skills. If they are not, the limited amount that they can actually produce on a word processor must place some doubts on whether students really gain anything from the

Integrating CAL with other instructional activities 383

whole exercise. Another result is that some students now enter secondary schools with some experience of word processing but often with no keyboarding expertise.

The problems of the primary school also occur at secondary level, but often with additional complicating factors. Since secondary study is subject oriented, the teaching of general purpose computer-related skills poses a problem, namely by whom and in what subject should the skills be taught? Where students are expected to use word processing in several subject areas there is obviously a case for collaborative planning. Even this can be complicated if, for example, one subject department has a word processing laboratory and it is the sole user thereof. Sometimes the result is that students cannot obtain access to computers for work set by other departments. Effective integration of computing will require some territorial boundaries to be crossed-perhaps for the first time. It must always be remembered that equipment, such as computers, belongs to the school and not to one particular subject department. It may be argued that computing would be integrated faster and better if all the computing hardware and software within a school were the property of a non-subject area such as the library or media centre. Each subject department would then have to borrow or book equipment, preferably following consultation and agreement with other potential users.

How can the theories of integration and curriculum development be applied to the integration of computing into the school curriculum? The first step is for teachers and administrators to realise that decisions made in this area must be school decisions, reached by consensus. The next step begins the collaborative process and requires all teachers who will be directly involved to begin planning, on the basis of full information about the hardware and software available. The most difficult task is determining the proportion of the available computing resources to be allocated to each subject department, but this should at least partially follow from the stated policies of the school and of the subject departments. It is at this stage that goodwill, understanding and consideration for the opinion of others will be most needed.

As a result of Fordham’s paper[l], some schools have redesigned their whole curriculum from the bottom-up, eschewing the traditional disciplinary boundaries, and planning for computers to be used appropriately right across the curriculum. One example is the Churchill Post-Primary School in Victoria[l2] which has split its programme into five curriculum areas: communication and number studies; creative studies; human development studies; science and technology studies; and social studies. Such a radical departure from tradition is very difficult unless (as in this case) the school is new and can start its new curriculum implementation from scratch. In general, the sort of curriculum review which we suggest needs to be planned well in advance[l3].

3.2 Teacher education

Even if computers are physically available, they are not efictiuely available as an educational tool unless teachers can make informed decisions on whether or not to use them to provide a particular learning experience. This is possible only when a teacher has learned to operate the hardware and has practiced with appropriate software. The knowledge gained from an exploration of a variety of examples of discipline-related software becomes part of the teacher’s background. The teacher then focuses on her/his discipline and selects computer or non-computer work as appropriate, without this choice being a major issue.

3.3 Writing courseware

Unfortunately, much courseware is written in isolation from other curriculum support material and does not lend itself to integration. The educational validity of many CAL programs is highly questionable, and Watson[l4] points out that, despite the excellent work done so far in the British Computers in the Curriculum Project, its CAL material is still seen as an exceptional contribution to the curriculum. The approach now used in that Project is to integrate the proposing, planning and producing of CAL materials with any innovation in or development of the curriculum and to have teachers actively involved in the whole process.

This ensures that the CAL material fits into an accepted curriculum framework. “The discipline curriculum project can provide in its teacher groups a fertile base for the generation of CAL units”[l5]. Good Australian material produced in this way includes Gold Dust Island and the Australian Reality in Mathematics Education materials. However, producing a CAL program

384 D. W~~CJHOUSE and A. J. JOXES

needs significant expertise in computer programming and ample time to devote to the programming task, either or both of which a teacher may lack. Conversely a professional programmer may not have the necessary educational expertise. Fortunately, we can divide the development of CAL courseware into two parts, namely specification, which requires educational expertise, and programming, which requires programming expertise. These tasks may be undertaken by a teacher and programmer, respectively, provided that they liaise closely to ensure that what is produced is what was wanted. Alternatively, both tasks may be carried out by a single teacher/programmer, provided that s/he has enough time (see[16]).

3.3.1 separate programmer and reacher. One advantage of having programmers and teachers in the curriculum development team is that they can quickly implement either a section of the material requested, or a first approximation to it (a ~~u~~ry~e). Other advantages are that the teachers have access to students who can test the successive prototypes, and that a permanent curriculum development group can embark on long term commitments.

Disadvantages of this approach are that it needs organisation and finance. A teacher could not afford to employ a programmer to develop a CAL idea. Most schools could not afford this, either. Therefore some other centrally funded agency must establish a writing group by employing programmers and relieving selected teachers of some teaching duties (see for example[7]).

