مجله توسعه آموزش جندی شاپور اهواز

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

پرسش‌های متداول

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اخبار و اعلانات

فرآیند داوری

شناسایی مؤلفه‌های مدارس هوشمند بر اساس رویکرد سازنده گرایی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه مدیریت آموزشی، واحد بین الملل کیش، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، جزیره کیش، ایران

2 عضو هیات علمی ، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

3 عضو هیات علمی ، گروه مدیریت دولتی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بندرعباس، ایران.

چکیده

این پژوهش با هدف شناسایی مؤلفه‌های مدارس هوشمند بر اساس رویکرد سازنده گرایی انجام شد. پژوهش حاضر از لحاظ هدف، کاربردی و از لحاظ نحوه گردآوری اطلاعات جزء پژوهش­های آمیخته (کمی و کیفی ) است. جامعه آماری در بخش کیفی شامل خبرگان دانشگاهی وصاحب نظران حوزه مدارس هوشمند و در بخش کمّی شامل کلیه معلمان و مدیران مدارس هوشمند در سال 1397  بود. حجم نمونه در بخش کیفی با اشباع نظری (30 نفر) و در بخش کمّی بر اساس فرمول کوکران 357 نفر برآورد شد. برای انتخاب نمونه در بخش کیفی از نمونه‌گیری هدفمند و در بخش کمّی از نمونه‌گیری تصادفی طبقه­ای استفاده شد. ابزار گردآوری داده‌ها، در بخش کیفی، مصاحبه و در بخش کمّی، پرسشنامه محقق‌ساخته بر مبنای مقیاس 5 گزینه‌ای بود. برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده­ها از آزمون‌های آلفای کرونباخ، ﻣﯿﺎﻧﮕﯿﻦ وارﯾﺎﻧﺲ اﺳﺘﺨﺮاج ﺷﺪه (AVE)، ماتریس جذر AVE، کولموگروف‌اسمیرنف، تحلیل عاملی تاییدی و t تک‌نمونه‌ای استفاده شد. نتایج به دست آمده به شناسایی 5 مولفه و 44 شاخص منجر شد که 5 مؤلفه اثرگذار شامل برنامه درسی (پنهان و آشکار)، محیط مدرسه، معلم (عوامل فردی و شایستگی‌های حرفه‌ای)، مدیر مدرسه و کارکنان آموزشی و آموزش (دانش، مهارت و نگرش) تأثیر دارند. نتایج دیگر نشان داد که اولویت مؤلفه های شناسایی شده به ترتیب عبارت است از: برنامه درسی (پنهان و آشکار) (0.57)، محیط مدرسه (0.55)، معلم (عوامل فردی و شایستگی‌های حرفه‌ای) (0.44)، مدیر مدرسه و کارکنان آموزشی (0.33) وآموزش (دانش، مهارت و نگرش) (0.12). همچنین، درجه تناسب آن با اطمینان 95 درصداز نظر متخصصین مورد تایید قرارگرفت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying Smart School Constituents based on the Constructivist Approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohammad Rezaei 1
  • Amine Ahmadi 2
  • Mahdi Bagheri 3

1 Department of educational management, Kish International Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kish Island, Iran.

2 Faculty Member, Department of Educational Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Faculty Member, Department of Public Administration, Islamic Azad University, Bandar Abbas, Iran

چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to identify the components of smart schools based on the constructivist approach. The study upon the purpose was practical and in terms of data collection was a mixed (qualitative and quantitative) research. The statistical population included academic experts and professions in the field of smart schools in the qualitative section, and in the quantitative section consisted of all teachers and principals of smart schools in 1977. The sample size in the qualitative section on theoretical saturation was 30 members, and in the quantitative section based on Cochran formula 357 members were estimated. Purposeful sampling and stratified random sampling were used for quantitative sampling. Then, data were collected through qualitative interviews and quantitative researcher-made questionnaires based on 5-point scale. For data analysis, Cronbach's alpha, AVE, AVE, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, confirmatory factor analysis, and one-sample t-test were used. Accordingly, the results illustrated the identification of 5 components and 44 indicators that included 5 influential components including curriculum (hidden and explicit), school environment, teacher (individual factors and professional competencies), school administrator, and educational staff (knowledge, skills, and Attitude). Other results showed that the priority of the identified components were: curriculum (hidden and explicit) (0.57); school environment (0.55); teacher (individual factors and professional competencies) (0.44); school administrator and educational staff (0.33); and Education (Knowledge, Skill and Attitude) (0.12). Moreover, its degree of fitness was confirmed by experts with 95% confidence.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Intelligent schools
  • constructivism
  • education
مراجع
Abdol vahabi M, Mehrali Zadeh Y, Parsa A 2016. Investigating the Barriers to Establishing Smart Schools in Ahwaz Girls' High Schools from the Perspective of Teachers and Principals. Journal of Educational Sciences Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp: 80-55. [In Persian].
Abolhassani Z, Safai Movahed S 2019. Providing a framework for the first high school work and technology curriculum with emphasis on the reverse class pattern. Curriculum Research, Vol. 16, No. 61, pp. 1-13. [In Persian].
Ahmadi H, Virginiari M 2003. e-learning. Tehran: Iran Industrial Research and Training Center. [In Persian].
Ahmadi T 2016. A meta-analysis of the factors affecting the successful deployment of smart schools. Graduate thesis. University of Mohaghegh Ardabili. [In Persian].
Alizadeh Sh,  Salehi K, Moghadamzadeh A 2017. Investigating Classroom Teacher Quality - A Mixed Research Method. Journal of Research in School and Virtual Learning, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 63-84. [In Persian].
Azian T 2006. Deconstructing secondary education: the Malaysian Smart School Initiative: 1-12.
Cahyaningrum D, Wahyuni D, Sulistyawati H 2016. Supplementary Materials Based on Constructivism Principles for Students’ Effective Learning. In Proceeding of International Conference on Teacher Training and Education, Vol. No, 1.
Crawford J 2018. The National Literacy Strategy: Teacher Knowledge, Skills and Beliefs, and Impact on Progress. Support for Learning, Vol. 18, No. 2, Pp. 71-76.
Crossley M, Sprague T 2014. Education for sustainable development: Implications for small island developing states (SIDS). International Journal of Educational Development, Vol. 35, Pp. 86-95.
Cziprok C D, Popescu F F 2015. Project-based learning based upon the constructivist method for high school physics lessons. In The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education, Vol. 3, Pp. 469.
Education in Tehran 2010. Smart School Roadmap (Evaluation Checklist). [In Persian].
Hayes S M, Chapple S, Ramirez C 2014. Strong, smart and bold strategies for improving attendance and retention in an after-school intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, Vol. 54, No. 3, Pp. 64-69.
Holzman L 2016. Schools for growth: radical alternatives to current education models. Routledge.
Ibrahim M S, Razak A Z A, Kenayathulla H B 2013. Smart principals and smart schools. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol.103, Pp. 826-836.
Kumar R 2017. Role of ICT in Enhancing the Quality of School Education in India. PARIPEX-Indian Journal of Research, Vol. 5, No. 11.
Li W Wu S, Ni M 2016. A Study of Scientific Inquiry Activities in Smart Classrooms of a Primary School. In International Conference on Blending Learning: Pp. 24-36.
Marshall J C, Smart J B, Alston D M 2017. Inquiry-based instruction: a possible solution to improving student learning of both science concepts and scientific practices. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 15. No. 5, Pp. 777-796.
Mehr Mohammadi M 2004. Rethinking the Concept and Model of the Educational Revolution in the Information and Communication Age, Curriculum in the Information and Communication Technology. Tehran: Aig. [In Persian].
Mohajeran B, GHalhay A & H, Robati M 2013.The main reasons for the lack of proper formation of smart schools and providing solutions for their development in Mazandaran province. University of E-Learning Journal (Media), Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 13-23. [In Persian].
Nili M R, Nasr A R, Sharif M, et all 2010. Social Requirements and Consequences of Responsive Curricula in Higher Education, Case Study of Isfahan State Universities, Journal of Applied Sociology, Vol. 21, No. 2. [In Persian].
Olsen B 2015. Teaching what they learn, learning what they live: How teachers' personal histories shape their professional development. Routledge.
Rahman F A, Jalil H A, Hassan A 2016. An exposition of constructivism account to construct knowledge and to create meaningful learning environment for teacher education. EDUCARE, 1(1).
Saeedi M 2016. The role of school principals in facing the problems and challenges facing smart schools. Graduate thesis. Mashhad Ferdowsi University. [In Persian].
School Intelligence Style Sheet 2012. December Amendment of Statistics and Information and Communication Technology Center of Ministry of Education. Ebadi  R 2005. Information Technology and Education. Tehran: Institute of Educational Technology Development of Smart Schools. [In Persian].
Seyyed Mohammadi Z 2013. School smarts. http://nbarnamehrizy92.blogfa.com. [In Persian].
Siew Ming T, et al 2010. Supporting Smart School Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development in and through ICT: A model for change. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology (IJEDICT), Vol. 6, No. 3, Pp. 1-16.
Soltani M 2012. The Structure of Smart Schools in the Educational System. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, Vol. 2, No. 6, Pp. 6250-6254.
Soroush M 2010. Smart schools. Proceedings of the first national conference on information technology development, education in Yazd. [In Persian].
Taleb Z, Hassanzadeh F 2015. Toward Smart School: A Comparison between Smart School and Traditional School for Mathematics Learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 171, Pp. 90-95.
Talebi B, Jodaie Gh 2015. Essentials of School Intelligence, National Conference on Educational Management in the Age of Information and Communication Technology, Kermanshah, Islamic Azad University of Kermanshah. [In Persian].
Yaghma A 2009. The need for transformation in the educational system. Educational Technology, Tehran, Vol. 25, No. 206. [In Persian].
مجله توسعه آموزش جندی شاپور اهواز
دوره 11، ویژه نامه
ویژه نامه 99
مرداد 1399
صفحه 115-127
فایل ها
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار