ASPECTOS MÁS DESTACADOS DE LA LEY

Respecting and valuing individual differences means autonomy is given to all students so that they can make choices to pursue their interests and develop their potential (Exley & Kervin, 2013; Bhebhe, Dziva & Maposa, 2014). Lecturers need to be committed to developing the talent of individual students by providing them with challenging learning opportunities. With a firm belief that there are different pathways for students, lecturers should be capable of making a difference in each student’s learning through quality instruction that highly enable them to cater for student diversity (UNESCO –UNEVOC, 2010; Dalton, Mackenzie & Kahonde, 2012).

Universities, as parastetals operate independently. Their programmes are designed in-house by the lecturers and these programmes are approved by the national board (ZIMCHE) that governs the running of all universities within the country. A study carried out by Nguku (2012) within Southern Eastern African (S.E.A) countries analyses TCD curriculum development and review processes employed by the institutions that offer textile and clothing programmes. The study reveals that the curriculum development and review processes incorporated input from relevant partners and stakeholders such as the textile and clothing industry. It also emerged

71

from this study that the curriculum development process included such aspects as designing, developing, implementing, monitoring, evaluating and reviewing of curricula and the programmes were benchmarked with some selected global institutions. This study sought to establish how the students with diverse academic backgrounds were catered for in the designing, implementing and monitoring of the TCD curricula offered by the universities of technology in Zimbabwe.However, the accommodation process impact on selection of implementation procedures by the lecturers. The research by Nguku (2012) found that the institutions in the Southern Eastern Africa (SEA) were not providing sufficient training with regard to textile machines as they did not have textile or clothing industrial engineering and management programmes. A study on assessment of the adoption of apparel computer design technology training in some universities in Kenya by Kamu (2007) established that the designed CAD courses were not adequately addressing specific areas of apparel design as the courses comprised basic introductory concepts such as Corel Draw, Adobe Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator. The research pointed out that there was need for collaboration between the industry and textile and clothing department lecturers in curriculum development, training of lecturers and students, and in provision of CAD teaching and learning resources. The Pakistan Higher Education Commission emphasizes the need for preparing the Fashion and Design curriculum considering a lot of knowledge, techniques and methodologies evolving globally dictating that professionals must keep updated (Ali, 2011).In view of catering for students’ diverse academic backgrounds, this study sought to examine how the lecturers were trained in order to deliver the programmes effectively.

Lecturers working within institutions of learning work very hard to adapt programmes content to cater for students with diverse backgrounds. In an institution where programme adaptation is practised, it is done to meet the needs of any student for which the standard curriculum is inappropriate and can be better implemented through adaptation (Rosell & Ondrik, 2013; Wright, 2005). It involves arranging curriculum content for students to pursue different objectives within the same programme or lesson. When a lecturer makes adaptations, the programme maintains the same learning outcomes but the goals, expectations, presentation, materials, assistance and environment may vary (Block, 2011; Rosell & Ondrik, 2013). Lecturers’ instruction

72

and content adaptation techniques that attend to students’ learning styles and needs can remove barriers to learning and support individual students to achieve more academically (Shay, 2013; Rosell & Ondrik, 2013; Block, 2011).

There are various ways in which a programme curriculum can be adapted to meet the needs of students from different backgrounds. Such adaptation ways include quantity, time, input, difficulty, output, participation, alternate goals and substitute curriculum (Wright, 2005; Rosell & Ondrik, 2013). When adapting the quantity of content, the curriculum implementer breaks down the concepts and activities and number of items/ activities the student is expected to complete before assessment into manageable units for the students. For example, an instructor can reduce number of TCD items a student must learn at a time and increase sessions in which the student practices the content activities or worksheets. However, use of this adaptive technique may impact on time allocated for each programme subject because the increase of time slots may be a challenge to timetable since students have a number of subjects taught per semester. When adapting the curriculum content through time, the time allocated for learning, completing and testing a task is altered to meet different students’ capabilities for effective teaching and learning i.e. pace learning can be differentiated for some students (Wright, 2005). Use of this technique enables one to attend to individual needs though it may be very demanding on the part of the instructors who have very large classes composed of students from diverse academic backgrounds.

However, this adaptation is an accommodation if the student can demonstrate mastery of the standard on an assessment. The accommodation is dependent upon alteration of the standards. If the standards are not altered, the adaptation may influence performance differences among students. Rosell & Ondrik (2013) assert that when a teacher makes adaptations on a curriculum, the same learning outcomes should be maintained, but the goals, presentation, teaching materials, the help offered and the learning environment may vary. If the adaptation methods are routinely employed, they need individualized goals and assessment methods. In this regard, the main issue is whether the student can ultimately master the same material and demonstrate that mastery in alternate supports. The other issue is whether the institutions can afford the relevant materials for the diverse students. The provision of Textile, Clothing and Design programmes in universities has raised concerns among the textile and clothing

73

stakeholders. Mupinga, Burnet & Redmann (2005) argue that the TCD implementation strategy is not clear as to whether the purpose of the programme is prevocational or intensive skills training. The teachers implementing the programmes are the same teachers who were trained for the old TVE which was mainly focused on offering vocational education. The approach placed more emphasis on narrow skills training meant to prepare students for specific jobs in the industry (Kennedy, 2013; UNESCO & ZIMDEF, 2005). However, with the improvement of technology, the new approach to TVE offering emphasize students’ creativity and innovation in solving industrial problems and development of better ways of carrying out job tasks (Afeti, 2014; Coltart, 2012; UNESCO & ZIMDEF, 2005).

A study carried out on student diversity and the Australian Curriculum found out that teachers adjust curriculum content and teaching and learning strategies according to students’ age and individual students’ needs (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, (ACARA) (Anderson & Boyle, 2015). The teachers aligned learning area content with the age of students to adjust the teaching and learning programmes according to students’ individual needs. The study reveals that the curriculum implementers adjust the programme content by drawing content aspects from learning area content at different levels from first year to the final year according to the age of students. That is adjustment of age equivalent content. For example, year six students may plan and conduct a specific investigation but at a lesser complex level, by exploring and answering questions. Content adjustments in the Australian curriculum is also done by drawing content from the curriculum and emphasizing specific aspects of one or more of the general capabilities. This enables adjustment of the learning focus in a specific learning area. For example, teaching targeted literacy or social skills through a science lesson with greater focus on general capabilities. However, use of this approach may result in loss of curriculum integrity due to generalization of the content aspects which may lead to loss of focus in relationto programme’s learning outcomes. This may lead to production of graduates lacking relevant knowledge and skills especially when dealing with TCD programmes as the areas selected by the lecturers may differ. Besides that, some instructors may not fulfill programme demands since there are no guiding principles as to which and how the content concepts are selected. The TCD students with diverse academic qualifications may require core relevant knowledge that enables them to develop their varying

74

academic levels in TCD and not general capabilities, as the general capabilities may not address university TCD programmes’ learning outcomes.

However, Felder & Brent (2005) propose content integration technique in which curriculum instructors combine a number of subjects/ courses into one course. The students acquire basic knowledge in the subjects/ courses in the combination within a limited time provided for the course, thereby depriving students from acquiring in-depth knowledge in the subjects/courses. The same authors also give a content adaptation technique in which the institutions categorize programmes’ content into foundation, breadth and depth courses. Foundation courses provide students with fundamental concepts for pursuing studies at a higher level. Breadth courses introduce students to different special areas in a given discipline, while depth courses offer specialization within each discipline. Such a technique is quite relevant in that it enables institutions to deliver programmes’ content from simple to complex. Students may enjoy working from the known to the unknown and the idea of specializing in a specific discipline enables them to acquire deeper knowledge and skills in the chosen area. For one to apply this adaptive measure in TCD provision, he/she has to ascertain the content level of the students and classify them according to whether they should go for foundation courses, breadth courses or depth courses. The technique requires a well- resourced institution that can accommodate the classification of course levels. However, when a lecturer makes adaptations of the programme, it is critical that he/she maintains the same learning outcomes although the goals, expectations, presentations, materials, assistance and environments may vary (Block, 2011; Rosell & Ondrik, 2013).

Studies by various researchers carried out globally also note that lecturers’ instruction and content adaptation techniques that attend to students’ learning styles and needs remove barriers to learning and support students to be more successful academically (Anderson & Boyle, 2015; Shay, 2013; Rosell & Wickham, 2008; Zepke & Leach, 2007). Therefore, the other way in which curriculum implementers can cater for diverse students is through adaptation of instructional techniques which is discussed in one of the next sections.

