نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 فردوسی مشهد

2 دانشگاه فرهنگیان

چکیده

هدف اصلی این پژوهش، بررسی ارتباط میان دانش نظری و عملی معلمان در هر یک از پارادایم های اجرای برنامه درسی است. بر مبنای سه نوع پارادایم حوزه مطالعاتی برنامه درسی که با مطمح نظر قرار دادن نسبت میان نظریه و عمل شکل گرفته است، به بیان سه نوع رابطه میان دانش نظری و دانش عملی مورد نیاز معلمان در تدریس پرداخته شده است. این سه نوع رابطه، در دل سه پارادایم برای اجرای برنامه درسی، مورد بحث قرار گرفته اند. این سه پارادایم با ترکیبی از عناوین پارادایم های حوزه مطالعات برنامه-درسی و اجرای برنامه درسی، فنی- وفادارنه، فکورانه- انطباقی و انتقادی- برآمدنی نام گذاری می شوند. هر یک از این سه رابطه، پیامدهای متفاوتی را نیز برای شکل گیری برنامه های درسی رشد و توسعه حرفه ای معلمان در بردارد. در پارادایم فنی- وفادارنه، برنامه-های رشد حرفه ای بر انتقال دانش نظری و مهارت آموزی در فنون هر چه اثر بخش تر تدریس تأکید دارد. این برنامه ها در پارادایم فکورانه- انطباقی ضمن توجه به انتقال دانش نظری بروز، رشد و پرورش تأمل عملی معلمان را مطمح نظر قرار می گیرد. برنامه های رشد حرفه ای در پارادایم انتقادی- برآمدنی نیز شکلی از پژوهش فردی یا گروهی، به خود می گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Rethinking on Paradigms for Curriculum Implementation: The Linkage between Teachers Theoretical and Practical Knowledge

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maghsood Amin Khandaghi 1
  • Azam zarghani 1
  • Bakhtiar Shabani Varaki 1
  • nematallah mosapour 2

1 Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

2 central Farhangian University

چکیده [English]

The aim of this study is investigation of the relation between theoretical and practical knowledge of teachers in curriculum implementation paradigms. In this article, three relationships between theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge were presented. These were formed with regard to three paradigms in curriculum studies field which based on relationship between theory and practice. Three relationships between theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge were discussed in three paradigms of curriculum implementation. The combination of these paradigms and curriculum implementation models form three curriculum implementation paradigms which are named technical-faithfully, reflective- adaptive and critical-emergent. Any of these relationships have diverse consequences for teacher's professional development Curriculum. In technical- faithfully paradigm, teacher's professional development Curriculum emphasize on knowledge transferring and training for teaching effectively. In reflective- adaptive paradigms, the growth and development of teacher practical reflection is concerned. Teacher's professional development Curriculum in critical-emergent paradigm is a form of individual or collective research.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Theoretical knowledge
  • practical knowledge
  • paradigm
  • implementation
  • curriculum
Aoki, T. (2005). Curriculum implementation as instrumental action and as situational praxis, In W. F. Pinar. & R.L. Irvin. (Eds.). Curriculum in new key (pp. 111-123). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations.
Beauchamp, G. A. (2011). Curriculum Theory (4th ed.) (M. Aghazadeh, Trans.). Tehran: Ayij. (In Persian).
Beauchamp, G. A. (1982). Curriculum theory: meaning, development, and use. Theory into Practice, 21(1), 23-37.
Ben-Peretz, M. & Eilam, B. (2010). Curriculum use in the classroom, In P. Petersonw. & E. Baker. & B. Mcgaw. (Eds.). International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed.) (pp. 348-354). Oxford: Elsevier.
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.
Bourdieu, P. (1973). The three forms of theoretical knowledge. Social Science Information, 12(1), 53- 80.
Briscoe, C. (1991). The dynamic interactions among beliefs, role metaphors and teaching practices: a case study of teacher change, Science Education, 75(2), 185-199.
Car, W. (2006). Philosophy, methodology and action research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40(4), 421-435.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical. London: Routledge.
Cho, J. (1998). Rethinking curriculum implementation: paradigms, models and teachers' work. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, SanDiego, California (13-17 April).
Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED421767.pdf
Cochran- Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1998). Teacher research: the question that persist, INT. J. leadership in Education, 1(1), 19-39.
Cochran- Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1999). Chapter8: Relationships of knowledge and practice: teacher learning in communities, Review of Research in Education, 24, 249-305.
Dufee, L. & G. Aikenhead. (1992). Curriculum change, student evaluation, and teacher practical knowledge. Science Education, 76(5), 493- 506.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Elbaz, F. (1983). Teacher thinking: a study of practical knowledge, NewYork: Nichol
Fensterrmacher, G. D. (1994). Chapter 1: The knower and the known: the nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of Research in Education, 20, 3-56.
Fullan, M & Pomfret, A. (1977). Research on curriculum and instruction implementation. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 335-397.
Fullan, M. (2004). Curriculum implementation, In M. Mehrmohammadi (Ed.). Curriculum: theories, approaches and perspectives (pp. 403-423). Mashhad: Behnashr. (In Persian).
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University
Grumet, M. R. (1975). Existential and phenomenological foundations of currere: self -report in curriculum inquiry, paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington D. C
Ladwig, J. G. (2010). Curriculum and teacher change, In P. Peterson & E. Baker and B. Mcgaw. (Eds.). International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd ed.) (pp. 374-378). Oxford: Elsevier.
Lytle, S. L. & Cochran- Smith, M. (1992). Teacher research as a way of knowing. Harvard Educational Review, 62(4), 447- 474.
Marsh, C. J. (2009). Key concepts for understanding curriculum teachers' library (4th ed.), London: Taylor and Francis Routledge.
McKeon, R. (1952). Philosophy and action. Ethics, 62(2), 79-100.
Pinar, W. F. (2004). What is curriculum theory? London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pinar, W. F., Reynold, W. M., Slattery, P. & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum, New York: Peter Lang.
Pojman, L. P. (2008). Epistemology: introduction on cognitive theory (R. Mohammadzadeh, Trans and Research.). Tehran: Iman Sadegh University.
Saaneei Darebidi, M. (2009). Introduction, In V. Dilthey, Introduction on Humanities (M. Saaneei Darebidi, Trans.). Tehran: Ghoghnoos. (In Persian).
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schwab, J. J. (1978a). The practical: A language for curriculum. In I. Westbury. & N. J. Wilkof. (Eds.). Science, Curriculum, and Liberal Education: Selected Essays (pp. 287-321). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Schwab, J. J. (1978b). The practical: Arts of eclectic. In I. Westbury. & N. J. Wilkof. (Eds.). Science, Curriculum, and Liberal Education: Selected Essays (pp. 322-364). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Schwab, J. J. (1983). The practical4: something for curriculum professors to do. Curriculum inquiry,13(3), 239-265.
Tyler, R. W. (1974). Utilizing research in curriculum development. Theory into practice, 13(1), 5-10.
Tyler, R. W. (1977). Toward improved curriculum theory: the inside story. Curriculum Inquiry, 6 (4), 251- 256.
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D. & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education: the role of teachers' practical knowledge. Research in science teaching. 38(2), 137-158.
Van Mannen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6 (3), 205- 228.
Xu, S. & M, Connelly. (2009). Narrative inquiry for teacher education and development: focus on English as a foreign language in china. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 219- 227.