Research output

Article in Journal ()

Levels and equivalence in credit and qualifications frameworks: Contrasting the prescribed and enacted curriculum in school and college

Citation
Miller K, Edwards R & Priestley M (2010) Levels and equivalence in credit and qualifications frameworks: Contrasting the prescribed and enacted curriculum in school and college, Research Papers in Education, 25 (2), pp. 225-243.

Abstract
Drawing on data from an empirical study of three matched subjects in upper secondary school and further education college in Scotland, this article explores some of the factors that result in differences emerging from the translation of the prescribed curriculum into the enacted curriculum. We argue that these differences raise important questions about equivalences which are being promoted through the development of credit and qualifications frameworks. The article suggests that the standardisation associated with the development of a rational credit and qualifications framework and an outcomes-based prescribed curriculum cannot be achieved precisely because of the multiplicity that emerges from the practices of translation.

Keywords
prescribed curriculum; enacted curriculum; credit frameworks; learning outcomes; translation

Subject headings
Curriculum-based assessment; Curriculum planning Great Britain; Accreditation (Education); College credits

StatusPublished
AuthorsMiller Kate, Edwards Richard, Priestley Mark
Publication date06/2010
PublisherTaylor & Francis (Routledge)
ISSN 0267-1522
LanguageEnglish

Journal
Research Papers in Education: Volume 25, Issue 2 (2010-06)

© University of Stirling FK9 4LA Scotland UK • Telephone +44 1786 473171 • Scottish Charity No SC011159
My Portal