چکیده:
Approaches of faculty members toward curriculum planning area base for application of their teaching methods، teaching strategies and evaluation techniques. The general purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between Shiraz University faculty members’ preference of curriculum development model and their performance in teaching strategies and methods، and evaluation techniques in teaching-learning process. A descriptive and explanatory research method was chosen for this study. The statistical population included 661 faculty members at Shiraz University in 2010-11 academic-years. By cluster sampling method، 171 faculty members were selected. The research instruments included a researcher made scale based on 3 models of curriculum and faculty members’ performance in teaching-learning process (Lester & Bishop، 2000). The data was analyzed by using Freedman test and multivariate analysis of variance. The results of research showed that semi- centralized model was the preferred curriculum model for faculty members at Shiraz University. The interaction between curriculum development model and teaching experiences had significant relationship with teaching methods، but it didn’t have significant relationship with assessment strategies and skills. The interaction of faculty members’ preference of curriculum development model had significant relationship with faculty’s academic rank، but it didn’t indicate significant relationship with teaching methods، teaching strategies and assessment techniques.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Table 1- Centralized, semi-centralized, and decentralized models of curriculum planning in schools (Refer to page image) Findings indicate that the beliefs of faculty members regarding their preferred curriculum planning method or curriculum planning model can influence their performance in the teaching-learning process, including teaching methods and strategies, and the techniques they use in assessment (Gutek, 1980; Elbaz & Connelly, 1995).
Some researchers (Applefield, Huber & Moallem, 2000; Bransford, Brown, Cocking, Donovan & Pellegrino, 2000; Easton, 2000; Becker & Watts, 2001; Finkelstein, Seal & Schuster, 1998; Newman & Scurr, 2001; National Center for Education Statistic, 2002; Ho, Watkins & Kelly, 2001; Conti, 1989; Brown, 2003; Hayes & Allinson, 1997; Simonson, Schlosser & Hanson, 1999; Sheppard & Gilbert, 1991; Trigwell & Prosser, 2004; Wilson, 1998) reported a positive effect between changes in instructors' perceptions of teaching and their preferred curriculum planning model with changes in their teaching methods and the impact on students' learning approaches.
Some researchers (National Center for Education Statistic, 2002; Schaefer & Zygmont, 2003; Ramsden, Martin & Bowden, 1989; Waskow, 2006; Trigwell & (Watts & Becker, 2001; Hajduk, 2000; Prosser, 2004) believe that the relationship there is a significant relationship between curriculum planning models and the teaching strategies of faculty members.
2. Is there a significant relationship between the preferred curriculum planning model of the faculty members of Shiraz University and their teaching strategies, methods, and assessment techniques in the teaching-learning process based on their cognitive population characteristics?
Is there a significant relationship between the preferred curriculum planning model of the faculty members of Shiraz University and their teaching strategies, methods, and assessment techniques in the teaching-learning process based on their demographic characteristics?
(
, 
, 
)
