Teachers’ attention to curriculum materials and student contexts and the identification of the factors affecting it

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, University of Mazandaran

10.22098/jsp.2020.865

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to assess high school teachers' attention to curriculum materials and student contexts, and identify the factors affecting it. The research method was descriptive and correlational. The sample consisted of all teachers of the first grade high school of Babol selected using a cluster sampling method of 202 participants. To collect the data, Peak questionnaire (2014), which measures the amount of teachers' attention to the curriculum materials and student contexts was used. For data analyses, descriptive statistics and inferential statistics (Pearson Correlation Coefficients and Multiple Linear Regression Analysis in a Stepwise Method) were used. The results indicated that the teachers still paid considerable attention to textbooks and assessments but paid little attention to curriculum guides, teacher guide, students’ needs and local characteristics. Teachers’ positive and negative beliefs about curriculum materials, their knowledge, their collaboration with peer teacher assessments, and gender significantly influenced their attention to curriculum materials. In addition, teachers’ attention to curriculum guides and textbooks, gender, assessments, number of students in your classroom, know about the decentralization and collaboration with peer teachers were significant factors in teachers’ attention to local characteristics and students’ needs. Therefore, it is suggested to encourage teachers to use curricula to provide learning opportunities through collaboration with other teachers.

Keywords

References

سلسبیلی، نادر. (1382). سند و منشور اصلاح نظام آموزش و پرورش ایران (پیش‌نویس دوم). وزارت آموزش و پرورش. تهران: پژوهشکده تعلیم و تربیت.
سلسبیلی، نادر. (1386). گذار نظام برنامه‌ریزی درسی ایران به سمت عدم تمرکز در طراحی و تدوین برنامه درسی با تأکید بر برنامه ریزی درسی مبتنی بر مدرسه. فصلنامه مطالعات برنامه درسی، 1(4)، 98-68.
گویا، زهرا و ایزدی، صمد. (1382). برنامه درسی ملی، تمرکز و عدم تمرکز در برنامه‌ریزی درسی، در جستجوی الگوی مناسب. گزارش پژوهش‌محور مطالعاتی چهارم از مجموعه مطالعه در مسائل و مباحث اساسی حوزه برنامه‌ریزی درسی و روش‌های تدریس، تهران: پژوهشکده تعلیم و تربیت.
مهرمحمدی، محمود. (1381). برنامه درسی: نظرگاه‌ها، رویکردها و چشم‌اندازها. مشهد: نشر (آستان قدس رضوی).
نریمانی، محمد؛ خشنودنیای چماچائی، بهنام؛ زاهد، عادل و ابوالقاسمی، عباس (1392). نقش درک حمایت معلم در پیش بینی خودکارآمدی تحصیلی دانش آموزان دارای ناتوانی یادگیری. مجله ناتوانی­های یادگیری، 3(1)، 1270109.
 
Chung, J. Y. (2008). A study of an autonomous school policy: Rising issues and tasks for success. The Journal of Educational Administration, 26(2), 415–435.
Coburn, C. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading
Donnelly, L. A., & Boone, W. J. (2007). Biology teachers’ attitudes toward and use of Indiana’s evolution standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 236–257.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. Sage publications.
Floden, R. E., Porter, A. C., Schmidt, W. H., Freeman, D. J., & Schwille, W. H. (1981). Response to curriculum pressures: A policy-capturing study of teacher decisions about content. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(2), 129–141.
Freeman, D. J., & Porter, A. C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools? American Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 403–421.
Gooya, Z., & Izadi, S. (2002). National curriculum, focus and decentralization in curriculum design, in search of a suitable model. The research report of the fourth study series on the issues and topics of the curriculum and teaching methods, Tehran: Research Institute of Education. (Persian)
Hong, H.J. (2006). Paradiagm shift in curriculum development and quality control of Korean national curriculum standards. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24(2), 183–206.
Knapp, M. S. (2003). Professional development as a policy pathway. Review of Research in Education, 27, 109–157.
Lee, B.H., & Hong, H. J. (2008). A critical review of the structure of Korea’s subject matters curriculum documents. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26(1), 27–58.
Mehrmohammadi, M. (2001). Curriculum: Views, Approaches and Perspectives. Mashhad: Publishing (Astan Quds Razavi). (Persian)
Narimani, M., Khoshnoodnia Chomachaei, B., Zahed, A., & Abolghasemi, A. (2013). The role of perceived teacher support in predicting academic self-efficacy in students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7(3), 109-127. (Persian)
Paik, S. (2014). Teachers’ Attention to Curriculum Materials and Student Contexts: The Case of Korean Middle School Teachers. Asia-Pacific Edu Res (2015) 24(1):235–246. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40299-014-0175-4
Park, C. (2003). A study on the rights for the organization of the curriculum. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21(1), 98–110.
policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(2),145-170.
Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform. A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315–342.
Selseby, R. (2002). Document and Charter on the reform of the education system of Iran (second draft). Ministry of Education. Tehran: Institute of Education. (Persian)
Selseby, R. (2006). The transition of Iran's curriculum to a lack of focus in designing and developing curricula with an emphasis on school-based curriculum planning. Quarterly Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1 (4), 68-98. (Persian)
Seo, K.H. (2009). Teachers’ experiences of reconstructing national curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(3), 159–189.
Shin, K.H. (2009). American teachers’ autonomy in curriculum and its implications for Korean education. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(3), 191–212.
Son, J.W., & Choi, J. (2008). Elementary school teachers’ use of mathematics textbook: Cognitive demands and influential factors. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26(3), 155–189.
Sosniak, L. A., & Stodolsky, S. S. (1993). Teachers and textbooks: Materials use in four fourth-grade classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 93(3), 249–275.
Valencia, S. W., Place, N. A., Martin, S. D., & Grossman, P. L. (2006). Curriculum materials for elementary reading: Shackles and scaffolds for four beginning teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 107(1), 93–120.
Journal of School Psychology
Volume 8, Issue 4
February 2020
Pages 60-76

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics