فصلنامه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی در آموزش عالی
چالش‌های بازنگری و اجرای برنامه‌های درسی در دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری برنامه‌ریزی درسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
2 دانشیار دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روانشناسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد
چکیده
امروزه، با توجه به اهمیت تمرکززدایی و گسترش برنامه درسی دانشگاه‌محور بیشتر تصمیمات مربوط به طراحی، اجرا، ارزشیابی، تغییر و بازنگری برنامه‌های درسی در دانشگاه‌ها اخذ می‌شود. از آنجا که بخشنامه اجرایی واگذاری اختیارات بازنگری برنامه‌های درسی به دانشگاه‌ها سبب تغییر بخش زیادی از برنامه‌های درسی شده و هر تغییر برای اجرا ممکن است با دشواری‌هایی مواجه باشد، پژوهش حاضر با هدف شناسایی چالش‌های اجرای برنامه‌های درسی بازنگری شده با روش مطالعه موردی انجام شد. داده‌ها از طریق مصاحبه نیمه ساختاریافته با 10 نفر از مدیران گروه‌های آموزشی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد با روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند جمع‌آوری شد. بر اساس یافته‌های به‌دست آمده، چالش‌های تغییر و اجرای برنامه درسی در دو مقوله کلی چالش‌های مربوط به فرایند بازنگری برنامه درسی و چالش‌های مربوط به فرایند اجرای تغییرات قرار می‌گیرد. در مقوله چالش‌های فرایند بازنگری، اختیار محدود گروه‌های آموزشی، عدم پیش‌بینی امکان ایجاد تغییرات جزئی و متوسط در برنامه درسی، انجام دادن مطالعات پشتیبان، نبود سواد برنامه درسی اعضای هیئت علمی و مشخص نبودن انتظارات و در مقوله چالش‌های فرایند اجرا، مقاومت در برابر تغییر و نداشتن انگیزه کافی برای مشارکت در اجرا، نحوه ارائه دروس، کمبود فضا، زمان و امکانات آموزشی، کمبود نیروی انسانی، نبود سازوکار نظارت بر حسن اجرا و حمایت از تغییرات و اجرای آن به‌عنوان مهم‌ترین چالش‌ها شناسایی شدند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
Challenges of revision and implementation of curriculum in Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
نویسندگان [English]
- Zahra Vaghari Zamharir 1
- Morteza Karami 2
- Hossein Jafari Sani 2
1 Doctoral student in Planning, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Faculty of Education and Psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
چکیده [English]
Due to the importance of decentralization and the development of university based curriculum, most decisions regarding the design, implementation, evaluation, modification, and review of curricula are made by universities. Since delegation of Implementation Circular Curriculum Revision to universities has changed a large part of the curricula, and since any changes may be difficult, the present case study aimed to identify the challenges of implementing revision of curricula. Using purposeful sampling, semi-structured interviews with 10 administrators at various departments of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad were conducted. Based on the findings, the challenges of changing and implementing the curriculum are divided into two general categories of revision of curriculum, and the implementation processes. The challenges of revision process included limited authority of academic departments, inability to predict the possibility of making moderate and minor changes in the curriculum, performing support studies, unclear expectations and lack of curriculum literacy among faculty members. The challenges of implementation process included resistance to change, lack of sufficient motivation to participate in implementation, how to present lessons, shortage of space, time and educational facilities, shortage of human resources,, lack of monitoring mechanism for good implementation, and lack of support for change and implementation.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Implementation
- Review
- Higher Education Curriculum
2. Connelly, F.M., & Lantz, O.C. (1991). Definitions of curriculum: An introduction, In A. Lewy (Ed.). The international encyclopedia of curriculum (pp. 15-18). New York: Pergamon Press.
3. Dewett, T., Whittier, N.C., & Williams, S.D. (2007). Internal diffusion: The conceptualizing innovation implementation. Competitiveness Review, 17(1-2), 8-25.
