سنجش رویکردهای غالب آموزش زبان؛ مطالعه برنامه‌های درسی آموزش زبان در دوره ابتدایی
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسی
آذر مرادیان
1
(کارشناسی ارشد مطالعات برنامه درسی دانشگاه کردستان، کردستان، ایران.)
جمال سلیمی
2
(دانشیار مطالعات برنامه درسی دانشگاه کردستان، کردستان، ایران.)
کلید واژه: نظریه‌های آموزش زبان, برنامه درسی, نظریه‌های روان‌شناسی و زبان‌شناسی, برنامه درسی آموزش زبان, برنامه درسی اجرا شده,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف از پژوهش حاضر، بررسی برنامه‌های درسی آموزش زبان فارسی (محتوا، روش و سازوکارهای یادگیری) در دوره ابتدایی است. پژوهش از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی و از لحاظ شیوه گردآوری داده‌ها، توصیفی پیمایشی است. جامعه آماری شامل معلمان پایه اول و دوم ابتدایی است که در مدارس ابتدایی شهرستان سنندج در سال تحصیلی 95-94 فعالیت داشتند که با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری به شیوه تصادفی خوشه‌ای انتخاب شدند. ابزار گردآوری داده‌ها پرسشنامه محقق ساخته در این پژوهش ابزار شامل پرسشنامه محقق ساخته ایست که مبتنی بر پرسشنامه رایج حوزه آموزش زبان با عنوان سنجش رویکردهای آموزش زبان (ALEA) است. برای تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها از شاخص‌های آمار توصیفی شامل جداول و توزیع فراوانی، میانگین، انحراف استاندارد و نیز در سطح آمار استنباطی از آزمون تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی، ANOVA، تحلیل واریانس یک‌راهه، آزمون t تک نمونه‌ای و آزمون بارتلت (با نرم‌افزار SPSS19) بهره گرفته شد. عوامل و مؤلفه‌های برنامه‌های درسی آموزش زبان فارسی در پایه اول و دوم ابتدایی از دیدگاه معلمان در برنامه درسی اجرا شده با استفاده از روش تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی استخراج شدند که با توجه به بار عاملی و ساختار مفهومی و نظری گزاره‌های تشکیل‌دهنده پرسشنامه با تأکید بر گزاره‌های با بیشترین بار عاملی به ترتیب با عناوین روش‌های آموزش ذاتی؛ روش‌های آموزش اکتسابی؛ محتوای موضوعی اکتسابی؛ محتوای موضوعی ذاتی؛ محتوای موضوعی تعاملی؛ سازوکارهای یادگیری تعاملی؛ سازوکارهای یادگیری ذاتی؛ روش‌های آموزشی تعاملی؛ و سازوکارهای یادگیری اکتسابی نام‌گذاری شدند. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که دیدگاه معلمان ابتدایی برای عامل سازوکارهای آموزشی در رویکرد تعاملی در مقایسه با رویکرد اکتسابی تفاوت معنادار بیشتری داشته و دیدگاهشان احتمالاً به ترتیب به رویکرد تعاملی و سپس رویکرد اکتسابی نزدیک‌تر است. هم‌چنین معلمان در عامل محتوای موضوعی دیدگاهشان به ترتیب شامل رویکردهای ذاتی، تعاملی و اکتسابی است.
The purpose of this research was to study education curriculum (content, methods and mechanisms of learning) in elementary schools. The research in terms of purpose and method of data collection are application and descriptive- survey, respectively. The statistical population comprised first and second grade teachers in Sanandaj city primary schools. In this study, random cluster sampling was used. The instrument used in this study is a researcher- made questionnaire, which is derived from the common language education questionnaire entitled “Assessment of Language Education Approaches(ALEA)”. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and frequency tables, mean, and standard deviation and then, in inference statistics level, exploratory factor analysis, ANOVA, t-test one sample, and Bartlett test was used. Factors and components of the basic education curriculum in the first and second Persian language elementary teachers' views on curriculum implementation were extracted by exploratory factor analysis, which according to the load factor and the conceptual and theoretical structure of questionnaire statements with an emphasis on statements with the highest load factor were called inherent teaching methods, acquired teaching methods, acquired subject content, inherent subject content, interactive subject content, interactive learning mechanisms, inherent learning mechanisms, interactive teaching methods and learning mechanisms, respectively. The results of this research show that: the views of elementary teachers for interactive teaching mechanism in comparison with adaptive approach has been more significant and their view is likely to be closer to interactive approach and adaptive approach, respectively. Also, teachers for subject content factor, their views including the inherent, interactive and acquired approaches, respectively. Thus, their view is closer to inherent, interactive and adaptive approaches, respectively.
Ajami, F., & Abolmaali Alhosseini, K. (2019). The Effects of Instruction through Play on English Academic Achievement and Self- assertiveness skill of Language Learners of 8 to 12 years old. Research in Curriculum Planning, 16(60), 121-132. [Persian]
Al Dameg, K. A. (2011). The suitable age for learning foreign languages in public education. Damascus publication.
