Diane Swift, Gemma Clowes, Sarah Gilbert, Alex Lambert
{"title":"保持专业精神:教师作为课程设计的共同探究者","authors":"Diane Swift, Gemma Clowes, Sarah Gilbert, Alex Lambert","doi":"10.1002/curj.267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In England, the development of teachers' curriculum design capabilities has been identified as a ‘challenge remaining’ (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child). A recent White Paper (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child) offered access to a publicly funded online platform as a solution. Drawing on Stenhouse's concepts of teachers as researchers and curriculum as an inquiry process, this article argues that such a policy initiative restricts both curriculum and professional development. An alternative approach to curriculum design, one based on Stenhouse's conception of the iterative development of teachers' professional and curriculum knowledge is profiled. In this article, we, as four teacher‐researchers, analyse a project which featured the Curriculum Design Coherence (CDC) model. We share insights gained from our involvement, both in relation to our professional learning and the impact of our curriculum design work on our pupils. We argue that the ‘othering’ of teachers in research contributes towards the under valuing of practice‐informed evidence in policy making. We draw on the work of Lawrence Stenhouse to inform a different means of generating educational research evidence, one that sustains teacher‐researchers through engagement with principles and concepts so as to inform policy and curriculum development.","PeriodicalId":93147,"journal":{"name":"The curriculum journal","volume":"118 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sustaining professionalism: Teachers as co‐enquirers in curriculum design\",\"authors\":\"Diane Swift, Gemma Clowes, Sarah Gilbert, Alex Lambert\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/curj.267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In England, the development of teachers' curriculum design capabilities has been identified as a ‘challenge remaining’ (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child). A recent White Paper (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child) offered access to a publicly funded online platform as a solution. Drawing on Stenhouse's concepts of teachers as researchers and curriculum as an inquiry process, this article argues that such a policy initiative restricts both curriculum and professional development. An alternative approach to curriculum design, one based on Stenhouse's conception of the iterative development of teachers' professional and curriculum knowledge is profiled. In this article, we, as four teacher‐researchers, analyse a project which featured the Curriculum Design Coherence (CDC) model. We share insights gained from our involvement, both in relation to our professional learning and the impact of our curriculum design work on our pupils. We argue that the ‘othering’ of teachers in research contributes towards the under valuing of practice‐informed evidence in policy making. We draw on the work of Lawrence Stenhouse to inform a different means of generating educational research evidence, one that sustains teacher‐researchers through engagement with principles and concepts so as to inform policy and curriculum development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93147,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The curriculum journal\",\"volume\":\"118 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The curriculum journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.267\",\"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.267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在英格兰,教师课程设计能力的发展已被确定为 "余下的挑战"(教育部 [DfE]。(2022).Opportunity for all:Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity-for-all-strong-schools-with-great-teachers-for-your-child)。最近的一份白皮书(Department for Education [DfE].(2022).Opportunity for all:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity-for-all-strong-schools-with-great-teachers-for-your-child) 提供了一个由政府资助的在线平台作为解决方案。本文借鉴斯滕豪斯(Stenhouse)关于教师作为研究者和课程作为探究过程的概念,认为这样的政策举措限制了课程和专业发展。本文介绍了另一种课程设计方法,即基于斯滕豪斯关于教师专业和课程知识迭代发展的概念。在本文中,我们作为四位教师研究者,分析了一个以课程设计一致性(CDC)模式为特色的项目。我们分享了从我们的专业学习和课程设计工作对学生的影响两方面的参与中获得的启示。我们认为,教师在研究中的 "他者化 "导致了在政策制定中对以实践为依据的证据重视不够。我们借鉴劳伦斯-斯滕豪斯(Lawrence Stenhouse)的研究成果,提出了一种不同的 教育研究证据生成方式,即通过让教师研究者参与原则和概念的制定,为政策和课程开发 提供信息。
Sustaining professionalism: Teachers as co‐enquirers in curriculum design
In England, the development of teachers' curriculum design capabilities has been identified as a ‘challenge remaining’ (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child). A recent White Paper (Department for Education [DfE]. (2022). Opportunity for all: Strong schools with great teachers for your child. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/opportunity‐for‐all‐strong‐schools‐with‐great‐teachers‐for‐your‐child) offered access to a publicly funded online platform as a solution. Drawing on Stenhouse's concepts of teachers as researchers and curriculum as an inquiry process, this article argues that such a policy initiative restricts both curriculum and professional development. An alternative approach to curriculum design, one based on Stenhouse's conception of the iterative development of teachers' professional and curriculum knowledge is profiled. In this article, we, as four teacher‐researchers, analyse a project which featured the Curriculum Design Coherence (CDC) model. We share insights gained from our involvement, both in relation to our professional learning and the impact of our curriculum design work on our pupils. We argue that the ‘othering’ of teachers in research contributes towards the under valuing of practice‐informed evidence in policy making. We draw on the work of Lawrence Stenhouse to inform a different means of generating educational research evidence, one that sustains teacher‐researchers through engagement with principles and concepts so as to inform policy and curriculum development.