Designing a Model for Elementary School Curriculum Decentering: A Qualitative Research

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. in Curriculum Planning, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran

3 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Tabriz University, Tabriz, Iran

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to design a model of elementary school curriculum Designing based on the characteristics of the contexts, levels and elements of the curriculum in relation to the localization of the curriculum. The research approach was qualitative and included content analysis and synthesis research methods. According to the type of indicators, the statistical population of the study was variable in different questions.The first population included primary education experts and educational groups, 13 of whom were purposefully selected by special sampling, and their views and opinions were assessed through interviews. The second community was a textual community in which the documents and scientific texts of the last twenty years in the field of curriculum decentralization were examined, as well as a community of curriculum specialists, experts and primary school teachers, 19 of whom were purposeful and chain sampling Were selected and information was obtained through interviews and study and review of scientific content. In data analysis, conventional content analysis and content analysis of Gall et al. Research findings showed: The statistical population includes curriculum specialists, primary education experts and departments, elementary school teachers and scientific texts in the field of decentralization. Information was obtained through interviews and review of scientific content with the amount of different samples selected. In data analysis, the method of customary content analysis and content analysis of Gall et al. The research findings are: 1) components of change discourse, soft subject areas, systems thinking and organic empowerment have been identified as necessary contexts for the implementation of the liberalization approach. 2) The decision-making process has four levels (social, academic, institutional and educational) which is based on the participation of provincial, regional and school officials and the institutional level acts as a link between academic (theoretical) and educational (practical) decision-making levels and Its role has a special place in the theoretical-practical (quasi-practical) dimension. 3) According to Klein, the elements of the curriculum interact with each other in a network structure and, influenced by the theory of social constructivism, emphasize the design of learning environments.

Keywords

References

ابراهیمی، مجتبی، سلیمانی، نادر، و شفیع‌زاده، حمید (1399). ارائة الگویی برای مدیریت غیر متمرکز در آموزش ‌و پرورش بر اساس نظریة داده‌بنیاد. پژوهش در نظام‌های آموزشی، 14(ویژه‌نامه)، 269-255.
امین خندقی، مقصود، و گودرزی، محمدعلی (1390). طراحی نظام برنامه‌ریزی درسی منطقه‌ای برای آموزش ‌و پرورش جمهوری اسلامی ایران. مطالعات برنامة درسی ایران، 6(23) ، 109-76.
ایمان، محمدتقی، و نوشادی، محمدرضا (1390). تحلیل محتوای کیفی. پژوهش، 3(2) ، 44-15.
بازرگان هرندی، عباس (1398). ارزشیابی آموزشی: مفاهیم، الگوها و فرایند عملیاتی. تهران: سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌ها (سمت).
حسینی‌خواه، علی (1393). سطوح تصمیم‌گیری برنامة درسی. دانشنامة برنامة درسی. 6-1.
خسروی، رحمت‌اله (1393). تبیین و نقد آزادسازی برنامة درسی و ارائة الگویی برای نظام برنامه‌ریزی درسی ایران با تأکید بر نظریة عمل‌گرای شوآب و چگونگی کاربست آن در یک استان کشور )مورد استان زنجان(. رسالة دکتری، دانشگاه تربیت‌ مدرس.
دبیرخانة شورای راهبردی تحول وزارت آموزش ‌و پرورش (1390). راهنمای عمل، مجموعة مستندات تحول بنیادین در آموزش ‌و پرورش. چاپ دوم، تهران: سازمان پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی آموزشی.
ژوزف، پاملا بلوتین، براومان، استفنی لاستر، ویندشیل، مارک، میکل، ادوارد و نانسی استوارت، گرین (1396). فرهنگ‌های برنامة درسی (نظریه‌ها). ترجمة محمود مهرمحمدی و همکاران، تهران: سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌ها (سمت).
سازمان پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی آموزشی (1390). مبانی نظری تحول بنیادین در نظام تعلیم و تربیت رسمی عمومی جمهوری اسلامی ایران. تهران.
سازمان پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی آموزشی (1391). سند برنامة درسی ملی جمهوری اسلامی ایران. تهران.
شورای ‌عالی آموزش ‌و پرورش (1396). سند زیرنظام راهبری و مدیریت. معاونت آموزشی وزارت آموزش ‌و پرورش.
شورت، ادموند سی (1392). روش‌شناسی مطالعات برنامة درسی. ترجمة محمود مهرمحمدی و همکاران. تهران: سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌ها (سمت).
عادل مهربان، مرضیه (1394). مروری بر تحلیل محتوای کیفی و کاربرد آن در پژوهش. اصفهان: دانشگاه علوم پزشکی اصفهان.
عباس‌زاده، محمد (1391). تأملی بر اعتبار و پایایی در تحقیقات کیفی. جامعه‌شناسی کاربردی، 23(1)، 34-19.
یورگنسن، ماریان، و فیلیپس، لوئیز (1391). تحلیل گفتمان. ترجمة هادی جلیلی، تهران: نشر نی.
Ahmadi Gharacheh, A. M., Esmaeili, Z., Farajollahi, M., & Jamalzadeh, M. (2016). Presentation of blended learning conceptual pattern based on individual and social constructivism theory. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 1, 1126 -1149.
Akhter, M. (2004). Analyses of Curriculum process and Development of a model for Secondary level in Pakistan. Published by Internet PhD .Ed theses University Institute of education and research, University of Arid Agriculture Rawalpindi Pakistan.
Aktan, S. (2018). Curriculum studies in Turkey: A historical perspective. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
Al-Abdulkareem, R., & Hentschke, G. C. (2014). Textbooks and constructivist pedagogy in Saudi Arabian school classrooms. Curriculum and Teaching, 3(2), 13-24.
Alkis Kugukaydin, M., & Ulucinar Sagir, S. (2016). An investigation of primary school teachers’ PCK towards science subjects using an inquiry-based approach. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(1), 87-108.
Al-Mahasneh, R. (2018). The Role of Teachers in Establishing an Attractive Environment to Develop the Creative Thinking among Basic Stage Students in the Schools of Tafilah Governorate According to their own Perspective. Curriculum and Teaching, 7(1), 206-221.
Alshalti, A. M. (2010). The impact of the school environment system on the development of creative values in fine art in secondary education from the point of view of teachers. Master Thesis, Umm Al-Qura University, Saudi Arabia.
Amitha, V., & Vijayalaxmi, A. (2017). Multiple intelligence approach in the school curriculum: A review article. International Journal of Home Science, 3(3), 324-327.
Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and curriculum. London, United Kingdom: Routledge Falmer. (3rd ed).
Aritonang, D. M. (2016). Deconcentration for Local Government: The Case of Indonesia. Law, Policy and Globalization, 55, 78-86.
Aziz, M., Bloom, D. E., Humair, S., Jimenez, E., Rosenberg, L., & Sathar, Z. (2014). Education system reform in Pakistan: Why, When, and How?. IZA Policy Paper, 76, 1-22.
Bademo, Y., & Tefera, B. F. (2016). Assessing the desired and actual levels of teachers’ participation in decision-making in secondary schools of Ethiopia. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(13), 1236-1242.
Baeten, M.,  Dochy, F., Struyven, K., Parmentier, E., & Vander bruggen, A. (2015). Student-centred learning environments: An investigation into student teachers’ instructional preferences and approaches to learning. Learning Environments Research, 19(1), 43–62.
Barantovich, M. M. (2006). Deprofessionalization of curriculum decision making. FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Florida International University. http: //digital commons. fiu. edu/etd/1394.
Bas, G., & Senturk, C. (2019). Teachers’ voice: Teacher participation in curriculum development process. Inquiry in Education, 11(1), 3-31.
Bellei, C., & Morawietz, L. (2016). Strong content, weak tools: Twenty-first-century-competencies in the Chilean educational reform. In F.M. Reimers & C.K. Chung (Eds.), Teaching and Learning for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 93-126). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ben-Peretz, M. (2011). Teacher knowledge: What is it? How do we uncover it? What are its implications for schooling? Teaching and Teacher Education, 27, 3-9.
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011) Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design and curricula: Implications for academic developers. Academic Development, 16(2), 133-145.
Camelia, S., Vladimir-Aurelian, E., & Catalin, D. R. (2014). The impact of decentralization on the Romanian school. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 124, 69–76.
Casinader, N. (2016). A lost conduit for intercultural education: school geography and the potential for transformation in the Australian Curriculum. Intercultural Education, 27(3), 257-273.
Chapman, S., Wright, P., & Pascoe, R. (2018). Arts curriculum implementation: Adopt and adapt as policy translation. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(1), 12-24.
