بررسی برنامۀ درسی تجربه شدۀ دانشجویان کارشناسی ارشد رشتۀ برنامه‌ریزی درسی در دانشگاه بوعلی سینا
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسینشمین محمدی 1 , عظیمه سادات خاکباز 2
1 - کارشناس ارشد برنامه ریزی درسی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا همدان، گروه علوم تربیتی، همدان، ایران
2 - عضو هیات علمی دانشگاه بوعلی سینا همدان، گروه علوم تربیتی، همدان، ایران.
کلید واژه: برنامۀ درسی تجربه شده, دورۀ کارشناسی ارشد, رشتۀ برنامه‌ریزی درسی,
چکیده مقاله :
پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی برنامۀ درسی تجربه شده در دورۀ کارشناسی ارشد رشتۀ برنامه ریزی درسی با روش پدیدارشناسی انجام شد. مشارکت کنندگان در این پژوهش، 26 نفر از دانشجویان ورودی کارشناسی ارشد رشتۀ برنامه ریزی درسی در دانشگاه بوعلی سینا طی سه سال تحصیلی 1394-1393، 1395-1394 و 1396-1395 بودند که همگی آنان مورد بررسی قرار گرفتند. ابزار جمع آوری اطلاعات، مصاحبه های نیمه ساختاریافته با دانشجویان بود که سؤالات آن بر مبنای چهار سطح برنامۀ درسی تجربه شده از دیدگاه Fathi Vajargah (2005) (برنامۀ درسی سطح مورد انتظار، نهفته، تعاملی و یاد گرفته شده) طرح شده بود. داده ها به روش کدگذاری و مقوله‌بندی تحلیل و با معیارهای پژوهش های کیفی نظیر توصیف دقیق و عینی فرایند پژوهش و مقولات، درگیری طولانی‌مدت با میدان، نمونه گیری با در نظر گرفتن کثرت تفاوت ها از سه دورۀ ورودی دانشجویان، جمع آوری اطلاعات حتی بعد از اشباع نظری برای یافتن موارد احتمالی رد یافته ها و چک کردن یافته ها توسط مشارکت کنندگان در پژوهش، اعتباربخشی شدند. یافته ها نشان داد دانشجویان در هریک از سطوح برنامۀ درسی تجربه شده با مقوله های مختلفی روبه رو بودند. در سطح برنامۀ درسی مورد انتظار، مقولۀ تصور دشواری شناسایی شد. در سطح برنامۀ درسی نهفته، مقوله های انگیزۀ تحصیل و دانش ها و مهارت های لازم به دست آمد. در سطح برنامۀ درسی تعاملی، در بخش درس ها، مقولات تغییر نگرش نسبت به برخی دروس، تکراری بودن برخی از دروس، نداشتن منبع مشخص در برخی دروس، دشواری تکالیف، چالش های ارزشیابی و تعامل و پاسخگویی استادان و در بخش پایان‌نامه نیز مقولات انتخاب استاد راهنما و انتخاب موضوع پایان‌نامه شناسایی شد. در سطح برنامۀ درسی یادگرفته شده نیز یادگیری های آشکار، پوچ و پنهان حاصل شد و هریک از مقولات نیز شامل زیرمقوله های متعدد بود. نتایج پژوهش نشان داد برنامۀ درسی تجربه شده در هریک از سطوح، دچار تغییراتی می شود و در نهایت، برنامۀ درسی سطح یادگرفته شده، با مورد انتظار تفاوت بسیاری دارد. از طرفی دانشجویان با قرار گرفتن در معرض تجربه و بدون هیچ حمایتی با سردرگمی ها و ابهامات زیادی روبه‌رویند؛ از این رو لازم است فرایند تجربۀ برنامۀ درسی را برای آنان بهبود دهند.
The present study was conducted to investigate the experienced curriculum in the master students in curriculum development field of study at Bu-Ali Sina University. This research was conducted by phenomenological method. Participants in this study were 26 master students in the curriculum development discipline at Bu Ali Sina University in the 3 academic year of study 1394-1394, 1395-1394 and 1396-1695, all of whom were examined. Data collection tools were semi-structured interviews which questions were tested on the basis of four curriculum levels (expected curriculum, concealed curriculum, interactive curriculum and learned curriculum). Data analyzed by coding and categorization and validated through qualitative research criteria, research description in the details, long-term engagement with the field, sampling according to differences of opinion from the three groups of student based on entry periods, information collected even later of theoretical saturation in order to other possible cases of rejection of findings and analysis checking by research participants. The findings showed that the student is at each level of the program that is faced with different categories. At the expected curriculum level, the difficulty category was identified. At the level of the concealed curriculum, educational motivation and the necessary knowledge and skills were obtained. At the level of interactive curriculum, in the course section, the categories of changing attitudes towards some courses, repetition in some courses, lack of a specific source in some courses, homework problems, evaluation challenges and interaction and response of professors and in the dissertation section, supervisor selection and the choice of the dissertation topic were identified. In learned curriculum level, categories named explicit, null and hidden learning were identified. Each category also includes multiple subcategories. The results showed that the experienced curriculum at each level, changes and finally, the curriculum of the learned level is very different from the expected. On the other hand, students face a lot of confusion and ambiguity by being exposed to experience and without any support. Therefore, it is necessary to think of the measures to improve the curriculum experience process for them.
