پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسی

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

تاریخچه مجله

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اطلاعات آماری نشریه

اخبار و اعلانات

واکاوی ادراک متخصصان برنامه درسی ایران نسبت به مؤلفه‌های پارادایم برنامه درسی نوفهمی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مطالعات برنامه درسی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران.

3 دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

پژوهش حاضر با استفاده از روش پدیدارنگاری درصدد کشف کلیدی‌ترین ادراک متخصصان برنامه درسی ایران از مؤلفه‌های برنامه درسی نوفهمی است. از طریق مصاحبه‌های نیمه‌ساختاریافته با 21 نفر از متخصصان واجد شرایط، داده‌های لازم گردآوری و پس از طی فرایند کدگذاری، در قالب 251 کد باز، 81 کد محوری و 29 کد انتخابی، در زیرمجوعة هشت مؤلفه پارادایم نوفهمی، سازمان‌دهی شدند. حاصل نهایی تحلیل داده‌ها، حاکی از آن است که رهایی‌بخشی؛ برنامه‌ای نقاد و روشنگر، عدالت محور، روشنفکر مدار و یادگیرنده محور است. توجه به عوامل فرامدرسه‌ای؛ با نگاه جامع فرهنگی، تلقی زمینه‌ای و همسویی با تجارب جامعه محلی به دنبال مدیریت عوامل تأثیرگذار بر برنامه درسی است. تاریخ‌نگاری؛ مترادف با پایش روندی و جامع عقاید برنامه درسی، مکتوب کردن میراث برنامه درسی، عبرت‌آموزی، وقایع‌نگاری عقاید برنامه درسی و اقدام مبتنی بر خودشناسی به کار رفته است. میان‌رشته‌ای؛ مدیریت تعاملی و همه‌جانبه نگراست. بین‌المللی کردن مطالعات برنامه درسی؛ بسترسازی تعاملات فرهنگی، شور فرهنگی و هم‌افزایی فرهنگی در برنامه‌های درسی است. رابطة نظریه و عمل در نگرش‌های تمایل قطبی به نظریه، تمایل رفت و برگشتی و تمایل قطبی به عمل توصیف شده است. تغییر برنامه‌ریزی درسی به فهم برنامه درسی در اعتقاد به شیفت پارادایمی، عدم اعتقاد به شیفت پارادایمی و معنابخشی و نموددهی به هویت‌های جدید برنامه درسی تجلی یافته و درنهایت اتوبیوگرافیکال بودن برنامه‌های درسی با عناوین شخصی شده، ترکیبی و پژوهش‌محور مشخص شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Exploration of the Iranian Curricularists' Understanding of Reconceptualization Curriculum Components paradigm

نویسندگان [English]

  • salam yaghobi 1
  • ali hosseinikahe 2
  • Mostafa ghaderi 3
  • Marjan Kian 2

1 Ph. d student of curriculum studiy, Department of Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor of curriculum studies, kharazm'i University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Associate Professor of curriculum studies, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

The present study, using phenomenological method, seeks to discover the most important perception of Iranian curriculum specialists on the components of the reconceptualization curriculum. Through semi-structured interviews with 21 qualified experts, the necessary data were collected and organized during the coding process in the form of 251 open source codes, 81 axial codes and 29 selective codes, under the Eight Components of reconceptualization Paradigm.The end result of the data analysis is that emancipation is a critical and enlightening, justice-based, intellectual-focused, and learner-centered emancipation. Attention toextra-school factors; with a comprehensive cultural perspective, contextualization and alignment with local community experiences seeks to manage the factors influencing the curriculum. Historiography; has been synonymous Monitoring the process and comprehensive curriculum ideas, curriculum heritage writingLearn a lesson, Logistics of Curriculum Opinions, and Self-based practice. Interdisciplinary; interactive management and comprehensive. Internationalizing curricular studies; is the context of cultural interaction, cultural passion and cultural synergy in the curricula. The relation between theory and practice; has been described in polar attitudes to theory, reciprocal tendency, and polar tendency to practice. Changing the Curriculum Development to the Curriculum Understanding; in Belief in Paradigm Shift, Non-Belief in Paradigm Shift, Meaningfulness and Demonstration of New Curriculum Identities and Finally Auto-biographical Curriculum with Personalized, Combined and Research-Based Titles have been marked.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • understanding
  • Curriculum Specialists in Iran
  • Reconceptualization Components paradigm
مراجع
Ahanchian, N; Shabani Varki, B. (2012). Heuristics in higher education syllabus: The ratio of heuristic solutions to traditionalists, conceptualists and conceptualists. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies, Volume 3, Issue 5, Spring and Summer 2012. (Persian).
Aoki, T. (2005). Curriculum in a New Key. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publisher, United States of America.
Apple, M. W., and King, N. (1976). What Do Schools Teach? Humanism and Education. Edited by James B. Macdonald and
 