3.3.2 Teacher/programmer. Suppose, then, we decide not to separate the teacher and programmer functions, but to find a teacher with a high level of expertise in program deveIopment. This approach sometimes fails to produce the expected results, as the teacher seconded to programming can quickly begin to respond more readily to programming imperatives than to educational ones, and can get out of touch with the realities of classroom teaching and organisation.

In Australia this approach appears to have been successfully implemented through the secondment by some Education Departments of teachers to Prologic, a small software company. This company guides the teachers in the development of CAL material. “The teachers design the programs, using their curriculum experience, and the company programmes, packages and publishes the resulting software” [ 171.

As computer assistance is integrated into the educational process the distinction between generally available material, the production of which involves a large amount of effort, and locally written material, which can function only in the context of the particular writer, will become clearer, and the need for both will be evident. Just as texts cannot fully replace the teacher’s own notes, so, ultimately, commercialiy available courseware will not fully replace the local ad hoc material. Indeed, the occasional bug which necessitates evasive action by the student, or a recovery procedure by the teacher, can be most instructive about computers: the students realise at first hand that computers do only what they are told, and that the quality of a computerised process depends in part on the standard of the program, which has been written by a person.

4. ACHIEVING INTEGRATION

4. I Computers in curriculum planning

Wheeier[l8] gives five distinct stages in developing a curriculum. The initial stage involves the setection and definition of aims, goals and ubj’ectives. Next, suitable learning experiences are selected to enable the attainment of these ends. The third stage is the selection of ccnfent matrer through which particular types of iearning experience can be offered. Then the learning experiences and subject content are combined and organised to accommodate the teaching-learning process within the school and the classroom. The fifth and final stage is an evaluation of the effectiveness of the second, third and fourth stages in attaining the ends specified in the first stage. Evaluation of course, provides a new starting point, so the process is cyclic and continuing. This model is not universal and is indicative rather than prescriptive.

Computers and computing may feature in several of the stages of Wheeler’s model. At stage one, some curriculum objectives may be computer-related. Computers provide certain learning experiences, and should therefore be among the range of options from which the teacher or curriculum designer selects at stage two. Some content matter is only available through computer use (stage


three), and computers sometimes offer a convenient means of combining and orchestrating content and experience into an effective structure (stage four).

In any curriculum planning activity, the pre-specified aims must be borne firmly in mind. We state this possibly obvious fact in this context, because when computer considerations are brought to the curriculum planning process, they often take over and the whole curriculum becomes education about computers, even if the intent is to teach other things, such as science or writing skills[l9].

4.2 Computers in the stages of learning

Instructional activities are chosen for their relevance to the subject of instruction, while a range of such activities is chosen to provide variety. Whether the subject is content-oriented or process-oriented, stages in its teaching and learning may include (i) introduction, (ii) study of concepts, (iii) study of applications, and (iv) reinforcement of the subject matter.

These stages may overlap, and may be repeated. The computer can assist in each of these stages (although in the interest of variety, it would probably not be used in all stages for any one subject).

4.2.1 Introduction. When introducing a subject, use of appropriate courseware can open up a whole range of problems, ideas and questions. This process is most effective if it involves group discussions, as these usually give rise to a wider range of issues which can be addressed later. If computer-based work is used, it must be designed to raise questions but not provide simple answers. For example, in Australian history students could discuss the skills and trades would be most useful in a group of workers setting out to establish a new community in the wilderness. Having made a list of useful abilities, students could use the First Fleet data base program to compare their list with the actual trades of the convicts on the first fleet.

4.2.2 Concepts. Concepts need detailed theoretical study, and here individual activities may be more appropriate, particularly when supported by expert advice from the teacher and/or computer. This is an area that is at present accomplished in schools by a combination of teacher and text book. Very few computer programs currently in use in schools have been designed to teach concepts. This requires software that is capable of firstly running something such as a simulation, and then being able to ask pertinent, theoretical questions about the concepts associated with the simulation. Not only must answers to these questions be analysed by the program, but information and reasons for acceptable responses would have to be available. Such capabilities are characteristic of expert systems. These systems are used to give advice on well-defined topics, and are able to explain the reasons for the advice given and the questions asked. Some expert systems have been adapted to teach the user about the system’s area of expertise. The next few years should see the development of more expert systems programs explicitly written for educational purposes.

4.2.3 Applications. In application work, computer-based group activities are again appropriate. Simulations in which the pupils need to apply concepts to solve problems are very useful. There are several programs which simulate the breeding of animals with particular characteristics. Students would be expected to use theoretical concepts of heredity and choose the appropriate breeding schedule to produce desired characteristics.

An entirely different type of program is exemplified by muMath and Minitab. muMath carries out symbolic algebraic manipulations, such as symbolic differentiation and integration, fac- torisation and expansion of algebraic and trigonometric expressions. Thus, if related concepts are being studied, muMath could be used to carry out some of the tedious manipulations, and permit a greater variety and complexity of applications to be covered. Minitab is a package that carries out many statistical calculations. Realistic problems in statistics can be solved when such a tool is available. This sort of usage of muMath and Minitab is analogous to the use of calculators which have removed the need to concentrate on non-essential aspects of numeric problem-solving.

4.2.4 Reinforcement. The reinforcement stage can again be an individual one, because students need quite different amounts of reinforcement, and the computer’s “patience” can be useful here. The aim of drill and practice programs is to provide reinforcement, but unfortunately the practice is usually only in lower level skills such as recall of factual knowledge. To be of any real and lasting educational value programs will have to be devised to reinforce at least some of the higher level learning skills, such as comprehension or application.

386 D. WOODHOUSE and A. J. Jams

4.2.5 What next? The computer is a device with many uses, some of which are still in the pro5es.s of being discovered. As with any innovation, it is first used to carry out existing tasks in a different manner. Only as experience is gained with the tool do we recognise new things that can now be done which could not be done before. To obtain the optimal vaiue from the use of a computer it is necessary, firstly, to learn how to use it; secondly, to apply it to some known purpose; thirdly, to be aware of the possibilities which emerge as its capabilities become better understood; and fourthly, to be willing to change one’s activities if the new possibilities are perceived to be worthwhile. It is very useful to ask “What would I like to do which is at present impossible?’ and then to ask “Would a computer help in this?’

Another feature which is characteristic of a new device is that its use is “encapsulated”, rather than being a coherent part of the total activity. This can lead to an unhelpful awareness that “now we are using the computer”, which can detract from the learning process. If it is onty the end that is important, it does not matter whether or not a computer is used. In education, however, the process is often as important as the end, and so the computer must assist in both.

In the teaching and learning of history, for example, it is no longer the case that the end is the ability to regurgitate lists of events and dates. The end is much more diverse, and while it includes a knowledge of events and dates, it also includes understanding-of historical method, of the impact of events on people, of cause and effect, and so on. If a computer is introduced into this process, it is important that it be auxiliary to these aims, and not become a major preoccupation of teacher or students.

Some people would restrict computer use to areas in which it is essential. It is more sensible to be aware of much wider possibilities, and to consider its use whenever it is convenient and natural.

4.3 Mode& of integration

In integrating computer use into the curriculum, it is useful to consider a number of analogous activities with which teachers are already familiar.

4.3.1 Textbooks. Teachers adapt textbooks to fit their specific curriculum content or teaching style: they must be prepared to do this with computer courseware. Not all courseware can be easily adapted.

4.3.2 classroom orga~~sat~o~. Teachers also establish a classroom organisation which is appropriate to them or their subject, It is possible for a classroom-based computer (or computers) to be integrated into class activities for short periods by teachers or students. However, it is not easy to split a class into concurrent, different activities. Also, if a small number of computers must be shipped from class to class, timetabling can be difficult (see Section 4.4).

4.3.3 Laboratory. The Iaboratory is an essential part of the science curriculum. It is used for various purposes, including (i) teaching how to handle apparatus; (ii) demonstrating the practical effects of laws and theories; and (iii) initiating the theoretical study of specific phenomena. Through the use of computers, the laboratory approach can be extended to the non-sciences, for analogous purposes. For example, (i) in the computer room/laboratory, students can learn how the sociologist uses computers (to analyse sociological data); (ii) an enhanced understanding of the historicai process can be gained by running simulations of actual events (such as the Russian revolution) and changing some of the parameters or decisions and noting the different results; and (iii) playing wargames, in the sense of reconstructing actual battles, often provokes a lot of historical research, and computer-based simulations make such motivational activities more readily and widely accessible.

However, one limitation on the laboratory approach is that one is simply re-discovering what is already known. There is a right answer which one must obtain, and therefore discovery learning is not quite the same as creativity.

4.3.4 Workshop. The workshop, on the other hand, is a place for creativity, where one can do something different to what has been done before. However, creativity must be integrated with externally specified activities designed to teach methods and skills of using the tools and working with the materials. Computer programming is an excellent extension of this facility, offering as it does great scope for individual creativity. Computer graphics and word processing provide this capability in a new field.


4.3.5 Library. The library is used in various ways for project support: tasks set by the teacher are investigated in the library, then discussed, written up, etc. The computer laboratory can be used in a similar way. Like the laboratory, the library is a separate room, but one which is used individually, and only under general supervision. The common question “separate computer room or computer in the classroom?” is inappropriate, as both arrangements have their place. The computer room is like a laboratory or a library for special experiments and projects.

Its use has timetable implications, principally for the computer room itself. Unfortunately its use therefore tends to be regimented.

Another analogy with the library would be a library of software (and even hardware) resources. Indeed, with the current extension of libraries to include audio-visual materials, records and realia, it is probably best for the school library to take on the role of lending software also.

4.3.6 Information handling. Integration of library use into classwork is not merely an analogy for integration of computer use, as the computer in its role as an information handler is often seen as closely associated with the library and its present activities. Perhaps, therefore, we should talk about effective strategies for information handling-and this will include both computer and library. In this context, again unlike the laboratory, solutions are not set up. This means that more searching is needed-but perhaps this enables the student to get more out of the activity.

Data base packages for information handling give students the opportunity to classify and use information in any subject. Knowledge is becoming both more specific and more general, and we need to be able to look for it and at it in different ways. The computer provides rapid access to information, and is necessary to allow us to keep up with the rate of change of knowledge. The recently completed Domesday Project is one example of a data base that would not be feasible without computers. The computer also permits the classification of information using post coordinate instead of pre-coordinate indexing. In the latter, a hierarchical structure of knowledge is imposed beforehand, while in the former different facets can be identified and different connections made when the information is used that could not have been foreseen by the indexer.

Unless teachers and students accept this approach to knowledge and information, their existing knowledge will soon be out of date and their ability to adjust will be severely limited.

4.3.7 Integrated courses. This review of some learning activities and contexts reminds us that course integration does not require that all parts of the course be carried out in the same place. We could perhaps define an integrated course as one in which questions raised in one section of the course are answered in another section, and even in another place.

Because of the nature of secondary education with its well-defined subject areas, integration of CAL in the secondary school occurs longitudinally, spread over several weeks, terms or years. For example, if the History Department of a school decides to use relevant computer-based materials such as data bases and simulations, they must consider the content of the course and determine parts for which appropriate software is available. This might mean using CAL in Australian history when covering the early settlement and exploration (First Fleet data base, Bushrangers data base, Explorers) but not using CAL for topics such as the development of trade unions, relationships between white settlers and Aborigines, and Australia’s role in World War 2.

In contrast, the primary teacher is able to integrate on at least two levels. Firstly it is possible to select a theme or focus and integrate the content of several different subject areas within this theme. Suppose that a grade 5 teacher is planning an integrated unit of lessons around the theme of “weather”. Included among the areas that students might study would be the history of weather (mythology; shipwrecks and other weather related disasters; systematic collection and recording of data), weather and the arts (music, art, drama, design, literature and poetry), mathematics (measurement) and science (effect of weather on people, rocks, etc; climatic zones, food, clothing and shelter).

The second form of integration available to primary teachers is that of using CAL within the theme to assist in the teaching/learning process. Computer related activities could include the use of programs such as “Climate” and “Birds of Antarctica” that contain weather information, the use of data bases or spreadsheets with which students could develop their own data collection, and a visit to the Bureau of Meteorology to observe the role of computers in weather forecasting. There would also be the less obvious computer applications such as word processing, colour graphics and sound generation to assist students in their creative expression of various facets of weather.

388 D. W~ODHOUSE and ?.. J. Jam

4.4 Teaching techniques and classroom organisation

Once a workable sharing of the resources has been agreed upon, individual teachers in each subject area can begin detailed planning. Knowing exactly what hardware and software can be used, and when it will be available to their classes allows teachers to plan precisely how to intersperse computing and non-computing activities throughout their courses. Not only will the computing sessions require carefui consideration,. but close attention will need to be given to preparatory and follow-up classes. For students to use their limited keyboard access most effectively, they must know precisely what they are going to do. This implies a major increase in the detail of the planning by both teachers and students.

4.4. I Hurdware considerations. Different teaching strategies and styles of software are required when each child has an individual keyboard as opposed to when large groups of children work with few computers. O’Shea and Self[20], reporting on the Logo project at the Lamplighter School in Texas, noted that the quality of learning improved significantly as the number of students per keyboard decreased, and particularly as it approached one. A survey carried out by Levy[21], on the other hand, indicated that in some language activities pairs of students at a keyboard produced the best results. Woodhouse and McDougall[l6] have identified six possible situations, and categorised corresponding teaching strategies based on the two independent criteria of the number of students per keyboard (individual, small group or the whole class), and the availability in time of the hardware (permanent or intermittent).

4.4.2 Software considerations. The introduction and use of CAL brings with it the need for teachers to reconsider their role and activities in the classroom. However, there is no single approach which is appropriate to the computer environment ais-ci-vi.s the non-computer environment as different pieces of computer software also require quite different sets of expectations and actions from the teacher. The changes are much more far-reaching than simpty relieving the teacher of supervising such routine activities as practice and revision. They must take account of broader educationat implications, such as the effects on students of interacting with a computer in a Learning situation, These effects depend on the student’s age, maturity and sex; the course content; and the teacher’s teaching style. While some software is quite directive in its mode of use, most software is susceptible to the teacher’s decisions on its use, such as whether to encourage exploration or to prescribe a sequence of activities. Thus, although choice of software is highly important, the teacher’s use of it is even more important. What this means, of course, is that the teacher is as important in the computer classroom as in the non-computer classroom, and has one more, highly flexible item in his or her pedagogical armoury.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

s’: 9.

10. il.

12. 13.

14.

Fordham R., Curriculum Development and Victoria (1984).

Planning in Victoria. Ministerial Paper No. 6, Ministry of Education,

National Advisory Committee on Computers in Schools, Teaching, Learning and Computers. Commonwealth Schools Commission (1983).

REFERENCES

Cropley M., First Came the Computer, then the Modem, now the Australian Curriculum Information Network, Curric. Dev. in Aust. Schoois, 3 (January, 1987). Murray S., Commonwealth initiatives in computer education and information technology. In Computers in Educution: On the Crest of a Wave, ACEC 8th Annual Conference, pp. 64-67 (1986). Hebenstreit R., Teacher training for CAL in France. In Proc. 3rd World Conference on Computers in Education. Lausanne ( 1982). Ontario Ministry of Education, inregration of Computers into Elemenrary and Secondary Curricuium. Policy/Program Memorandum No. 91 (1987). Bendeiow P., Integration the keyword in Saxony’s computer drive. Times Education Supplement No. 3627 {1986). Fothergiii R., The U.K. Microelectronics Educarion Progrumme. M.E.P. (19&S). Smith D. and Sage M., Microcomputers and education in the U.K.: towards a framework for research. In Proc. 4th World Conf. on computers in Edu&ion (Edited by Duncan K. and Harris D.). North-HoIiand, Amsterdam (1985). Terry C. (Ed.), Usina Mierocom~urers in Schools. Croom Heim. London it984). Hall-N., Fducationai theory and computer applications in schools. In Co~u~~~=~i~n and Chunge (Edited by Satvas A. D.) Proc. 7th Annual Conf of the Comp. Educ. Group of Victoria. CEGV (1985). Kumai Coltege-ChurchiJi Campus, PO&~ und Program ~undbook 1987 (1986). Woodhouse D., Course integration. In Proc. 4th World Conf. on Computers in Education (Edited by Duncan K. and Harris D.). North-HoIland, Amsterdam (1985). Watson D., Some implications of micros on curriculum development. In Involving Micros in Education (Edited by Lewis R. and Tagg E. D.), pp. 197-206. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1982).


15. Watson D., A model for the production of CAL material. Comput. Educ. 7(3), 167-176 (1983). 16. Woodhouse D. and McDougall A., Compurers: Promise and Challenge in Education. Blackwell Scientific (1986). 17. McKenzie H., Cost stifles interest in interactive videodiscs. Tke Ausrralian, p. 34 (24 March 1987). 18. Wheeler D. K., The Curriculum Process. University of London Press (1967). 19. Fisher G. ef al.. Integrating computers into the curriculum. In Proc. 4rh World Con/Y on Computers in Educarion (Edited

by Duncan K. and Harris D.). North-Holland, Amsterdam (1985). 20. O’Shea T. and Self J., Learning and Teaching with Computers. Harvester Press (1983). 21. Levy M., Computer Assisted Lunguage Learning: Review Report. Footscray College of Technical and Further Education,

Victoria (1986).

SOFTWARE REFERENCES

Bira!s of Anfarclica. Elizabeth Computer Centre, Hobart (1984). Bushrangers Data Base. Know Ware (1985). C&rare. Heinemann (1982). Expedition to Saqqara. Ginn (1983). The First Fleer. Elizabeth Computer Centre. Hobart (1983). Gold Dust Island. Jacaranda Wiley, Brisbane (1982). Isle of What? Soil Conservation Authority of Victoria (1984). Minitab. Minitab Inc., State College, Pennsylvania. muMath. The Soft Warehouse, Honolulu. Ode1 Luke. M.E.C.C. Science, Vol. 3 (1980). Plants. E&oft (1985).

integrating cal with other instructional activities in schools

Documents