نویسندگان
1 استادیار برنامه درسی گروه علوم تربیتی دانشگاه کردستان
2 کارشناس ارشد علوم تربیتی دانشگاه کردستان
چکیده
هدف از پژوهش حاضرسنجش باورهای اساتید دانشگاه کردستان برای پی بردن به جهت گیری غالب برنامه ی درسی آنان است. پژوهش از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی و از لحاظ شیوه گردآوری داده‌ها، توصیفیِ پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری شامل کلیه اعضای هیات علمی دانشگاه کردستان است که در سال تحصیلی 94-93 مشغول به تدریس بودند . با توجه به محدود بودن حجم جامعه، نه از روش نمونه‌گیری بلکه از روش سرشماری کامل استفاده شد. ابزار گردآوری داده‌ها پرسشنامه جهت گیری های برنامه ی درسی(COI) است. روایی و پایایی این پرسش نامه در تحقیقات قبل اثبات شده بود اما برای اطمینان و لزوم انطباق با جامعه ما، روایی پرسشنامه با استناد به نظر اساتید علوم تربیتی و پایایی آن با استناد به ضریب آلفای کرونباخ (820 .) مورد بررسی مجدد قرار گرفت. نتایج نشان دادکه ابتدا جهت گیری برنامه ی درسی فرایندهای شناختی، و بعد از آن جهت گیری برنامه ی درسی عقل گرایی آکادمیک جهت گیری غالب اساتید بود. نکته دیگری عدم پیروی از یک جهت گیری در مواجه با عناصر برنامه درسی توسط اساتید بود. همچنین نتایج نشان داد که میان جهت گیری برنامه ی درسی اساتید و حوزه تخصص آن ها ارتباط وجود دارد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Assessing the Faculty Members Curriculum Orientations: Case Study in University of Kurdistan
نویسندگان [English]
- jamal salimi 1
- ziba shabazi 2
1 Correspond Author (Assistance Professor in Curriculum Studies- University of Kurdistan)
2 M.A in Educational Science- University of Kurdistan
چکیده [English]
The purpose of the present study is measuring the dominant orientation of the Kurdistan University Professors curriculum. This study is practical, in terms of purpose, and is descriptive survey, in terms of data collection methods. The target population is consists of all Kurdistan University faculty members who were teaching in 94-93 the academic year. Not sampling method but a complete census was used, due to the limited population size. Data collection tools are Mahlios standard questionnaire which measures dominant orientation of professors. Validity of this questionnaire reviewed and approved according to curriculum field professors and experts' opinion and its reliability reviewed and approved according to Cronbach's alpha coefficients (820). The results showed that first, the curriculum orientation of cognitive processes and then the curriculum orientation of academic rationalism was professors dominant orientation. The results also showed that there is relationship between the professors' curriculum orientation and their expertise.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Curriculum planning
- Curriculum orientations
- Faculty Members
Ashour, R., Khasawneh, S., Abu-Alruz, J., & Alsharqawi, S. (2012). Curriculum orientations of pre-service teachers in Jordan: A required reform initiative for Professional development. Teacher Development, 16 (3), 345-360. Baldeston, J. (2000). Knowledge & university. Journal of Higher Education, vol. 26, No. 1. Bas, G. (2013). Curriculum Design Orientations Preference Scale of Teachers: Validity and Reliability Study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice - 13(2) • Spring •981-991. Bay, E., Gündoğdu, K., Dilekçi, D., Ozan, C ve Özdemir, D. (2011). Investigation of elementary prospective teachers' curriculum approaches: Ataturk University Case. Oral presentation, II. İnternational Education Curriculum and İnstruction Congress, Abant İzzet baysal University, Bolu/Turkey. Cheung D, Wong H. (2002). Measuring teacher beliefs about alternative curriculum designs. The Curriculum Journal. 13(2): 225-248. Cheung, D. (2000a). Analyzing the Hong Kong junior secondary science syllabus using the concept of curriculum orientations. Educational Research Journal, 15(1), 69-94. Cheung, D. (2000b). Measuring teachers’ meta-orientations to curriculum: Application of hierarchal confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Experimental Educator 68: 149–65. Crummey, M. A. (2007). Curriculum orientations of alternative education teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas the Graduate School, Kansas. Cunningham, R., J. Johnson, and S. Carlson. (1992). Curriculum orientations of home economic teachers. Paper presented at the American Vocational Association Convention, December 7, St Louis, MO. Eisner, E.W., & Vallance, E. (1974). Conflicting conceptions of curriculum. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan. Ennis, C.D., Chen, A., & Ross, J. (1992b). Educational value orientations as a theoretical framework for experienced urban teachers' curricular decision making. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 25, 156-163 Ennis, C.D., Mueller, L.K., & Hooper, L.M. (1990). The influence of teacher value orientations on curriculum planning within the parameters of a theoretical framework. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 61, 360-368. Ennis, C.D., Ross, J., & Chen, A. (1992a). The role of value orientations in curricular decision making: A rationale for teacher's goals and expectations. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63, 38-47. Foil, J. (2008). Determining the curriculum orientations of public school administrators using the modified curriculum orientation inventory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas the Graduate School, Kansas. Horn, N. (2011). Curriculum orientation of virtual teachers: A basic interpretive study of secondary teachers’ development of curriculum orientations. In M. Koehler, & P. Mishra, (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference (pp. 1857-1860). Chesepeake, VA: AACE. Jenkins, S. B. (2009). Measuring teacher beliefs about curriculum orientations using the Modified-curriculum orientations inventory. The Curriculum Journal Vol. 20, No. 2, June 2009, 103–120. Kemmis, S., Cole, P. & Suggett, D. (1983). Orientations to curriculum and transition: Towards the socially-critical school. Melbourne: Victorian Institute of Secondary Education. Klein, M. F. (1986). Alternative curriculum conceptions and designs, Theory into Practice, 21, 31-35. MacNeil, M.S. (2007). Concept mapping as a means of course evaluation. Journal of Nursing Education, 46 (5), 232-235. Mahlios, M., S. Rice, and K. Thomas. (2004). Teachers’ views of curriculum: the hedgehog v. the fox. Thirty-fifth Annual Meeting of the American Educational Studies Association, November 3–7, in Kansas City, Missouri. McNeil, J. D. (1996) Curriculum: A Comprehensive Introduction. New York: Harper- Collins College. Miller, N.P. 1983. The educational spectrum orientations to curriculum. New York: Longman. Ng, P. H., & Cheung, D. (2002). Student-teachers' beliefs on primary science curriculum orientations. New Horizons in Education, 45, 42-53. Ornstein A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2009). Curriculum foundations, principles and issues. (5th edition). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Reding, C. A. (2008). Curricular orientations of Catholic school teachers and administrators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas the Graduate School, Kansas. Ryu S. (2009). Curriculum orientations and professional teaching practices, reported by Korean secondary school home economics teachers and teacher educators. [Dissertation]. Ohio: Ohio State University. Schiro, M.S. (1992). Educators’ perceptions of changes in their curriculum belief systems over time. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 7 (3), pp. 250–286. Schiro, M.S. (2008). Curriculum Theory: Conflicting Visions and Enduring Concerns. SAGE Publications. Schubert, W. H. (1986). Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. New York: Macmillan. Tannverdi, B & Apak, O. (2014). Pre-service Teachers’ Beliefs about Curriculum Orientations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 842 – 848. Wiles, J., & Bondi, J. (2007). Curriculum development: A guide to practice (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
