浅析课程设置

M. Klein, L. Tyler
{"title":"浅析课程设置","authors":"M. Klein, L. Tyler","doi":"10.2307/1179336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two articles appeared in the first issue of Curriculum Network Theory (Summer, 1968) which were the products of a similar professional concern. The concern was to formulate a plan by which curricula and/or instructional materials could be examined. Stevens and Morrissett reported a system for analyzing social science curriculal and Tyler and Klein reported a set of recommendations by which curricula and/or instructional materials could be evaluated. Although each article was generated by similar motives, the end products were quite dissimilar. The editor of the Curriculum Theory Network asked the authors of the two articles to respond to the other's product. Our reply is not a detailed analysis and evaluation of the system developed by Stevens and Morrissett. This paper attempts to put these two articles and a third one with a similar concern into a general perspective to which each of the three publications seems to make a particular contribution.","PeriodicalId":273582,"journal":{"name":"Curriculum Theory Network","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Analyzing Curricula\",\"authors\":\"M. Klein, L. Tyler\",\"doi\":\"10.2307/1179336\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two articles appeared in the first issue of Curriculum Network Theory (Summer, 1968) which were the products of a similar professional concern. The concern was to formulate a plan by which curricula and/or instructional materials could be examined. Stevens and Morrissett reported a system for analyzing social science curriculal and Tyler and Klein reported a set of recommendations by which curricula and/or instructional materials could be evaluated. Although each article was generated by similar motives, the end products were quite dissimilar. The editor of the Curriculum Theory Network asked the authors of the two articles to respond to the other's product. Our reply is not a detailed analysis and evaluation of the system developed by Stevens and Morrissett. This paper attempts to put these two articles and a third one with a similar concern into a general perspective to which each of the three publications seems to make a particular contribution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":273582,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Curriculum Theory Network\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Curriculum Theory Network\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2307/1179336\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Curriculum Theory Network","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1179336","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

《课程网络理论》(Curriculum Network Theory, 1968年夏季)的第一期中出现了两篇文章,这两篇文章是类似专业关注的产物。关注的是制定一项计划,以便审查课程和/或教学材料。史蒂文斯和莫里塞特报告了一个分析社会科学课程的系统,泰勒和克莱因报告了一套可以评估课程和/或教学材料的建议。虽然每一篇文章都出自相似的动机,但最终的产品却大不相同。课程理论网络的编辑要求这两篇文章的作者对对方的产品做出回应。我们的回答不是对Stevens和Morrissett开发的系统进行详细的分析和评价。本文试图将这两篇文章和第三篇具有类似关注的文章放入一个总体视角,其中三个出版物中的每一个似乎都做出了特定的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On Analyzing Curricula
Two articles appeared in the first issue of Curriculum Network Theory (Summer, 1968) which were the products of a similar professional concern. The concern was to formulate a plan by which curricula and/or instructional materials could be examined. Stevens and Morrissett reported a system for analyzing social science curriculal and Tyler and Klein reported a set of recommendations by which curricula and/or instructional materials could be evaluated. Although each article was generated by similar motives, the end products were quite dissimilar. The editor of the Curriculum Theory Network asked the authors of the two articles to respond to the other's product. Our reply is not a detailed analysis and evaluation of the system developed by Stevens and Morrissett. This paper attempts to put these two articles and a third one with a similar concern into a general perspective to which each of the three publications seems to make a particular contribution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信