Attaran, M., & Zeinabadi, H., & Toulabi, S. (2010). Supervisor selection and student-supervisor relationships perspectives of PhD graduates. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 4(16), 96-129.
Bamber, V., Choudhary, C. J., Hislop, J., & Lane, J. (2019). Postgraduate taught students and preparedness for Master’s level study: polishing the facets of the Master’s diamond. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 43 (2), 236-250.
Becker, S. (2019). Mapping the challenges in making the transition to taught postgraduate study in Psychology. Psychology Teaching Review, 25(1).
Bozorg, H., & Khakbaz, A. S. (2013). Hidden supervisor: the emergent curriculum of advising graduate students thesis (case study: training science course). Journal of Research in Curriculum Planning. 10(36), 38-50.
Creswell, J., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational Research. Sixth Edition. Pearson Publications.
Fathi Vajargah, K. (2020). Basics and Main Concepts of Curriculum Development. Elm Ostadan Publication.
Fathi Vajargah, K. (2005). Curriculum pathology in Iran: A model in research field. In Curriculum Area in Iran: Current Status and Future Outlook. SAMT Publications.
Fathi Vajargah, K., Arefi, M., & Jalilinia, F. (2010). Hidden curriculum involved in graduate thesis at Shahid Beheshti University. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies. 1 (1), 96-118.
Griffiths, J. (2018). Understanding the student experience in one-year graduate masters programs. In: Andrews, J., Clark, R., Nortcliffe, A., & Penlington, R. (eds.) 5th Annual Symposium of the United Kingdom & Ireland Engineering Education Research Network. (pp. pp. 60-63). Royal Academy of Engineering: Birmingham, UK
Hardre, P. L., & Hackett, Sh. (2015). Defining the graduate college experience: What it “should” versus “does” include. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 57-77.
Heussi, A. (2012). Postgraduate student perceptions of the transition into postgraduate study: student engagement and experience. Student Engagement and Experience Journal, 1(3).
Javaheri Daneshmand, M., Valipoor, M., & Hosseinkhani, S. (2016). Evaluating the internal quality of the curriculum in the field of master's and doctoral curriculum planning, from the perspective of Kharazmi University students. Iranian Curriculum Studies Association Conference.
Keshtiaray N, Fathi Vajargah K, Zimitat C, & Forughi A A. (2009). Designing and accrediting an experiential curriculum in medical groups based on phenomenological approach. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 9 (1), 55-67
Ly, C., Vickers, M. H., & Fernandez, S. (2015). Master of business administration student outcomes in Vietnam: Graduate student insights from a qualitative study. Education + Training, 57(1), 88-107.
McPheson, C., Punch, S., & Graham, E. (2017).Transitions from undergraduate to taught postgraduate study: Emotion, integration and belonging. Journal of Perspectives of Applied Academic Practice. 5 (2), 42-50.
Mehrmohammadi, M. (2020). Curriculum: Theories, Approaches and Perspectives. SAMT Publication, 11th edition.
Moameni Mahmouie, H., Karami, M., & Teymouri, S. (2011). A study of Experimented curriculum of undergraduate students of elementary education. Quarterly
Journal of Educational Psychology. 2 (1), 65-80.
Nasr, A., Etemadizadeh, H., & Nili, M. (2013). Theoretical and Practical Approaches in Designing Curriculum in Higher Education. SAMT Publications.
Nouroozzadeh, R., & Fathi Vajargah, K. (2010). An Introduction to University Curriculum Planning. Higher Education Research and Planning Institute Publications.
Safaeimovahedi, S., Ataran, M. (2010). Exploring the norms affecting M.A students’ selection of research supervisors: A phenomenological study. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities, 2(4), 95-121.
Safaei Movahed, S., Attaran, M., & Tajik Esmaili, A. (2010). Analysis of hidden norms affecting supervisor selection: a phenomenological study. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies. 1 (1), 9-37.
Tahmasebzadeh sheikhlar, D., Mahin Hosseinnia, F., Azimi Aghbalag, A., & Seyede Nazarlu, S. (2020). Curriculum quality assessment of the master's degree programming course based on the Kano model. Educational Measurement and Evaluation Studies, 9(28), 75-106.
West, A. (2012). Formative evaluation of the transition to postgraduate study for counseling and psychotherapy training: students' perceptions of assignments and academic writing. Counseling and Psychotherapy Research: Linking Research with Practice, 12 (2), 128-135.
Zarghami, S., & Bazghandi, P. (2010). Expressions of academic experience of graduate students studying philosophy of education. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum. 1(1), 119-141.
_||_