1دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت آموزشی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران
2استاد گروه مدیریت آموزشی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی،واحد علوم و تحقیقات، تهران، ایران
چکیده
طراحی برنامه درسی یکی از بخش‌های اصلی فرآیند تدریس و یادگیری در آموزش‌وپرورش به شمار می‌رود. برنامه درسی شامل برنامه درسی آشکار، پنهان، پوچ و فوق برنامه است. درواقع، برنامه درسی پوچ به بخش‌های حذف شده و نادیده گرفته شده از یک برنامه درسی اشاره دارد. در این پژوهش تلاش شد تا از طریق مطالعه کتابخانه‌ای و مرور کتاب‌ها، مقالات و اسناد مرتبط تحلیلی بر برنامه درسی پوچ انجام گیرد و عواملی که موجب پوچ شدن برنامه درسی در طول یک دورة تحصیلی می‌شوند شناسایی شوند. برنامه درسی پوچ در سه سطح رخ می‌دهد: بخشی از محتوای کتاب‌های درسی توسط سیاست‌گذاران، نویسندگان کتـاب‌های درسی یا سیاستمداران، به دلیل عـدم تناسب آن با نیـازهای دانش‌آموزان و جـامعه حذف و یا اضافه می‌شوند. بخش‌هایی از محتوای برنامه درسی در مدرسه توسط مسئولان و معلمان مورد کم‌توجهی یا حتی بی‌توجهی قرار می‌گیرند. درنهایت، بخش‌هایی از محتوای برنامه درسی به واسطة دانش‌آموزان که با زندگی واقعی آنها مرتبط نباشد، مورد توجه قـرار نمی‌گیرند و جالب این‌که در این سطح هیچ‌گونه یادگیری هم رخ نمی‌دهد. هدف اصلی این پژوهش این است که به ارائة دیدگاه‌های نظری در مورد سه سطح برنامه درسی پوچ مبتنی بر نظام حاکم بر جامعه، مدرسه و دانش‌آموز بپردازد. درنهایت راهکارهایی را پیشنهاد می‌کنیم تا مانع پوچ شدن محتوا در برنامه‌ریزی و یا اجرای برنامه درسی شویم.
11Ph.D Student in educational management, Oloom Tahghighat Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2Professor, Department educational management, Oloom Tahghighat Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]
Curriculum design is one of the main parts of the process of teaching and learning in education. In fact, the null curriculum refers to the deleted and ignored parts of a curriculum. In this study, we tried to analyze the null curriculum and identify the factors that led to the null curriculum at schools. The null curriculum occurs in three levels: Some parts of the content of textbooks are deleted or added by policy makers, writers or politicians, due to the mismatch between the needs of students and society. Some parts of the content of the curriculum are neglected by staff and teachers in schools. Finally, some parts of the content of textbooks are omitted by the students that not connected with their real life. The main objective of this research is to provide a theoretical perspective on the three levels of the null curriculum based on governing system in society, schools and students. Finally, we propose some solutions to prevent of null content in the planning or execution of curriculum.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
Curriculum, Null, Null Curriculum
مراجع
Adib, Yousef; Fathi Azar, Eskandar; Karimi, Seyed Bahaeddin; Soltani, Akbar. (2016). Master perception Conseling Group of null curriculum At the University: Qualitative Study. Research in Curriculum Planning Vol 13. No 23. Autumn 2016.
Ainley, M., Hidi, S. and Berndorff D. (2002). Interest A unique motivational. Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship, Journal of Educational Psychology 94,pp.545-561.
Cheong Cheng, Yin. (1994) Effectiveness of Curriculum Change in School. International Journal of Educational Management volume 8 number 31994 pp.26-34.
Eisner E. W. (1985). The educational imagination: on the design and evaluation of school programs. 2nd Ed. New York: Macmillan;
Eisner, E. W. (1986). Educational imagination on the design and evaluation of school programs. New York: Macmillan cokkege publishing company.
Ghourchian, Nadergholi (2008); “Curriculum in Educational System”, Tehran: Farashenakhti Publications.
Hanze M, Berger R (2007). Cooperative learning, motivational effects, and student characteristics An experimental study comparing cooperative learning and direct instruction in 12th grade physics classes. Learning and Instruction; 17(1):29-41.
Krull, Edgar, Oras, Kaja and Sisask Sirje. (2006). Differences in teachers, comments on classroom evens as indicators of their professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, Article in Press.
Lietz P, Tarabshkina L. (2009). Achievement and learning approaches of sojoumer students: Do gender and academic discipline make a difference? Australian Association for Research in Education International Education Research Conference;
Maleki, Hassan (2000); “Designing of Curriculum” Tehran, Iran,
Mansouri Gargar, Rahimeh; Salehi, Akbar; Salehi, Efat. (2016). “Curriculum characteristics of in the era of globalizing and internationalizing of curriculum.” Research in Curriculum Planning Vol 13. No 23. Autumn 2016, Pages 1-13.
Matthews, Bobbie, Lietz, Petra and Ngurah, Gusti. (2007). Values and learning approaches of students at an international university darmawan. Social Psychology of Education, Flinders University, Institute of International Education, Po Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia.
Oliva, P. (1997) “The curriculum: Theoretical dimensions”. New York: Longman.
Portelli, John. (1987). Perspectives and Imperatives on Defining Curriculum. Journal of curriculum and supervisin. Vol 2. no 4.
Ryan K. (1993). Mining the values in the curriculum. Character Education; 51(3): 16-18.
Shariatmadari, Ali. (1990). Society and education. Tehran: Amir Kabir Publications.
Sheikhzade, Mostafa (2013); “Intended, Implemented, and Experiential Null Curriculum”, Life Science Journal, 82-85.
Short, E, C. (1982). Curriculum Development and organization. Encyclopedia of educational research.
Skubic Ermenck K. (2010). Brief note of national developments on curriculum policies and practices. European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training.
Stiglerw, J.W. and Stevenson, H.W. (1991). How asian teachers polish each lesson to perfection. American educator, 15(1).
Yeping, Li. (2003). Knowing, understanding and exploring the content and formation of Curriculum materials: a Chinese approach to empower prospective elementary school teachers pedagogically. International Journal of Educational Research Volume 37, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 179- 193.
Wilson, L. O, (2014); “A dozen important concepts and teaching strategies….”,
Zeidner M, Schleyer EJ (1999). The effect of educational context on individual difference variables, selfperceptions of giftedness, and school attitudes in gifted adolescents. J Youth Adoles 1999; 28(6): 687-703.
ابتدای صفحه