Baldauf, R., Kaplan, R., & Kamwangamalu, N. (2010). Language planning and its problems. Current Issues in Language Planning, 11, 430–438.
Beglar, D., & Alan H. (2002). Implementing task-based language teaching. In Jack Richards and Willy Renandya (eds). Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Crandall, J. (2012). Content-based language teaching. In: Burns A, Richards JC, the Cambridge Guide to Pedagogy and Practice in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press, 149–60.
Doughty, C., & Long, M.H. (2013). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7, 50-80.
Espinosa, L. (2013). Early Education for Dual Language Learners: Promoting School Readiness and Early School Success, Young Children of Immigrants: Research Findings and Policy Choices, Migration Policy Institute.
Ghasem Pour Moghadam, H. (2006). An Analytical Study of Innovation Dimensions in the Elementary Language Curriculum of Persia, Innovation Conference in Elementary Curriculum. [Persian]
Ghasem Pour Moghaddam, H., Zandi, B, & Bakhshesh, M. (2008). A comparative study of Iranian-American language curriculum in elementary school. Curriculum Studies, 3 (8): 22-1. [Persian]
Ghasempour Moghadam, H., Roshan, B, & Mohammadi, A. (2010). Examining the features of the national language in the Persian language domain. Quarterly Journal of Educational Innovation, 9 (36): 28-7. [Persian]
Ghorbandordinejad, F., & Bayat, Z. (2017). The effect of inter-cultural background knowledge on Iranian learners' reading skills. Research in Curriculum Planning, 13(49), 48-60. [Persian]
Goldenberg, C., Hicks, J., and Lit, I. (2013). Dual Language Learners: Effective Instruction in Early Childhood’, American Educator.
Graves, K. (2008). The language curriculum: a social contextual perspective. Language Teaching, 41(2), 81-147.
Griffiths, C. (ed.) (2008). Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Habibpour, K., and Safari Shali, R. (2016). SPSS Application Guide for Surveying Research. Third Edition, Tehran: Motafakeran Publications. [Persian]
Houghton, S.A. (2014). Exploring manifestations of curiosity in study abroad as part of intercultural communicative competence. System 42C, pp. 368-382.
Jannejad, M., Khazaie, S., Ahmadi, H., & Darjani, H. (2017). Learning English through new media with Iranian-Islamic content development. Research in Curriculum Planning, 14(26), 109-117. [Persian]
Kako Joibari, Ali Asghar (2011). Literacy methods in the first language elementary Persian language. Exceptional Education Organization. Exceptional Children's Research Institute. [Persian]
Kako Joybari, Ali Asghar (2010). Effective evolutionary aspects in the teaching of elementary school students, theoretical and research articles about language. Exceptional Children's Research Institute. [Persian]
Khelifa, M. (2009). Factor Analysis, SPSS for Windows® Intermediate & Advanced Applied Statistics, Zayed University Office of Research, available at http://www.zu.ac.ae/main/files/contents/research/training/factoranalysis.ppt on 2015/03/02
Leung, C. (2012). Outcomes-based language teaching. In: Burns A, Richards JC (Eds) The Cambridge Guide to Pedagogy and Practice in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Magnan, S.S., Murphy, D. & Sahakyan, N. (2014). Standards through the Perspectives of Postsecondary Students. Modern Language Journal 98, S1, 222-251.
O'Grady, W., Archibald , J., Aronoff , M & Rees Miller, J. (2009). Contemporary Linguistics an Introduction, Fourth Edition Edition. Springer publication. Oxford: Oxford University.
Papafragou, A., Kimberly, C., & Linda, G. (2007). When We PhilosoPhical. Framework &implication for teaching. New York. Academic Press.
Richards, Jack C. (2013). Curriculum Approaches in Language Teaching: Forward, Central, and Backward Design. RELC Journal 44(1) 5–33.
Robinson, P. (2009). Syllabus Design. In Long, M.H. and C.J. Doughty (eds.), the Handbook of Seliger & M. H. Long (eds.) Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition pp. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Sahraie, R., M. (2012). Perspective of Persian language teaching to non-Persians in terms of curriculum design. Linguistics Research; 4 (1): 113-97. [Persian]
Sharifi, H. (2008). Determining the approaches and methods of teaching Persian language in the first and second grade of elementary school. Tehran, Research and Educational Planning Organization. Office of Planning and Compilation of Textbooks. [Persian]
Sheeba, S., A. (2018). CLT- An Approach to teach EFL and ESL learners. GJRA – Global Journal for Research Analysis, 7(10),78-85.
Thomas, W., Collier, V. (2012). Dual Language Education Can Close Achievement Gap – summary available at: http:// http://www.thomasandcollier.com/
Van Lier, L. (2009). Action-based teaching, autonomy and identity. Innovation in Language Teaching and Learning 1(1): 1–19.
Vaziri Nia, S. (2010). Cognitive Language, Tehran, Ghatreh Publishing. [Persian]
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA MIT Press.
Webster, Jonathan., J. (2014). What we can learn from investigating Theme: a case study of Malala’s UN speech. Invited lecture to commemorate appointment as Visiting Professor, Sun Yat-sen University. April 2014. Guangzhou, China.
_||_