طراحی و اعتبارسنجی الگوی برنامه درسی زمینه- محور با تاکید بر ارتباط‌گرایی برای آموزش علوم تجربی
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسیسعید اسدپور 1 , علیرضا عصاره 2 , غلامعلی احمدی 3 , محمدرضا امام جمعه 4
1 - دانشجوی دکتری برنامه ریزی درسی دانشگاه تربیت دبیرشهید رجایی، تهران، ایران.
2 - دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی، تهران، ایران.
3 - دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی، تهران، ایران
4 - دانشیار گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: ارتباط‌گرایی, علوم تجربی, برنامه‌درسی, زمینه- محور,
چکیده مقاله :
پژوهش حاضر با هدف طراحی و اعتبارسنجی الگوی برنامه درسی زمینه- محور با تاکید بر ارتباط گرایی برای آموزش علوم تجربی متوسطه اول انجام شد. روش پژوهش از نوع آمیخته و طرح اکتشافی است. در بخش کیفی از روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی جهت دار برای طراحی الگو و در بخش کمی از روش پیمایشی برای اعتبارسنجی الگو استفاده شد. داده ها از طریق اسناد بالادستی و متون علمی در بازه زمانی 2020- 2000 و مصاحبه نیمه ساختار یافته به روش نمونه گیری هدفمند و گلوله برفی با 10 نفر از صاحب نظران گردآوری گردید. روش تحلیل داده ها در بخش کیفی، کدگذاری استقرایی و در بخش کمی، تحلیل عاملی تأییدی، شاخص های توصیفی میانگین، انحراف معیار و آزمون استنباطی کندال (w) بود. پس از دستیابی به الگوی پیشنهادی از طریق پرسشنامه محقق ساخته با 30 نفر از صاحب‌نظران به روش نمونه گیری هدفمند جهت اعتبارسنجی الگو نظرخواهی شد. از جمله نتایج به دست آمده در این پژوهش، 72 کد محوری مربوط به ویژگی های عناصر منطق، هدف، محتوا، نقش معلم، فعالیت های یادگیری، گروه بندی، منابع، زمان، مکان و ارزشیابی بود. در مرحله کمی، پس از تحلیل عاملی تأییدی پرسش نامه محقق ساخته توسط نرم افزار PLS، 2 متغیر به دلیل داشتن بار عاملی کمتر از 5/0 از الگوی اولیه حذف شده و الگوی اصلاح شده، با 70 متغیر، پس از تحلیل عاملی تأییدی و برازش مناسب و همچنین بررسی توافق صاحب نظران، اعتبارسنجی و ارائه شد.
The present study was conducted with the aim of designing and validating the context-based curriculum model with emphasis on connectivism for teaching sciences in the first period of high school. The method of the study is mixed and exploratory design. In the qualitative part, the directional qualitative content analysis method was used and in the quantitative part, the polling method was used. Data were collected through upstream documents and scientific texts in the period of 2000-2020 and semi-structured interviews using purposive sampling and snowball sampling with 10 experts. The method of data analysis in the qualitative part was inductive coding and in quantitative part was confirmatory factor analysis, descriptive indices of mean and standard deviation and Kendall inferential test(w). After achieving the proposed model, through a researcher-made questionnaire, 30 experts were interviewed by purposive sampling to validate the model. Among the results obtained in this study, 72 pivotal codes related to the characteristics of the elements of logic, purpose, content, teacher role, learning activities, grouping, resources, time, place and evaluation. In quantitative part, after confirmatory factor analysis of the questionnaire by PLS structural equation software, 2 variable were removed from the original model due to having a factor load of less than 0.5 and a revised model of curriculum with 70 variables was validated and presented after confirmatory factor analysis and appropriate fit by R2 and also examining the agreement of experts with Kendall coefficient.
Aikenhead, G. S. (2009). Research into STS science education. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 9(1).
Asadpour, S. (2014). The Effectiveness of teaching science with context-based approach on the 7 th grade Students' Achievement. thesis Submitted to the Graduate of Requirement for the Degree of Master in Curriculum, Shahid Rajaei University.
Asikin, N., & Yulita, I. (2019). Scientific literacy-based chemical teaching materials design of chemical solution materials on sea pollution context. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 5(2), 204-211.
Baran, M., & Sozbilir, M. (2018). An application of context-and problem-based learning (C-PBL) into teaching thermodynamics. Research in Science Education, 48(4), 663-689.
Baran, M., Maskan, A. K., Baran, M., Türkan, A., & Yetisir, M. I. (2016). Examining High School Students' Attitudes towards Context Based Learning Approach with Respect to Some Variables. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 11(5), 851-865.
Bennett, J., & Holman, J. (2002). Context-based approaches to the teaching of chemistry: What are they and what are their effects?. In Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 165-184). London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bennett, J., Grasel, C., Parchmann, I., & Waddington, D. (2005). Research report. International journal of science education, 27(13), 1521-1547.
Bennett, J., Lubben, F., & Hogarth, S. (2007). Bringing science to life: A synthesis of the research evidence on the effects of context-based and STS approaches to science teaching. Science Education, 91(3), 347–370.
Bilgin, A. K., Nas, S. E., & Çoruhlu, T. Ş. (2017). The effect of fire context on the conceptual understanding of students:“The heat-temperature”. European Journal of Education Studies.
Brahuimoghadam, N., & Kahrazehi, M. (2020). A Comparative Study of Teaching Methods Used for Teaching Science in the Elementary Schools in Iran and the United Kingdom. Journal of Teacher's Professional Development, 5(2), 41-58.
Cabbar, B. G., & Senel, H. (2020). Content Analysis of Biology Education Research That Used Context-Based Approaches: The Case of Turkey. Journal of Educational Issues, 6(1), 203-218.
Choi, H. J., & Johnson, S. D. (2005). The effect of context-based video instruction on learning and motivation in online courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(4), 215-227.
Couros, A. (2008). What does the network mean to you. Open thinking, 25, 793-803.
De Jong, O. (2006). Making chemistry meaningful. Conditions for successful context-based teaching. Educación Química, 17(4e), 215-221.
De Putter-Smits, L. G. A. (2012). Science teachers designing context-based curriculum materials: developing context-based teaching competence. Unpublished dissertation, Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.
De Putter-Smits, L. G., Nieveen, N. M., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. (2020). A one-year teacher professional development programme towards context-based science education using a concerns-based approach. Professional development in education, 1-17.
Dishadewi, P., Wiyarsi, A., Prodjosantoso, A. K., & Nugraheni, A. R. E. (2020). Chemistry-based socio-scientific issues (SSis) as a learning context: an exploration study of biofuels. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1440, No. 1, p. 012007). IOP Publishing.
Drexler, W. (2010). The networked student model for construction of personal learning environments: Balancing teacher control and student autonomy. Australasian journal of educational technology, 26(3).
Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International journal of science education, 28(9), 957-976.
Holbrook, J. (2005). Making chemistry teaching relevant. Chemical education international, 6(1), 1-12.
Ilhan, N., Yildirim, A., & Yilmaz, S. S. (2016). The Effect of Context-based Chemical Equilibrium on Grade 11 Students' Learning, Motivation and Constructivist Learning Environment. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(9), 3117-3137.
Jirasatjanukul, K., & Jeerungsuwan, N. (2018). The Design of an Instructional Model Based on Connectivism and Constructivism to Create Innovation in Real World Experience. International Education Studies, 11(3), 12-17.
Kalantari, A., & Saeidipour, B. (2016). Investigating the Effects of Connectivism-Based Environment Education on Sixth Graders’ Learning and Their Contact with Nature. Environmental Education and Sustainable Development, 4(3), 5-11.
Karimi, A; Kabiri, M (2013). Comparison of the performance of the top and weaker countries of the 2007 Timss in terms of the use of teaching methods in science classes. Curriculum Studies Quarterly, 106, 31-91
Kazeni, M. M. M. (2012). Comparative effectiveness of context-based and traditional teaching approaches in enhancing learner performance in life sciences (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pretoria).
Khumalo, L. T. N. (2009). A context-based problem solving approach in grade 8 natural sciences teaching and learning (Doctoral dissertation).
Kieserling, M., & Melle, I. (2019). An experimental digital learning environment with universal accessibility. Chemistry Teacher International, 1(2).
King, D. (2012). New perspectives on context-based chemistry education: Using a dialectical sociocultural approach to view teaching and learning. Studies in Science Education, 48(1), 51-87.
King, D., & Henderson, S. (2018). Context-based learning in the middle years: achieving resonance between the real-world field and environmental science concepts. International Journal of science education, 40(10), 1221-1238.
King, D., Winner, E., & Ginns, I. (2011). Engaging middle school students in context-based science: one teacher's approach. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference of STEM in Education 2010 (pp. 1-18). Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics in Education, Queensland University of Technology.
Kortland, J. (2005). Physics in personal, social and scientific contexts. A retrospective view on the Dutch Physics Curriculum Development Project PLON. In P. Nentwig, & D. Waddington (Eds.), Making it relevant: Context-based learning of science (pp. 67-89). Munchen, Germany: Waxmann.
Kortland, J. (2010). Scientific literacy and context-based science curricula: Exploring the didactical friction between context and science knowledge. In GDCP Conference. Potsdam, Germany.
Kropf, D. C. (2013). Connectivism: 21st Century's New Learning Theory. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 16(2), 13-24.
Lagerstrom, M. L., Piqueras, J., & Palm, O. (2021). " Should we be afraid of Ebola?" A study of students' learning progressions in context-based science teaching. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 17(1), 64-78.
Lee, Y. C. (2010). Science‐Technology‐Society or Technology‐Society‐Science? Insights from an Ancient Technology. International Journal of Science Education, 32(14), 1927-1950.
Lubben, F., Bennett, J., Hogarth, S., & Robinson, A. (2005). A systematic review of the effects of context-based and Science-Technology-Society (STS) approaches in the teaching of secondary science on boys and girls, and on lower ability pupils. . In: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
Madanipour, D. (2014). The Investigate of the implementation a context -based (thematic) approach in the sixth grade elementary sciences curriculum of publin schools in Karaj city in Alborz province from the perspective of teachers in the academic year 2013-2014. thesis Submitted to the Graduate of Requirement for the Degree of Master in Curriculum, Shahid Rajaei University.
Mai, M. Y. (2015). Developing Context-Based Science Curriculum: Humanizing Science Curriculum. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 4(1), 171.
National Center for Timss and Perls Studies. (2016). National Thames Findings 2015. Tehran: Ministry of Education
Nentwig, P. M., Demuth, R., Parchmann, I., Ralle, B., & Grasel, C. (2007). Chemie im Kontext: Situating learning in relevant contexts while systematically developing basic chemical concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(9), 1439.
Office of planning and writing textbooks . (2015). Teacher's book (teaching guide). Experimental sciences, seventh grade, first year of high school. Tehran: General Office of Textbook Printing and Distribution.
Overman, M., Vermunt, J. D., Meijer, P. C., & Brekelmans, M. (2019). Teacher–student negotiations during context‐based chemistry reform: A case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(6), 797-820.
Ozlem, O. Z. A. N. (2013). Scaffolding in connectivist mobile learning environment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 44-55.
Panek, H. S. (2012). Context Based Science Instruction. Education and Human Development. (Master's Theses). State University of New York, New York.
Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C., Baer, A., Nentwig, P., Demuth, R., & Ralle, B. (2006). “Chemie im Kontext”: A symbiotic implementation of a context‐based teaching and learning approach. International journal of science education, 28(9), 1041-1062.
Poulova, P., & Klimova, B. (2015). Social networks and their potential for education. In Computational Collective Intelligence (pp. 365-374). Springer, Cham.
Renouard, A., & Mazabraud, Y. (2018). Context-based learning for Inhibition of alternative conceptions: the next step forward in science education. npj Science of Learning, 3(1), 1-6.
Rezaei, E., ZARAII, E., Hatami, J., Ali Abadi, K., & Delavar, A. (2017). Development of MOOCs instructional design model based on connectivism learning theory. The Journal of Medical Education and Development, 12(1), 65-86.
Sethi, V., Sethi, V., Jeyaraj, A., Duffy, K., & Farmer, B. (2017). Enabling Context-Based Learning with KPortal Webspace Technology. Journal of Effective Teaching, 17(3), 38-58.
Siemens, G. (2005), "Connectivism: A learning theory for a digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, Retrieved January 10, 2008
Sunar, S. (2013). The effect of context-based instruction integrated with learning cycle model on students’ achievement and retention related to states of matter subject. Doctoral Dissertation, Mıddle East Technical University, Ankara.
Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Effects of problem-based learning and traditional instruction on self-regulated learning. The journal of educational research, 99(5), 307-320.
Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution (2011). Fundamental Evolution Document of Education. Tehran: Ministry of Education in cooperation with the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution.
Supreme Education Council. (2011). National Curriculum of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran: Ministry of Education.
Tural, G. (2012). The process of creating context based problems by teacher candidates. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3609-3613.
Tural, G. (2013). The functioning of context-based physics instruction in higher education. In Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 14(1) , 3-23.
Ultay, N., & Usta, N. D. (2016). Investigating Prospective Teachers’ Ability to Write Context-Based Problems/. Online Submission, Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 12(2), 447-463.
Utecht, J., & Keller, D. (2019). Becoming Relevant Again: Applying Connectivism Learning Theory to Today's Classrooms. Critical Questions in Education, 10(2), 107-119.
Waddington. D. (2005). Making it relevant context based learning of science, Waxmann Münster, New York 121-154.
Walan, S., Mc Ewen, B., & Gericke, N. (2016). Enhancing primary science: an exploration of teachers’ own ideas of solutions to challenges in inquiry-and context-based teaching. Education 3-13, 44(1), 81-92.
Wiyarsi, A., Pratomo, H., & Priyambodo, E. (2020). Vocational high school students’ chemical literacy on context-based learning: a case of petroleum topic. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(1), 147-161.
Yager, R. E., Choi, A., Yager, S. O., & Akcay, H. (2009). Comparing science learning among 4th-, 5th-, and 6th-grade students: STS versus textbook-based instruction. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 15-24.
_||_