Ian Frank & Malcolm Field; Creating Meaningful Learning
Future University-Hakodate, Japan
Corresponding author: ianf@fun.ac.j

Keywords & Précis:We describe an implemented example of an interdisciplinary higher education curriculum design thatprivileges meta-skills as a common goal for all first-year classes. We then discuss how the challenge of"teaching technological thinking without technology" can allow students to reinforce appropriatecompetencies across a curriculum.

Short biography of lead author:
Professor Ian Frank graduated from the Department of Artificial Intelligence at Edinburgh University, wherehis PhD research was on computer game playing and how to automatically explain a computer՚s “thinking”
to humans. “The understanding and explanation of the complex” is a good summary not just of his researchinterests in science, but also of his experience in teaching. He became a faculty of Future UniversityHakodate in 2001, and has been experimenting with educational practices and workshops over severalyears. More information on his workshops and teaching can be found at www.koto-tsukuri.org.

Abstract:
Higher education in Japan is facing an identity crisis: on the one hand, university education is generally
essential to attain employment in most white collar jobs, while on the other hand, fiscal support for higher
education is being reduced.
Resource limitations are particularly evident in the public sector where national and public universities arebeing required to rethink their position in society, and in some cases, are being required to become semiautonomous organizations (Monbukagakusho 1997).

pThis paper describes our experiences of working within the contradictions of the Japanese system, anddraws concrete and general lessons for both theory and practice. First, we describe an implemented
example of interdisciplinary higher education curriculum design that we have successfully introduced in ourhome institution. A key educational feature of the design is the privileging of meta-skills as a common goal
for all first-year classes. This approach was especially important in our institution since although it isprimarily a science and technology school, it also has significant components of design and communication
education. For students in Japan, meta-skills do not fit easily within their learned educational experience.
Students can acquire knowledge, and can demonstrate some level of comprehension of that knowledge,
but they are unused to questioning, comparing, contrasting, or creating new outcomes that have been
based on decisions and information gathered from alternative criteria. We describe our experience ofinitiating a “Center for Meta-Learning” (CML) and the challenges it faces in crossing academic paradigms,and reconciling mindsets of different cultures.

We ourselves follow Salomon and Perkins (1989: 7) in the belief that the transfer of knowledge or skills fromone situation to another “is not easy and it does not happen on its own; it requires the mindful abstractionof a principle…”. Especially, there is a growing worldwide body of evidence that the introduction oftechnology into classrooms often does not produce anticipated improvements in learning. For instance, thereport by Pegg et al. (2007) on ICT learning in Australia concluded that “Most state and territory projects
are yet to see the rewards of their efforts”. We have been working towards addressing this issue bydeveloping a framework that can support learners' thinking, both with and without technology, even before
they actually encounter computers. In particular, we have used the notion of koto from Japanese philosophy
to develop a series of workshops that target an understanding of how people interact with theirenvironment. By maximally reducing the technology in our workshops, we have arrived at the original
research challenge: “How can technological thinking be taught without technology?” This has led us to theongoing formalization of technological thinking primitives, with accompanying teaching practices andworkshop activities. This formalization raises the possibility of the reinforcement of technological thinking inclasses other than those directly related to technology. We discuss how, through a clear and concise
formalisation of what it actually means to think in a technological way, appropriate competencies can be
reinforced not only in classes that use technology, but also across a curriculum.

References
Monbukagakusho (1997) “Educational Reform: Why is educational reform needed now?” Japanese Government.
Available online from <http://www.monbu.go.jparamashi/1997eng/e201.html>
Pegg, J., Reading, C. and Williams, M. (2007) “Partnerships in ICT Learning Study.” Full report, Department ofScience, Education and Training, Canberra. Available online from<http://www.deewr.gov.au/Schooling/DigitalEducationRevolution/Documents/pictl_full_report1.pdf>
Salomon, G. and Perkins, D.N. (1989) “Rocky Roads to Transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglectedphenomenon.” Educational Psychologist 24 (2), pp.113–42