教师对中学理科与宗教教育关系的看法:独立还是相互充实?

Mary Woolley, Robert A. Bowie, Sabina Hulbert, Caroline Thomas, John‐Paul Riordan, Lynn Revell
{"title":"教师对中学理科与宗教教育关系的看法:独立还是相互充实?","authors":"Mary Woolley, Robert A. Bowie, Sabina Hulbert, Caroline Thomas, John‐Paul Riordan, Lynn Revell","doi":"10.1002/curj.233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is a gap in the research on the relationship between secondary school subject departments, particularly where, as in the case of science and religious education (RE), there is not the traditional relationship that may be seen in science and maths or across humanities subjects. More awareness of content taught in other departments is important for pupils' coherent experience of curriculum and schooling. This article reports on data from 10 focus groups with 50 participants from six universities, where student teachers of science and RE revealed a complex picture of relationships between the two departments in their placement schools. Furthermore, this article reports findings from a survey where 244 teachers and student teachers of science and RE shared their perspectives on the relationship between the two school departments. The measure was adapted from Barbour's typology, a classification describing the nature of the relationship between science and religion in a range of literature. The terms ‘conflict’, ‘independence’, ‘dialogue’, ‘collaboration’ and ‘integration’ were presented to teachers of both subjects. Little evidence was found of conflict between science and RE departments, but more ‘independence’ than ‘dialogue’ between the two departments was reported. In the light of these findings, the benefits of boundary crossing are explored alongside the role teachers should play in boundary crossing.","PeriodicalId":93147,"journal":{"name":"The curriculum journal","volume":"14 11","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teachers' perspectives on the relationship between secondary school departments of science and religious education: Independence or mutual enrichment?\",\"authors\":\"Mary Woolley, Robert A. Bowie, Sabina Hulbert, Caroline Thomas, John‐Paul Riordan, Lynn Revell\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/curj.233\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract There is a gap in the research on the relationship between secondary school subject departments, particularly where, as in the case of science and religious education (RE), there is not the traditional relationship that may be seen in science and maths or across humanities subjects. More awareness of content taught in other departments is important for pupils' coherent experience of curriculum and schooling. This article reports on data from 10 focus groups with 50 participants from six universities, where student teachers of science and RE revealed a complex picture of relationships between the two departments in their placement schools. Furthermore, this article reports findings from a survey where 244 teachers and student teachers of science and RE shared their perspectives on the relationship between the two school departments. The measure was adapted from Barbour's typology, a classification describing the nature of the relationship between science and religion in a range of literature. The terms ‘conflict’, ‘independence’, ‘dialogue’, ‘collaboration’ and ‘integration’ were presented to teachers of both subjects. Little evidence was found of conflict between science and RE departments, but more ‘independence’ than ‘dialogue’ between the two departments was reported. In the light of these findings, the benefits of boundary crossing are explored alongside the role teachers should play in boundary crossing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93147,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The curriculum journal\",\"volume\":\"14 11\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The curriculum journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.233\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The curriculum journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.233","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

对中学学科部门之间关系的研究存在差距,特别是在科学和宗教教育(RE)的情况下,没有在科学和数学或跨人文学科中可能看到的传统关系。更多地了解其他部门教授的内容对学生对课程和学校教育的连贯体验很重要。本文报告了来自6所大学的10个焦点小组的数据,其中有50名参与者,其中科学和自然科学的学生教师揭示了他们安置学校中两个部门之间关系的复杂图景。此外,本文报告了一项调查的结果,其中244名科学和自然科学教师和学生教师分享了他们对两个学校部门之间关系的看法。这种方法改编自巴伯的类型学,这是一种在一系列文学作品中描述科学与宗教之间关系本质的分类方法。“冲突”、“独立”、“对话”、“合作”和“整合”这些术语被呈现给这两个学科的教师。几乎没有证据表明科学部门和自然资源部门之间存在冲突,但是两个部门之间的“独立”多于“对话”。根据这些发现,我们探讨了跨界的好处以及教师在跨界中应该扮演的角色。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Teachers' perspectives on the relationship between secondary school departments of science and religious education: Independence or mutual enrichment?
Abstract There is a gap in the research on the relationship between secondary school subject departments, particularly where, as in the case of science and religious education (RE), there is not the traditional relationship that may be seen in science and maths or across humanities subjects. More awareness of content taught in other departments is important for pupils' coherent experience of curriculum and schooling. This article reports on data from 10 focus groups with 50 participants from six universities, where student teachers of science and RE revealed a complex picture of relationships between the two departments in their placement schools. Furthermore, this article reports findings from a survey where 244 teachers and student teachers of science and RE shared their perspectives on the relationship between the two school departments. The measure was adapted from Barbour's typology, a classification describing the nature of the relationship between science and religion in a range of literature. The terms ‘conflict’, ‘independence’, ‘dialogue’, ‘collaboration’ and ‘integration’ were presented to teachers of both subjects. Little evidence was found of conflict between science and RE departments, but more ‘independence’ than ‘dialogue’ between the two departments was reported. In the light of these findings, the benefits of boundary crossing are explored alongside the role teachers should play in boundary crossing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Toward a grammar of curriculum practice: Embracing new conceptions of curriculum and curriculum planning By Edmund C.Short, State University of New York Press. 2023. 160 pp. $33.95 (paperback). ISBN: 9781438493473 Rethinking student teachers' professional learning in Wales: Promoting reflection‐in‐action Development and evaluation of neuroscience lesson content to improve Key Stage 3 (11–14 year old) students' understanding of the early years in England Reclaiming accountability through collaborative curriculum enquiry: New directions in teacher evaluation Barriers to curriculum accessibility for students with visual impairment in general education setting: The experience of lower secondary school students in Senegal
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1