4. Fathi Vajargah, K. (2010). Dissolved curriculum. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum, 1(4), 6-7 (in Persian).
5. Fathi Vajargah, K., & Momenimahmouei, H. (2009). Study of affecting factors on participation of the members of the department in designing curriculum. Journal of Iranian Higher Education, 1 (1), 139-165 (in Persian).
6. Fathi Vajargah, K., Jamali Tazehkand, M., Zamanaimanesh, H., & Youzbashi, A. (2012). The obstacles to curriculum change in higher education: Viewpoints of faculty members of Shahid Beheshti University and Shahid Behehsti Medical University. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 11(7), 767-778 (in Persian).
7. Folen, M. (1985). Curriculum change. Translated by Ahmad Reza Nasr Esfahani, Curriculum: Theories, approaches and perspectives. Mashhad: Astan Quds Publications.
8. Fullan, M. (2015). New meaning of educational change. 4th Ed, Canada: Teachers College Press.
9. Ghaderi, A., Jafari Sani, H., & Karami, M. (2014). Study of administrators and executers’ attitudes about the dimensions and challenges in implementing the new curriculum (revised) of vocational higher education. Skill Training, 2(7), 121-136 (in Persian).
10. Gall, J., Borg, W., & Gall, M. (2016). Qualitative and quantitative research methods in education and psychology. Translated by Ahmad Reza Nasr Esfahani et al., Vol. II, Tehran: Samt.
11. Hall, G.E., & Hord, Sh.M. (2015). Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes. 4th Ed, Allyn & Bacon.
12. Iman, M.T., & Ghaffari Nasab, E. (2013). Philosophical hospitality of complex systems theory. Journal of Methodology of Humanities, (76), 41-60 (in Persian).
13. Karami, M., & Vaquri Zamharir, Z. (2016). Optimal structure of the curriculum development and review of the higher education: Ferdowsi University of Mashhad experience. National Congress of Higher Education of Iran, Tarbiat Modares University of Tehran (in Persian).
14. Kaviani, H., & Nasr, A.R. (2016). The research synthesis of challenges in curriculum of higher education in the recent decades and potential solutions. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies, 7(13), 7-36 (in Persian).
15. Khosravi, M., & Arman, M. (2015). A model for implementing changes in curriculum in higher education. Quarterly Journal of Innovation and Enterpreneurship, 3 (7), 65-84 (in Persian).
16. Lattuca, L.R., & Stark, J.S. (2009). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in context. 2th Ed, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
18. Mehrmohammadi, M., & Mahmoodi, F. (2013). Upsidedownness: A new approach to curriculum design in professional fields (with emphasis on education). Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Stufies, 3(6), 141-177 (in Persian).
19. Nitenson, S. (2005). Adoption and implementation of radical innovation. Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Golden GAte University.
20. O`Sullivan, M. C. (2002). Reform implementation and the realities within which teachers work: A Namibian case study. 32(2), 219-137.
21. Rezaei, H., & Haghani, F. (2016). The causes of resistance to change and solutions to overcome it: A review of literature. Iranian Journal of Medical Education, 16, 440-453 (in Persian).
22. Salimi, L., Keshtiaray, N., & Fathi Vajargah, K. (2014).The evolution and reform of higher education curriculum in Iran after the Islamic Revolution. Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies, 5(9), 52-73 (in Persian).
23. Snyder, J., Bolin, F., & Zumwalt, K.(1992). Curriculum implementation, In P. Jackson (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 402-435). New York: Macmillan.
24. Toh, Y., & So, H.J. (2011). ICT reform initiatives in Singapore schools: A complexity theory perspective. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(3), 349-357.
25. Yamani, N., Nasr, A.R., & Sabri, M.R. (2009). Supervisor selection and studen-supervisor relation. Journal of Curriculum Studies (J.C.S.), 4(3), 281-308 (in Persian).
)