You are here

Home » Content

Evaluation and Provision of an Optimal Model of Semi-Centralized Curriculum in Accordance with National Curriculum of First Period of High School in Iran

Journal Name:

  • Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Fen Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2015

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The purpose of this study is to provide an optimal model for semi-centralized curriculum in accordance with the national curriculum of the first period of high school in Iran and its evaluation from the perspective of the curriculum experts and related teachers and presentation of recommendations in relation to semi-centralized curriculum to improve the national curriculum. Research methodology, is applied and this study is an evaluative study. The researcher has used "field research" in order to conduct the study. Statistical population studied in this research consists of two groups: (1) 79 people from faculty members and third semester students studying curriculum planning in universities of Tehran, including Kharazmi University, Tarbiat Modarres University, Shahid Beheshti University, Allameh Tabatabaei University, Shahid Rajai University, Tehran University and Islamic Azad University, Research and Sciences Branch 2- first period of high school teachers of Baharestan with job titles including teachers, deputies and assistants with a bachelor's degree, master's degree and Ph.D students who were 466 subjects. In the present study, three hypotheses were tested, all of which were rejected in this study. The data collection tools included a researcher made questionnaire, and this questionnaire consisted of 36 questions with five options (Likert range). To check the validity of the questionnaire the opinions of advisor and supervisor professors were used who confirmed the face and content validity. To obtain reliability coefficient the questionnaire was conducted in a smaller statistical population and its reliability was estimated to be 0.96 using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. In general, Data Analysis showed the sameness of the opinion distribution of the experts (professors and Ph.D students studying curriculum planning) and teachers to use the semi-centralized curriculum model to explain the semi-centralized curriculum component in accordance with National Curriculum of first period of high school in Iran which was at the average level or higher than the average. Curriculum can be developed both by internal factors such as available forces in the schools, local areas or regions and external factors such centers central institutions in the country. The results of this study are a strategy to develop decentralization in the national curriculum planning.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon 5000139547-5000241795-1-pb.pdf
  • 6
1212
1225
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