WilliamGephart. Bloomington, Indiana: phi DeltaKappa.
Ayers, W. (2002). To teach: The journey of a teacher. Teachers College Press, New York.
Barrow, R. (1988). Over the top: A misuse of philosophical techniques? Interchange, 19 (2), 59-63.
Bronfenbrnner, U. (2006). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cannella, G. (2002). Deconstructing early childhood education: Social justice and revolution. Peter Lang, New York.
Dahlberg, G., Moss, P., & Pence, A. (1999). Beyond quality in early childhood education and care: Postmodern perspectives. London: Falmer Press.
Danaei Fard, H; Kazemi, H. (2009). Improvement of Interpretative Research in Organization: A Philosophical Review and the Process of Implementing the Phenomenological Method, Journal of Improvement and Development Management Studies, No. 61, Winter 88 and Spring 89, pp. 121 to147. (Persian).
Delacruz, E. M. (2012). Revisiting Curriculum Conceptions: A Thematic Perspective.
Dewey, J. (1998). Experience and education, Kappa Delta Pi, West Lafayette, IN.
Fathi Vajjarah, C. (2007). Curriculum Towards New Identities (Contemporary Theory), Tehran: Ayje Publishing. (Persian).
Ghaderi, M. (2013a). Historical Analyzing of Reconceptualism: implication and
intentions related to it in Curriculum Field. Journal of Theory & Practice in Curriculum. Vol.1 (1); 2013, 49-72. (Persian).
Ghaderi, M. (2013b). Reconceptualization in Curriculum Studies from Reconceptualization to Post – Reconceptualization. Avaye Noor Press, Tehran. (Persian).
Giroux, H. A., Penna, A. N., & Pinar, W. F. (1981). Curriculum & instruction: Alternatives in education.
Gough, N. (2007). Changing planes: rhizosemiotic play in transnational education curriculum inquiry, Stud philos Educe (2007) 26:279- 294.
Greene, M. (1973). Identities and Contours: an Approach to Educational History, 1973.
 Greene, M. (1974). Cognition, Consciousness and Curriculum, 1974, p. 70
Grieshaber S (2008). Interrupting stereotypes: Teaching and the education of young children. Early Educ. Dev. 19: 505-518.
Grumet, M. R. (1976). Psychoanalytic foundations, W. F. Pinar, M. R. Grumet. Toward a Poor curriculum. Dubuque, Kendall Hunst, pp. 111-146.
Huebner, D. (1976). Toward remarking of Curricular Language, 1974, p. 41.
Huebner, D. (1981). Toward a political economy of curriculum and human development. In H. A. Giroux, A. N. Penna, & W. F. Pinar (Eds.), Curriculum & instruction: Alternatives in education (pp. 124-128).
Huebner, D. (1999). The lure of the transcendent. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jacobs, H.H. (1989), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and Implementation, Alexandria VA, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jahan Faghihi, A; Piran, Z. Qualitative Recognition of Dimensions and Components of a Thoughtful Curriculum, Quarterly Educational Research Quarterly, Spring 2017 - Number 50 Pages 50-23. (Persian).
Jickling, B. (1988). Paradigms in curriculum development: Critical comments on the work of Tanner and Tanner. Interchange, 19 (2),41-49.
Khosravi, R; Mehr Mohammadi, M. (2012). Transformative Curriculum: A Critical Reflection on the Concept of a Predefined Curriculum, Iranian Curriculum Studies Quarterly, No. 7, No. 25, Summer 2012. (Persian).
Kliebard, H. (1986). The struggle for the American Curriculum 1896. Boston: Routledge.
Klohr, P. (1974). Curriculum Theory: the state of the field. Columbs. OH: Ohio State University. College of Education. Unpublished Manuscript.
MacNaughton, G. (2001). Rethinking gender in early childhood education, Sage, London.
McKnight, D. (2006). The gift of a curriculum method, Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, Information Age Publishing.
 Mehr Mohammadi, M. (1990). The Future of Education, Quarterly Journal of Education. (Persian).
Mehrmohammadi, M. (2013). Curriculum: Views, Approaches, and Perspectives, Tehran: B Publish Company. (Persian).
Mehrmohammadi, M; Amin Khandaghi, M. (2008). Comparison of Eisner Curriculum Ideologies with Miller: A Different View, Journal of Educational Studies and Psychology of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Volume 10, No. 1,2009. (Persian).
Miller, J. L. (2005). The Sounds of silence breaking. New York: Peter Lang.
Piirto, J. (1999). Implications of Postmodern Curriculum Theory for the Education of the Talented, Journal for the Education of the Gifted. Vol.
Pinar, W, F. (1975). Preface, and Curriculum Theorizing: The Reconceptualists, 1975a, pp. 11–13.
Pinar, W, F. (1994). Autobiography and an Architecture of self, in Autobiography, politics and Sexuality, New York: peter long.
Pinar, W, F. (2000). Preface [Curriculum Studies: The Reconceptualization.
Pinar, W, F. (2004). What Is Curriculum Theory, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates publishing.
Pinar, W, F. and Grumet, M. (1976). Theory and Practice and the Reconceptualization of Curriculum Studies, 1981, pp. 30, 36, 38.
Pinar, W.F. (2008). What Is Curriculum Theory? London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Posner, G. (1998). Models of curriculum planning. In: L. Beyer & M. Apple. (Eds.). The curriculum: Problems, politics and possibilities New York: Suny Press.
Schubert, W. (1996). Curriculum. Perspective, Paradigm, and Possibility, p. 316.
Schwab, J. J. (1981). The concept of structure of a discipline. In H. A. Giroux, A. N. Penna & W. F. Pinar (Eds.), Curriculum & instruction: Alternatives in education (pp. 51-62).
Sharif, M. (2011). Theory of Discourse Theory, Research and Practice of the Conceptualist Curriculum, Isfahan University Academic Jihad. (Persian).
Sharifian, F. (2014). Paradigmatic controversies in the curriculum and the analysis of the flow of conceptualization from the perspective of the claim of the paradigm shift, the scientific research journal "Curriculum Research", Volume 4, Issue 1, Spring and Summer 2014, Pages1- 22. (Persian).
Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. (1979). Emancipation from research: The reconceptualist prescription. Educational Researcher, 8 (6), 8-12.
Walker, D. F. (1985). Curriculum and technol ogy. In 1985ASCD Yearbook: Current thought on curriculum (pp. 93-102). Alexandria, VA: ASCD
Wraga, W. & Hlebowitsh, P. (2003). Toward a renaissance in curriculum theory and development in the USA. Curriculum Studies, 35 (4), 425-437.
Wraga, W. (1999). Extracting sun-beams out of cucumbers: The retreat from practice in reconceptualized curriculum studies. Educational Researcher, 28 (1), 4-13.
پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسی
دوره 17، شماره 64 - شماره پیاپی 64
اردیبهشت 1399
صفحه 18-45
فایل ها
اشتراک گذاری
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار