{"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":null,"pages":null},"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}
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.
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.