Cheung, A. C. K., & Yuen, T. W. W. (2017). Examining the perceptions of curriculum leaders on primary school reform: A case study of Hong Kong, China. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(6), 1020-1039.
Cheung, A. C. K., & Wong, P. M. (2012). Factors affecting the implementation of curriculum reform in Hong Kong, China: Key findings from a large-scale survey study. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(1), 39-54.
Coburn, C. E., & Russell, J. L. (2008). District policy and teachers’ social networks. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(3), 203-235.
Costley, K. C. (2015). Research supporting integrated curriculum: Evidence for using this Method of Instruction in Public School Classrooms. Running head: Integrated Curriculum, Associate Professor of Early Childhood Education, Arkansas Tech University.
Dagar, V., & Yadav, A. (2016). Constructivism: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 7(4), 1-4.
Dagdelen, O., & Kosterelioglu, I. (2015). Effect of conceptual change texts for overcoming misconceptions in “people and management” unit. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(1), 99-112.
Damovska, L., & Tasevska, A. (2014). Requirements for reorganization of th first cycle of primary education in the Republic of Macedonia. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education, 2(1), 7- 12.
Davis, E. A., Janssen, F. J. J. M., & Van Driel, J. H. (2017). Teachers and science curriculum materials: where we are and Where We Need to Go.ESERA 2017 Confererence. Dublin City Univercity, Dublin, Ireland.
DeLuca, C., Shulha, J., Luhanga, U., Shulha, L. M., Christou, T. M. & Klinger, D. A. (2015). Collaborative inquiry as a professional learning structure for educators: A scoping review. Professional Development in Education, 41(4), 640-670.
Demarest, A. B. (2015). Place-based curriculum design: Exceeding standards through local investigations. New York: Routledge.
Department of Education.(2015). The Curriculum and Learning Management Systems Framework of DepEd Region Iva – Cauibarzon. CLMD/JEL. Gate 2, Karangalan Village, Cainta Rizal.
Dolezal, D., Posekany, A., Motschnig, R., & Pucher, R. (2018). Person-centered learning using peer review method an evaluation and a concept for student-centered classrooms. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 8(1), 127-147.
Doroudi, S. (2017). Computation, constructivism, and curriculum design. school of computer science. Carnegie Mellon University. Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
Driedger-Enns, L. (2014). A narrative inquiry into the identity making of two early-career teachers: Understanding the personal practical knowledge. Head of the Department of Curriculum Studies. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Dumitru, D., & Enachescu, V. (2015). Communities of practice as a mean for decentralization. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 187, 752-756.
Fanni, A., Fathi Vajargah, K., Zarhani, S. A., & Zarafshan, A. (2009). Ministry of education, organization of research and education planning, office for national curriculum planning.
Favre, M. (2016). Modeling social interactions and their effects on individual decision making. Master of Science MSc. in Physics, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding Student Differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57-72.
Fenton, L., & Gallant, K. (2016). Integrated experiential education: Definitions and a conceptual model. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(2), 1-15.
Fernando, S., & Marikar, F. (2017). Constructivist teaching/learning theory and participatory teaching methods. Curriculum and Teaching, 6(1), 110-122.
Floyd, C., Huston, C., Pulido, A., Sgoutas‐Emch, S., Sumner, S., & Yard, S. (2011). Diversity curriculum proposal. Additional References and Resources on Diversity.
Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
Ghonoodi, A., & Salimi, L. (2011). The study of elements of curriculum in smart schools. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 68-71.
Gilardi, A., & Guglielmetti, C. (2007). Quando a decidere è il gruppo. Teorie e modelli di presa di decisione. In G. Pravettoni & G. Vago (Eds.). La scelta imperfetta. Caratteristiche e limiti della decisione umana. Milano: McGraw-Hill.
Goddard, Y. L., Goddard, R. D., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2007). A theoretical and empirical investigation of teacher collaboration for school improvement and student achievement in public elementary schools. Teacher College Record, 109(4), 877–896.
Goldrick-Rab, S. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for improving community college student success. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 437-469.
Goyal, G.(2017). Formulation of Objectives in Curriculum Development. International Journal of Analysis of Social Science and Humanity, 1, 23- 34.
Halinen, I.(2018). The New Educational Curriculum in Finland. Improving the Quality of Childhood in Europe, 7, 75-89.
Hall, W., & Keynes, M. (2008). Equality, diversity and accessibility in the curriculum: Guidance for faculty management, programme committees and course teams. The Equality and Diversity Office. Strategy Unit. The Open University.
Hameed Hassan, A. M. (2013). Reflection of the key aspects of curriculum in the newly revised secondary school curriculum of english and other subjects in Bangladesh. Humanities and Social Science,17(2), 59-68.
Hamilton, R. J., Farruggia, S. F., Peterson, E. R., & Carne, S. (2013). Key competencies in secondary schools: An examination of the factors associated with successful implementation. Teachers and Curriculum, 13, 47- 55.
Hammad, W. (2017). Decision domains and teacher participation: A qualitative investigation of decision-making in Egyptian schools. The Qualitative Report, 22(9), 2478-2493.
Hanesworth, P. (2015). Embedding equality and diversity in the curriculum: a model for learning and teaching practitioners.The Higher Education Academy. Innovation New York Science Park. Heslington.
Harjanti, R., Supriyati, Y., & Rahayu, W. (2019). Evaluation of learning programs at elementary school level of “Sekolah Alam Indonesia (SAI)”. (Evaluative research using countenance Stake’s Model. American Journal of Educational Research, 7(2), 125-132.
Hung, W. (2013). Problem-based learning: A learning environment for enhancing learning transfer. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 137, 27- 38.
Hussain, R. (2015). School leaders’ engagement in curriculum planning and decision making. In D. Garbett & A. Ovens(Eds.), Teaching for tomorrow today (pp. 266-275). Auckland, New Zealand: Edify.
Hussain, I. (2012). Use of constructivist approach in higher education: An instructors observation. Creative Education, 3(2), 179-184.
Karahan, E., & Roehrig, G. (2015). Constructing media artifacts in a social constructivist environment to enhance students’ environmental awareness and activism. Science Education and Technology, 24(1), 103-118.
Kenea, A. (2014). The practice of curriculum contextualization in selected primary schools in rural Ethiopia. Education and Practice, 5(10), 49-56.
Kimpston, R., & Anderson, D. (1986). The locus of curriculum decision making and teachers’ perceptions of their own attitudes and behaviors toward curriculum planning. Curriculum and Supervision, 1(2), 100-110.
Kisirkoi, F. K., & Mse, G. (2016). Curriculum implementation: Strategies for improved learning outcomes in primary schools in kenya. Curriculum and Teaching, 5(1), 19-26.
Klein, M. F. (1981). Improving curricula by identifying discrepancies and agreements in curricula. Illinois School Research and Development, 18(1), 13-21.
Komba, S. C., & Mwandanji, M. (2015). Reflections on the implementation of competence based curriculum in tanzanian secondary schools. Education and Learning, 4(2), 73-80.
Kubitskey, B., & Fishman, B. J. (2006). Professional development design for systemic curriculum change. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Kukla, A. (2009). Social constructivism and the philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
Kurth, J. A., & Keegan, L. (2014). Development and use of curricular adaptations for students receiving special education services. Special Education, 48(3), 191-203.
Lane, H. W., & Maznevski, M. (2014). International management behavior: Global and sustainable leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Laudams, V. (2013). Decentralization of education in LEA and the participation of pedagogues in its implementation. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 82, 621 – 627.
Leow, F. T., & Neo, M. (2014). Redesigning the classroom environment to enhance students’ collaborative learning activities. In Huang, R., Kinshuk, Jemni, M., Chen, N.-S., Spector, J.M. (Eds). Lecture notes in educational technology (pp. 267-274). Springer.
Leung, F. K. S. (2004). Educational centralization and decentralization in East Asia. Paper Presented at the APEC Educational Reform Summit. Beijing, China.
Lynch, K., & Baker, J. (2005). Equality in education: An equality of condition perspective. Theory and Research in Education, 3(2), 131- 164.
Mahmoudi, L. (2014). Iranian national curriculum and the pre-university English textbook: The degree of compatibility of objectives. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 2(2), 4-8.
Makura, O., & Makura, A. H. (2012). Rethinking the definition and value of the curriculum concept: The Zimbabwe Experience. Anthropologist, 14(6). 509-515.
Matseko, R. C. (2018). A framework for enhancing formative classroom assessment practices at a higher education institution in lesotho. Education and Practice, 9(12), 43-49.
Mc Kenney, S., Kali, Y., Markauskaite, L., & Voogt, J. (2015). Teacher design knowledge for technology enhanced learning: an ecological framework for investigating assets and needs. Instructional Science. 43(2),181-202.
Mc Kenney, S., Voogt, J., & Boschman, F. (2012). Teachers’ intuitive approaches to curriculum design: Under standing decision-making while creating ict-rich learning activities for early literacy. Paper presentation at the Teachers as Designers of Technology Enhanced Learning pre-conference workshop in conjunction with the ISLS annual meeting.
Meyer, H. (2018). Teachers’ thoughts on student decision making during engineering design lessons. Education Sciences, 8(9), 1-11.
Ministry of Education and Employment. (2012). A National Curriculum Framework for All. Salesian Press – Malta.
Mintrom, M., & Walley, R. (2013). Education governance in comparative perspective. Published in Education Governance for the Twenty-First Century: Overcoming the Structural Barriers to School Reform. Eds. Manna, Paul; Mc Guinn, Patrick J. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. 252-274.
Mokoena, S. (2011). Participative Decision-making: Perceptions of School Stakeholders in South Africa. Social Sciences, 29(2), 119-131.
Mokua, B. (2010). An evaluation of the curriculum development role of teachers as key agents in curriculum change.
Mueller, J. (2014). What is authentic assessment? http: // jfmueller. faculty. noctrl. edu/toolbox/whatisit.htm.
Muhammad Khan, A., & Mirza, M. S. (2011). Implementation of decentralization in education in pakistan: framework, status and the way forward. Research and Reflections in Education, 5(2), 146 -169.
Murray, J., & Clark, R. M. (2013). Refraining leadership as a participative pedagogy: The working theories of early years professionals. Early Years: An International Research Journal, 33(3), 289-301.
Nalova, E. M. (2017). Education and peace building: The role of the teacher within and beyond the school. The International Journal Of Humanities & Social Studies, 5(3), 184-187.
Nel, J. P. (2011). The art and science of assessing student performance: Conducting assessment with the focuson learning. South Africa: Mentornet (Pty) Ltd.
Nghihalwa, I. N. (2018). Teachers’ involvement in the planning and development of national curriculum for basic education in Namibia. Master Thesis, Programme in Primary Education, University of Eastern Finland School of Applied Educational Science and Teacher Education.
Njengere, D. (2014). The role of curriculum in fostering national cohesion and integration: Opportunities and challenges. UNESCO International Bureau of Education.
OEL and DOE.(2013). What is a Comprehensive Curriculum? Delaware Stars for Early Success: Delaware Institute for Excellence in Early Childhood. University of Delaware Newark, 19716(302), 831-3239.
Onyeme, A. C., & Okoli, S. O. (2018). Decentralization in curriculum development for greater community participation in basic education. International Journal of Advanced Academic and Educational Research, 13(3), 20-26.
Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2018). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues. (7th ed.). Global Edition. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Parker, W. C. (2012). Democracy, Diversity, ana Schooling. from The Encyclopedia of Diversity in Education, J. A. Banks, ed. New York.
Parmigiani, D. (2012). Teachers and decision-making processes: An Italian exploratory study on individual and collaborative decisions. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1), 171-186.
Priestley, M., Biesta, G. J. J., & Robinson, S. (2015). Teacher agency: An ecological approach, bloomsbury academic. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Priestley, M. & Sinnema, C. (2014). Downgraded curriculum? An analysis of knowledge in new curricula in Scotland and New Zealand. The Curriculum Journal, 25(1), 50–75.
Raudonis, L. (2011). What makes a good school? Page One, 32(2),7-12.
Richards, D. R.(2016). The integration of the multiple intelligence theory into the early childhood curriculum. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(15), 1096-1099.
Robinson, J. Sinclair, M., Tobias, J., & Choi, E. (2017). More dynamic than you think: Hidden aspects of decision-making. Administrative Sciences, 7(23), 1-29.
Rodgers, T. (2003). Methodology in the New millennium. English Teaching Forum, 38, 2-13.
Rodriguez-compos, L. (2005). Collaborative evaluations: A step by-step model forthe evaluator. Tamarac, FL: Lumina press.
Ronfeldt, M., Farmer, S. O., McQueen, K., & Grissom, J. A. (2015). Teacher Collaboration in Instructional Teams and Student Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 52(3), 475-514.
Savage, M. J., & Drake, S. M. (2016). Living transdisciplinary curriculum: teachers’ experiences with the international baccalaureate’s primary years programme. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(1), 1-20.
Schiro, M. S. (2013). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Schreurs, J., & Dumbraveanu, R. (2014). A Shift from teacher centered to learner centered approach. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (IJEP), 4(3), 36-41.
Schwille, J., Dembele, M., & Schubert, J. (2007). Global perspectives on teacher learnings: Improving policy andpractice. Paris: UNESCO.
Seyyedrezaie, S. H., & Barani, G. (2013). Constructivism and curriculum development. International Journal of Basic Sciences & Applied Research, 2(1), 62-67.
Shawer. S. F. (2010). Classroom-level curriculum developmen. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 173–184.
Short, E. C. (2008). Curriculum policy research. The Sage Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction. Los Angeles: SAGE, 420-430.
Sidebotham, M., Walters, C., Chipperfield, J., & Gamble, J. (2017). Midwifery participatory curriculum development: Transformation through active partnership. Nurse Education in Practice, 25, 5-13.
Simpson, I., & Halse, C. (2006). Illusions of consensus: New South Wales stakeholders’ constructions of the identity of history. The Curriculum Journal, 17(4), 351-356.
Smith, G., & Sobel, D. (2010). Bring it on home. Educational Leadership, Independent School, 68(1), 38-43.
Sobel, D. (2006). Place-based education: connecting classrooms and communities. Nature literacy series; 4. Great Barrington, MA: Orion Society.
Stabback, P. (2011). What makes a quality curriculum? Current and critical issues in curriculum and learning. In-Progress Reflection No.2on Current and Critical Issues in Curriculum and Learning. UNESCO International Bureau of Education(IBE).
Subedi, K. R. (2018). Local curriculum in schools in Nepal: A gap between policies and practices. Interdisciplinary Studies, 6(1), 57- 67.
The Curriculum Development Council. (2011). General Studies for Primary Schools Curriculum Guide(Primary 1 - Primary 6). Recommended for use in schools by The Education Bureau HKSARG.
Tholappan, A. (2015). Knowledge and curriculum. Bharathidasan University. Centre for Distance Education.
Thomas, A. F. (2015). Creating lifelong learners: Fostering facilitation, modeling & choice in the classroom. Curriculum and Teaching, 4(2), 17- 21.
Tseng, L. (2012). A study of how mathematics teachers in secondary schools in Hong Kong Cater for Students’ Individual Differences. Doctoral Dissertation, School of Education and Life-Long Learning, University of East Anglia.
Unesco.(2011). What makes a quality curriculum?. International Bureau of Education(IBE).
Van den Akker, J. (2009). Curriculum in development. Enschede, Netherlands: SLO–Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development.
Watt, M. (2008). National curriculum collaboration in australia: an analysis of the national debate. Conference Of The New Zealand Post, Primary Teachers Association, Waipuna Lodge, Auckland, New Zealand.
Wedin, A. (2015). Non-challenging education and teacher control as factors for marginalization of students in diverse settings. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(2), 169-188.
Weegar, M. A., & Pacis, D. (2012). Comparison of Two Theories of Learning: Behaviorism and Constructivism as applied to Face-to-Face and Online Learning. E-Leader Manila, 1-20.
Westbrook, J., Durrani, N., Brown, R., Orr, D., Pryor, J., Boddy, J., & Salvi, F. (2013). Pedagogy, curriculum, teaching practices and teacher education in developing countries. Final Report. Education Rigorous Literature Review. Department for International Development.
Winnie Dube, Z. H. (2016). Curriculum decision-making in the selection of new subjects in schools: A qualitative study of the adoption of Tourism as an elective in selected KwaZulu-Natal High Schools. University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Winograd, K. (2002). The negotiative dimension of teaching: Teachers sharing power with the less powerful. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(3), 343-362.
Wynne, K. (2009). Ontario’s equity and inclusive education strategy. Realizing the Promise of Diversity. Ontario: Reach Every Student.
Yagoob, M. (2012). Developing creative thinking: Using a cognitive teaching model in literature classroom. Learning, 18(6), 71-82.
Zabitgil, O.(2013). A new model in english language classroom: Howard’s Multiple Intelligences Theory. Educational Research Association The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 4(1), 30- 40.
Zhang, K.(2012). Sprituality and early childhood special education: exploring a forgotten dimension. International Journal of Children’s Sprituality, 17(1), 39 – 49.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics