专业:教师应对科学课程改革的责任与权威

IF 4.7 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Science Education Pub Date : 2015-01-02 DOI:10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629
J. Ryder
{"title":"专业:教师应对科学课程改革的责任与权威","authors":"J. Ryder","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The science curriculum is a focus of repeated reform in many countries. However, the enactment of such reforms within schools rarely reflects the intended outcomes of curriculum designers. This review considers what we know about the experiences and reflections of teachers in the enactment of externally driven school science curriculum reform. ‘Externally driven’ signals a focus on studies of teachers who did not make a proactive choice to adopt a particular curriculum reform initiative. This is a very common experience for teachers in many school systems, and one likely to highlight issues of professionalism and authority that are central to the work of teachers. The review analyses 34 relevant studies. These include studies of teachers’ experiences of national curriculum reform, and also studies focusing on more regional or local curriculum reform activities. The studies examine individual teachers’ beliefs, practices and reflections associated with curriculum reform, the response of teacher communities to reform (e.g. within school departments), and teachers’ (and other stakeholders’) experiences across school systems. A wide range of factors influencing teachers’ responses are identified. These are characterised in terms of personal, internal and external contexts of teachers’ work. The review also highlights issues of authority, professionalism and the process of meaning-making in response to external curriculum reform. The discussion section identifies important areas for future research and gives recommendations for the design of curriculum policies that recognise and support the professionalism of science teachers.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"51 1","pages":"120 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629","citationCount":"46","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Being professional: accountability and authority in teachers’ responses to science curriculum reform\",\"authors\":\"J. Ryder\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The science curriculum is a focus of repeated reform in many countries. However, the enactment of such reforms within schools rarely reflects the intended outcomes of curriculum designers. This review considers what we know about the experiences and reflections of teachers in the enactment of externally driven school science curriculum reform. ‘Externally driven’ signals a focus on studies of teachers who did not make a proactive choice to adopt a particular curriculum reform initiative. This is a very common experience for teachers in many school systems, and one likely to highlight issues of professionalism and authority that are central to the work of teachers. The review analyses 34 relevant studies. These include studies of teachers’ experiences of national curriculum reform, and also studies focusing on more regional or local curriculum reform activities. The studies examine individual teachers’ beliefs, practices and reflections associated with curriculum reform, the response of teacher communities to reform (e.g. within school departments), and teachers’ (and other stakeholders’) experiences across school systems. A wide range of factors influencing teachers’ responses are identified. These are characterised in terms of personal, internal and external contexts of teachers’ work. The review also highlights issues of authority, professionalism and the process of meaning-making in response to external curriculum reform. The discussion section identifies important areas for future research and gives recommendations for the design of curriculum policies that recognise and support the professionalism of science teachers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49262,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Science Education\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"120 - 87\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629\",\"citationCount\":\"46\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2014.1001629","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 46

摘要

科学课程是许多国家反复改革的焦点。然而,这些改革在学校的实施很少反映课程设计者的预期结果。本文回顾了教师在实施外部驱动型学校科学课程改革过程中的经验和思考。“外部驱动”标志着对那些没有主动选择采用特定课程改革倡议的教师的研究。这是许多学校系统中教师的一个非常普遍的经历,这可能会突出专业性和权威性问题,这是教师工作的核心。本文分析了34项相关研究。这些研究包括对国家课程改革教师经验的研究,也包括更多关注区域或地方课程改革活动的研究。这些研究考察了个别教师与课程改革相关的信念、实践和反思,教师群体对改革的反应(例如在学校部门内),以及教师(和其他利益相关者)在整个学校系统中的经验。研究确定了影响教师反应的各种因素。这些特点包括教师工作的个人、内部和外部背景。审查还强调了权威、专业和为响应外部课程改革而制定意义的过程等问题。讨论部分确定了未来研究的重要领域,并为课程政策的设计提出了建议,这些课程政策承认并支持科学教师的专业性。
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
Being professional: accountability and authority in teachers’ responses to science curriculum reform
The science curriculum is a focus of repeated reform in many countries. However, the enactment of such reforms within schools rarely reflects the intended outcomes of curriculum designers. This review considers what we know about the experiences and reflections of teachers in the enactment of externally driven school science curriculum reform. ‘Externally driven’ signals a focus on studies of teachers who did not make a proactive choice to adopt a particular curriculum reform initiative. This is a very common experience for teachers in many school systems, and one likely to highlight issues of professionalism and authority that are central to the work of teachers. The review analyses 34 relevant studies. These include studies of teachers’ experiences of national curriculum reform, and also studies focusing on more regional or local curriculum reform activities. The studies examine individual teachers’ beliefs, practices and reflections associated with curriculum reform, the response of teacher communities to reform (e.g. within school departments), and teachers’ (and other stakeholders’) experiences across school systems. A wide range of factors influencing teachers’ responses are identified. These are characterised in terms of personal, internal and external contexts of teachers’ work. The review also highlights issues of authority, professionalism and the process of meaning-making in response to external curriculum reform. The discussion section identifies important areas for future research and gives recommendations for the design of curriculum policies that recognise and support the professionalism of science teachers.
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
Studies in Science Education
Studies in Science Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
15.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The central aim of Studies in Science Education is to publish review articles of the highest quality which provide analytical syntheses of research into key topics and issues in science education. In addressing this aim, the Editor and Editorial Advisory Board, are guided by a commitment to: maintaining and developing the highest standards of scholarship associated with the journal; publishing articles from as wide a range of authors as possible, in relation both to professional background and country of origin; publishing articles which serve both to consolidate and reflect upon existing fields of study and to promote new areas for research activity. Studies in Science Education will be of interest to all those involved in science education including: science education researchers, doctoral and masters students; science teachers at elementary, high school and university levels; science education policy makers; science education curriculum developers and text book writers. Articles featured in Studies in Science Education have been made available either following invitation from the Editor or through potential contributors offering pieces. Given the substantial nature of the review articles, the Editor is willing to give informal feedback on the suitability of proposals though all contributions, whether invited or not, are subject to full peer review. A limited number of books of special interest and concern to those involved in science education are normally reviewed in each volume.
期刊最新文献
Students’ ideas about the scientific underpinnings of climate change: a systematic review of the literature Queer individuals’ experiences in STEM learning and working environments Inquiry-based chemistry education: a systematic review Metacognitively ALERT in science: literature synthesis of a hierarchical framework for metacognition and preliminary evidence of its viability Inquiry-based science education in science teacher education: a systematic review
×
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