Australian instructors employ instructional adaptation in order to meet students’ diversities in their institutions (Anderson & Boyle, 2015; Exley & Kervin, 2013). The

75

instructional strategies include those that use explicit and systematic instruction. Examples arewhen instructors deliver curriculum content by identifying the subject’s key vocabulary for explicit instruction, providing alternative representation of teaching and learning materials such as use of multimedia, illustrated texts, simplified texts or captioned video, and providing feedback and correction. The use of such electronic media in delivering subject content may arouse students to develop interest in the lesson thereby facilitating student learning as in the use of videos. However, students may not conceptualize subject content if they are not engaged in the activity of the process and remain passive during the lesson. Instead, Wright (2005) suggests that the lecturers should adapt how the students respond to instructions.For example, instead of answering questions in writing; they should allow verbal responses, use communication books for some students, allow students to show knowledge with hands on materials and through demonstrations. Such techniques enable students to be active during the lesson.

Anderson & Boyle (2013) also reveals that the curriculum instructors can organize and connect subject content knowledge, skills and values to promote generalization so that the diverse students can effectively learn. The researchers provide a range of methods which the lecturers can use to organize and connect the subject content such as providing opportunities for students to generalize and maintain the learnt concepts, providing opportunities for the student to think aloud (Verbalization), motivating students through engagement with personal interests, and designing levels of promoting learning concepts during lesson delivery. These instructional techniques enable the lecturers to link what they deliver with the learned concept allowing the students to develop step by step in acquisition of subject content. This instructional technique links quite well with Felder and Brent’s (2007) content adaptation technique that links content from known to the unknown (foundation to depth subject content knowledge). The Exley & Kervin (2013) researchers in agreement with Wright (2005) provide another instructional mode that can be employed by curriculum instructors to cater for student diversities, which is use of alternative opportunities for students to represent their learning. Such opportunities include use of technology, augmentative and alternative communication systems, scaffolding student learning through guided practice and support, modeling problem solving, modeling and demonstrating skills, knowledge and cognitive strategies, and use of cross-curricular and naturally occurring

76

learning opportunities to enhance individual learning goals. The techniques that involve use of technology based applications are preferable since they match industry processes where students go for experiential learning and also get employed after graduating (Afeti, 2014; Nguku 2012). Also computer applications make designing processes simpler, faster and also enable students to model processes that would require live models and very expensive unaffordable equipment. The achievement of the above strategies also requires lecturer competencies and availability of resources. Therefore, there is need for examining how the lecturers in universities of technology adapt curriculum to meet the needs of students from diverse backgrounds.

The above strategies focus on inclusion of students with disabilities and those with different levels of capabilities. The issue of students with diverse academic qualifications may be catered for to a certain extent by some of the strategies. However, Rosell & Ondrik (2013) assert that inclusive schools’ focus is to adapt the curriculum in a regular education class as much as possible to meet the needs of any student for which the standard curriculum is inappropriate. It is therefore, not certain whether the students may acquire the relevant knowledge and skills especially in TCD provision at university level when the students pursue different objectives within the same lesson. Although Rosell and Ondrik (2013) argue that when teachers make content adaptations, the curriculum should maintain the same learning outcomes, the learning outcomes may also need to be adapted to meet industry stakeholders’ needs that change regularly due to technological development.

The lecturers must ensure an on-going programme content review and adaptation for the content to be relevant for the dynamic needs of students. The programme’s content must undergo necessary structural reform and modernization in order to meet the needs of diverse students who enter institutions of higher learning from diverse backgrounds as well as the shifts in the global economic environment (Tuffy, 2014; Catts, Falk & Wallace, 2011; Afeti, 2014). Research has revealed that there is increasing awareness of how well the programmes are catering for the constantly changing environmental and economic needs of students as well as how the institutions compare with corresponding institutions in other states in programmes content and provision strategies (Tremblay, Lalancette & Roseveare, 2012; Mitiku, Alemu & Mengsitu, 2014; Tkachenko, Bratland & Johnson, 2016; Machteld & Naomi, 2016). This entails that higher education institutions have an obligation to offer

77

curriculum content and implementation strategies that cater for the diverse needs of students in order to remain competitive in higher education. Curriculum content adaptation to cater for the students’ needs is one of the strategies that can be used to enhance student learning. However, curriculum adaptation techniques engaged by curriculum implementers should ensure maintenance of programmes’ learning outcomes (Rosell & Ondrik, 2013).

The Irish National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030 state that the main focus of technological universities is to provide education and research that is of high quality and is industry focused. Therefore, the content adaptation strategies adopted in these technological universities have to take cognizance of the diverse students for them to be competitive among other higher education institutions. The universities’ focus on industry that is emphasized through engagement in workplace learning, strong record of university engagement with local business through curriculum development and implementation, record of staff exchange, funding for training and research contracts and a record of international collaboration has to engage content adaptation in the mentioned areas for effective accommodation of diverse students through adaptation of curriculum content and implementation strategies (Tremblay et al., 2012).