[1] Izadi, Samad (2000). Designing a semi-centralized model for the curriculum. Tehran:
Tarbiat Modarres University.
[2] Javidi Kalateh J. Abadi, T. (2006). Negotiations Curriculum Model, a new approach
to decentralization of high school education, proceedings of the Conference of
centralization and decentralization in the process of curriculum development,
Curriculum Studies Association, pp. 85-102.
[3] Khandaghi, Maghsoud Amin, Goudarzi, Mohammadali. (2011). Iran's regional
system curriculum design. Journal of Curriculum Studies. Year 6th, Number 23, Pp.
76-109.
[4] Khandaghi, Maghsoud Amin, Goudarzi, Mohammadali. (2012). Analysis of the
current state of social education curriculum design of middle school course based on
the content analysis of books and documents related to the curriculum. Scientific
Research Journal, Vol. I, number 2, pp. 131 -176.
TIARI, NADERI, SEIF NARAGHI
1224
[5] Secretariat for curriculum design and development (2010). The curriculum of the
Islamic Republic of Iran. The fifth map. Tehran, research organization and
curriculum development.
[6] Salsabeeli, N. (2007). Transition of curriculum planning system of Iran towards
decentralization in curriculum design and development with an emphasis on schoolbased
curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies. The first year, No. 4, Pp. 49-68.
[7] Salsabeeli, Nader. (2010). designing learning opportunities in a process-oriented
compilation from the views of the curriculum. Journal of Education. No. 105, Pp 63-
91.
[8] Seif Ali Akbar (2005). Educational psychology (Psychology of Learning and
Teaching) .Tehran: Agah publication.
[9] Osareh, A. (2012) Globalization and development of national curriculum. Journal of
Curriculum Studies of Iran. Seventh year, No. 25, Pp 67-94.
[10] Fathi Vajargah, K. (1998). Designing an "assessment model in the curriculum." Ph.D.
Thesis in curricula, Tarbiat Modarres University.
[11] Fathi Vajargah, K. (2011). The principles of curriculum planning. Tehran: Iranzamin.
[12] Fathi Vajargah, K. (2007). Curriculum into new identities. Tehran: Ayizh.
13-Fathi Vajargah, K. (2008). Research needs assessment. Tehran: Ayizh. Second
edition.
[13] Qadiri, M., (2009). Critical theory of education: a critique of modern curriculum and
recent capitalist Tehran, Memorial of book.
[14] Karami, M. Bahman Abadai, Somayeh. Ismaeli, Arezoo (2012) optimal structure of
decision-making in higher education curriculum development, view of faculty
members and experts research journal in curriculum, ninth year, No. 7
[15] Gouya, Zahra. Izadi, S. (2003). The status of teachers at levels of curriculum
decision-making. Scientific-Research Journal of Human Sciences in Al-Zahra
University. Twelfth years, No. 42, pp. 147-173.
[16] Gouya, Zahra. Ghadaksazkhosroshahi, Leila (2007) a new explanation for
centralization and decentralization in Iran, Journal of Curriculum Studies. The first
year, No. 4, Pp. 17-28.
[17] Mousapoor, Nematollah (1992) dos and don’ts in the curriculum of Iran, education
experts’ point of view, Literature and humanities Journal, Pp 61-39
[18] Mousapour, Nematollah (2006). Proceedings of the Conference process of
centralization and decentralization in the curriculum.
[19] Mousapour, Nematollah (2011). Fundamentals of high school education planning.
Tehran: Behnashr.
[20] Naderi, E. Seif Naraghi, M. (2010) Ignorance and deficiencies in the Research and
their realizations, Tehran Arasbaran publication.
[21] Naderi, E. Seif Naraghi, M (2011) evaluation and measurement and analytical
foundations of its tools in the Education and Psychology, Tehran Arasbaran
publication.
[22] Naderi, E. Seif Naraghi, M (2015) Research Methods and its evaluation in the human
sciences, Tehran Arasbaran publication
[23] Norouzzadeh, R., et al (2006). Devolution university curriculum, a step towards
decentralization of curriculum in the higher education. Proceedings of the Conference
process of centralization and decentralization in the curriculum. Curriculum Studies
Association, Pp 570-597.
Evaluation and Provision of an Optimal Model of Semi-Centralized Curriculum in Accordance
with National Curriculum of First Period of High School in Iran
1225
[24] Yarmohammadian, Mohammadhossein et al. (2002) feasibility and solutions for the
decentralization of educational system and delegation of authority. Knowledge and
research. Islamic Azad University Khorasgah Esfahan branch. No. thirteenth and
fourteenth. Pp. 1-24, English References
[25] ADAMS,D. AND A. GOLDBARD.(1995), Comprehnsive cultural policy for the
state of California. C. A: icd WWcd. Org{8.21.2000}.
[26] Bocher, T. (1989). The national curriculum and the implementation gap in preedy M
(ed) Approaches to curriculum management milton keyhes open university press.
[27] Belton (2005). What is Design? http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk /trinity/watdes.html
[28] Brady, L. (1994). Outcome-based education: imposing a model for curriculum
development. International Journal of Educatory, 9(2): 180- 192.
[29] Henson,Kenneth T. (1998). Curriculum Development for Education Reform, New
York: Longman Inc.
[30] Hunkins, F. P. A. (1993). Systematic Model for Curriculum Planning In: Curriculum
Develop ment. Edited by G. Hass and M. parkay. Allyn &Bacom.
[31] Londono Polo, Isabel (1996). Decentralization of education in Colombia fromthe
perspective of the local participants: Learning in the context ofimplementation. Ed.
Dissertation. Harvard University.
[32] 8-Saylor Galen J.&Alexander W.H. &Lewis A.J. (1974). Curriculum Planning for
Better TeachingAnd Learning. 4th.ed. New York: Holt Rinehart And Winston Inc.
[33] Schubert Wiliam H.(1986). Curriculum. Perspective, Paradigm and Possibility. New
York: Macmillan Pub.co.
[34] Schwab Joseph J. (1969).The Practical, A language For Curriculum.
[35] In Flinders & Thornton (ed.). 1997. New York: The Curriculum Studies Readers,
Routledge.
[36] Short , Edmond C. (1982). A Historical Look at Curriculum Design.In Journal of
Theory into Practice. 12-Skager R. (1984).Organizing Schools to EncourageSelf-
Direction in Learners.Hamburg: UIE. Pergamon press.
[37] Utomo, Erry (2005). Challenges of curriculum reform in the context of
decentralization: The response of teachers to a competence-based curriculum (CBC)
and its implementation in schools, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
[38] Skilbeck. M. (1991). School Based Curriculum Development.Harper and Row.
London.
[39] Short, E. (1973). Knowledge production and utilization in curriculum. Paper
presented at Annual Meeting, AERA, and New York.
[40] Schuberts, W. H. (2006). Curriculum inquiry. In F.M.Connelly, Fang He M., &
Phillion J. (Eds.), The sage handbook of curriculum and instruction(1st ed., pp. 399-
419). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
[41] Wilson,B(1997).The Post modern paradigm. http://www.cudenver.edu/bwilson
[42] Wiles John & Bondi Joseph. (1993). Curriculum Development. A Guide to Practice.
4th ed. NewJersey: Merrill Prentice – Hall Inc.
[43] Wiles, Jon. (2003). Curriculum Essentials, A Resource for Educators. Second ed.
Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com