نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه مدیریت آموزش عالی، واحد ساری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، ساری، ایران.

2 عضو هیئت علمی، گروه مدیریت آموزشی، واحد ساری، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، ساری، ایران.

چکیده

هدف کلی پژوهش حاضر شناسایی و رتبه بندی ابعاد دانش محتوایی تعلیم و تربیت در دانشگاه فرهنگیان منطقه 9 است. این مطالعه کاربردی با رویکردی مختلط با استفاده از یک رویکرد کیفی و کمّی با طرح اکتشافی انجام شد. در بخش کیفی از روش دلفی استفاده شده و در بخش کمّی نیز از روش پیمایشی توصیفی استفاده شد. در بخش کیفی، جامعه آماری شامل 20 نفر از اساتید دانشگاه فرهنگیان منطقه 9 بود که 10 نفر از آنها به روش نمونه گیری هدفمند و براساس قانون اشباع انتخاب شدند و 263 عضو هیئت علمی، اساتید مأمور و مدرس مدعو دانشگاه فرهنگیان منطقه 9 کشور شامل (سمنان، مازندران و گلستان) در بخش کمّی قرار داشتند که 156 نفر از آنها با استفاده از روش نمونه گیری تصادفی طبقه بندی شده براساس فرمول کوکران به عنوان نمونه انتخاب شدند. برای جمع­آوری داده­ها از پرسشنامه دانش محتوایی تعلیم و تربیت (محقق ساخته) با 82 سؤال استفاده شد. روایی و میزان اعتبار ابزارها توسط متخصصان تأیید شد و پایایی ترکیبی و آلفای کرونباخ نیز بالاتر از 7/0 محاسبه شد. نتایج نشان داد که دانش محتوای آموزش دارای 5 بعد مضمون دانش تدریس اثربخش، مضمون دانش محتوایی و دانش پداگوژیکی، مضمون تخصص در محتوای علمی، مضمون دانش تعامل با دانشجو معلمان، مضمون اقدامات مبتنی بر PCK در دانشگاه فرهنگیان» است که از این میان مضمون دانش محتوایی و دانش پداگوژیکی بالاترین ضریب استاندارد و درجه همبستگی را دارا بودند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying and Ranking the Dimensions of Education Content Knowledge in Farhangian University of Region 9

نویسندگان [English]

  • Gholamreza Mahmoudpour 1
  • Maryam Taghvaie Yazdi 2
  • Maryam Taghvaei 2

1 PhD student, Department of Higher Education Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.

2 Faculty member, Department of Educational Management, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran.

چکیده [English]

The general purpose of this study is to identify and rank the dimensions of education content knowledge in Farhangian University of Region 9. This applied study was carried using a mixed method involving qualitative and quantitative approaches with an exploratory design. In the qualitative phase, the Delphi method was used, whereas the quantitative phase involved descriptive survey method. The statistical population in the qualitative phase included 20 faculty members of Farhangian University of Region 9, of whom ten were selected by purposive sampling method and based on saturation law. As far as the quantitative phase was concerned, the statistical population involved 263 faculty members, visiting professors and visiting lecturers of Farhangian University of Region 9 of the country (the provinces of Semnan, Mazandaran and Golestan), of whom 156 were selected as participants using random sampling method based on Cochran's formula. To collect the data, the Education Content Knowledge Questionnaire (researcher-made) including 82 items was used. The validity and reliability of the instruments were confirmed by experts in the field, and the combined reliability and Cronbach's alpha were calculated to be higher than 0.7. The results showed that education content knowledge has 5 dimensions: knowledge of effective teaching, content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge, specialization in scientific content, knowledge of interaction with student-teachers, and PCK-based actions in Farhangian University. Content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge had the highest standard coefficient and degree of correlation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Content Knowledge
  • Education
  • Farhangian University
Ababaf Z 2019. Pedagogical perspectives, inspiring horizons in higher education curriculum. Quarterly Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Tenth Year. No. 19. [in Persian]
Adli F, Agha Soleimani H, Amini Shad M, et all 2015. Upgrading the professional competence of the teacher to the pck (content knowledge of education). Two Quarterly Journal of Science and Promotion of New Teacher Training Strategies. Vol. 6, No. 1. [in Persian]
Alharbi H E 2019. An Arabic Assessment Tool to Measure Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge. Computers & Education. Vol. 2, No. 142, Pp. 2-20.
Alcock L, Inglis M 2008. Doctoral students’ use of examples in evaluating and proving conjectures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, Vol. 69, Pp. 111-129.
Bulut A, Işıksal M 2019. Perceptions of Pre-service Elementary Mathematics Teachers on Their Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) Regarding Geometry. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, Vol. 38, No. 2, Pp. 153-176.
Dong Y, Xu C, Chai C S, et all 2019. Exploring the Structural Relationship Among Teachers’ Technostress, Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK), Computer Self-efficacy and School Support. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 1-11.
Eshter M 2008. Teacher Views on Understanding Evolutionary Theory: A PCK-Study in the Framework of the ERTE-model8).
Gess-Newsome J, Taylor J A, Carlson J, et all 2019. Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice, and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 41, No. 7, Pp. 944-963.
Hashweh M Z 2005. Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content Knowledge: teachers and teaching: theory and practice, No. 11, Pp. 273-292.
Hosseini Z 2015. Comparison of the effect of direct education and structuralism models on increasing the knowledge of teacher technology students. Two quarterly scientific and research quarterly educational approaches. Vol. 10, No. 2. [in Persian]
Jang J E,  Lei J. 2019. The Impact of Video Self-Analysis on the Development of Preservice Teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK). In Pre-Service and In-Service Teacher Education: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 986-1002). IGI Global.
Khakbaz  A S, Alam al-Huda J, Musaipur N, et all 2011. Discovering content-educational knowledge as a kind of interdisciplinary knowledge for academic teaching. Quarterly. Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities of the Fourth Grade. No. 1 (13 in a row). [in persian]
Koehler M J, Mishra P, Yahya K 2007. Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computers & Education, Vol. 49, No. 3, Pp. 740-762.
Mehr Mohammadi M, Fazeli A R 2015. The Nature of Teacher Knowledge and Teacher Knowledge: Comparing Schulman's and Gary Fenstermecher's Perspectives. Journal of Fundamentals of Education, Vol. 5, No. 1, Pp. 30-46. [in Persian]
Shulman L S 1986. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.Educational Researcher, Vol. 15, No. 2, Pp. 4-14.
Shulman L S 1999. Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard: Harvard Educational Review, No. 57, Pp. 1-22.
Shulman L 1987. Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 57, No. 1, Pp. 1–22.
Tondeur J, Scherer R, Siddiq F, et all 2020. Enhancing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): a mixed-method study. Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 68, No. 1, Pp. 319-343.
Wang C J 2019. Facilitating the emotional intelligence development of students: Use of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 100198.
Zhang S, Liu Q, Cai Z 2019. Exploring primary school teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in online collaborative discourse: An epistemic network analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology. Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 1-10.