نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 فردوسی مشهد

2 تربیت مدرس

چکیده

هدف اصلی این پژوهش، بررسی و مقایسه دیدگاه‌های دو صاحب نظر در زمینه دانش پایه تدریس و دانش معلمان، لی شولمن و گری فنسترماخر می‌باشد. شولمن اشکال دانش تدریس را شامل انواع دانش گزاره‌ای (موضوعی)، دانش موردی و دانش راهبردی می‌داند و دانش پایه تدریس و دانش معلمان را شامل طبقه‌های مختلف دانش محتوایی، دانش محتوایی- تربیتی، دانش عمومی تربیتی، دانش برنامه درسی، دانش درباره یادگیرندگان و خصوصیات آنها، دانش درباره موقعیت تربیتی و دانش درباره هدف‌ها، مقاصد و ارزش‌های تربیتی و زمینه‌های تاریخی و فلسفی معرفی می‌کند. فنسترماخر، اشکال دانش تدریس را به دو دسته کلی، دانش رسمی تدریس و دانش عملی تدریس تقسیم می‌کند. فنسترماخر عناصر تدریس خوب را شامل فعالیت‌های منطقی، فعالیت‌های روان‌شناختی و فعالیت‌های اخلاقی می‌داند. هر دو دیدگاه از اندیشه‌های شواب تأثیر پذیرفته اند و هر دو دانش تدریس و دانش معلمان را هم از جهت عملی و هم از جهت نظری و موضوعی مورد مطالعه قرار دادند. در این میان، فنسترماخر تاکید بیشتری روی عمل معلمان و دانش عملی آنها دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The nature of teaching knowledge and teachers knowledge; compare the viewpoints of Lee Shulman and Gary Fenstermacher

نویسندگان [English]

  • ahmadreza fazeli 1
  • Mahmoud mehrmohammadi 2

1 Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

2 Tarbiat Modarres

چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to review and compare the views of two experts in the field of basic teaching knowledge and teachers knowledge, Lee Shulman and Gary Fenstermacher. Shulman forms of teaching knowledge include: propositional knowledge (subject), strategic knowledge and strategic knowledge. Shulman Basic knowledge of teaching and teachers knowledge, including classes, such as: Content knowledge, Pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, curriculum knowledge, knowledge of learners and their characteristics, knowledge of educational status and knowledge about goals, purposes and values of education and historical context and philosophical views. Fenstermacher divided forms of teaching knowledge, knowledge of formal teaching and practical teaching knowledge. Fenstermacher raises good teaching and good teaching elements including logic operations, psychological operations and activities as ethical. Both influenced Schwab's ideas and both studied teachers knowledge of the practical and theoretical issues. But Fenstermacher is more emphasis on the practical knowledge of teachers and their work.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • teaching knowledge
  • teachers' knowledge
  • knowledge basic teaching
  • Lee Shulman
  • Fenstermacher
Ben-Peretz, M. (2011). Teacher knowledge: What is it? How do we uncover it? What are its implications for schooling? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 3-9.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1987). Teachers’ personal knowledge: What ounts as ‘personal’ in studies of the personal. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 9(6), 487–500.
Desforges, C. (1995). How dose experiencing affect theoretical knowledge for teaching? Learning and Instruction, 5, 385-400.
Feldmen, A. (1995), Teachers learning Foram teachers: Knowledge and understanding in collaborative action research. University of Massachusetts.
Fenstermacher, G., & Richardson, V. (2005). On making determinations of quality in teaching. Teachers college records, 107(1), 186-213.
Fenstermacher, G. (2001). On the concept of manner and its visibility in teaching practice. Curriculum studies, 33(6), 639-653.
Fenstermacher, G., & Richardson, V. (2001). Manner in teaching: the study in four parts. Curriculum studies, 33(6), 631-637.
Fenstermacher, G. (1994). The Knower and the Known: the nature of knowledge in research on teaching. In Linda Darling Hammond (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 20, 3-56.
Grossman, P. L., & Richert, A. E. (1988). Unacknowledged knowledge growth: A Reexamination of the effects of teacher education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4 (I), 53-62.
Hanuscin, D. L., & Lee, J. E. (2011). Developing PCK for teaching teachers through a mentored internship in teacher professional development. Association for Science Teacher Education.
Jalil, Z., Loh, W.I., & Lee, C. K. E. (2009). The role of primary science teacher s subject matter knowledge & pedagogical content knowledge in lesson study. National Institute of Education, Singapore.
Khakbaz, A. (2010). Schwab Line – Shulman, Special Conference on Teacher Education, Group curriculum, Schwab and deliberation practice. Newsletter No. 3, Society for Iranian Curriculum Studies. (In Persian).
Mehrmohamadi, M. (2008). Rethinking teaching-learning and teacher training. School Publishing. (In Persian).
Munby, H., Russell, T., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Teachers’ knowledge and how it develops. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. 877–904.
Osborne, M. D. (1998). Teacher as Knower and Learner: Reflections on Situated Knowledge in Science Teaching. Research in Science Teaching, 35 (4) 427–439.
Shulman, L.S, (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15(3) 4–14.
Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1), 1–22.
Shulman, L., Sherine, M. (2004). Fostering communities of teachers as learners: disciplinary perspectives. Stanford University.
Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H. (2004). How and What Teachers Learn: A Shifting Perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36 (2), 257-271.
Shulman, L. S. (2004). The Wisdom of practice: essays on teaching, learning, and learning to teach, Jossy bass. Reviewed by Michael Thomasian.
Shulman, L. S. (2011). The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: A Personal Account and Reflection. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1).
Van Dijek, E. M., Zentrum, D., & Ossietzky, C. V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in sight? A Comment on Kansanen. Orbis Scholae, 3 (2) 19–26.
Verloop, N., Driel, J. V., & Meijer, P. (2001). Teacher knowledge and the knowledge base of teaching. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 441–461.
Toom, A. (2006). Tacit Pedagogical Knowing at the Core of Teacher’s Professionality. University of Helsinki Faculty of Behavioural Sciences.