Emil Sætra, Janicke Heldal Stray
{"title":"Læreplan og demokrati","authors":"Emil Sætra, Janicke Heldal Stray","doi":"10.7577/NJCIE.2440","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we examine how social studies teachers’ say they interpret and use different parts of the curriculum in order to teach for democracy. The empirical material of the study is based on a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with teachers in secondary school in Norway. We present three main find-ings. A first finding is that most social studies teachers plan their instruction based on the subject-specific competence aims. For most teachers, the general part of the curriculum, where democratic education is highlighted, does not constitute an articulated part of instruction. Some teachers feel, however, that they still work in accord with this part of the curriculum, but in a way better described as tacit. A second finding is that teachers agree that the subject-specific competence aims are comprehensive and that many teachers agree they are too comprehensive. A third finding is that the teachers disagree about whether conditions for democratic citizenship education are adequate or not. We suggest two inter-related reasons for this disa-greement. One reason is somewhat different interpretations of and emphasis put on the mandate to teach for democracy by different teachers. A second reason is differences in pedagogy and school culture.","PeriodicalId":161134,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7577/NJCIE.2440","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们研究了社会研究教师如何解释和使用课程的不同部分,以进行民主教学。本研究的实证材料基于问卷调查和对挪威中学教师的半结构化访谈。我们提出了三个主要发现。第一个发现是,大多数社会研究教师根据特定学科的能力目标来规划他们的教学。对大多数教师来说,课程的一般部分,即强调民主教育的部分,并不构成教学的一个明确部分。然而,有些教师觉得,他们的工作仍然与课程的这一部分保持一致,但在某种程度上,更合适的描述是默契。第二个发现是,教师们认为特定学科的能力目标是全面的,许多教师认为他们太全面了。第三个发现是,教师们对民主公民教育的条件是否充分存在分歧。对于这种分歧,我们提出了两个相互关联的原因。其中一个原因是,不同的教师对民主教育任务的解释和强调程度有所不同。第二个原因是教学法和学校文化的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Læreplan og demokrati
In this article, we examine how social studies teachers’ say they interpret and use different parts of the curriculum in order to teach for democracy. The empirical material of the study is based on a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with teachers in secondary school in Norway. We present three main find-ings. A first finding is that most social studies teachers plan their instruction based on the subject-specific competence aims. For most teachers, the general part of the curriculum, where democratic education is highlighted, does not constitute an articulated part of instruction. Some teachers feel, however, that they still work in accord with this part of the curriculum, but in a way better described as tacit. A second finding is that teachers agree that the subject-specific competence aims are comprehensive and that many teachers agree they are too comprehensive. A third finding is that the teachers disagree about whether conditions for democratic citizenship education are adequate or not. We suggest two inter-related reasons for this disa-greement. One reason is somewhat different interpretations of and emphasis put on the mandate to teach for democracy by different teachers. A second reason is differences in pedagogy and school culture.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信