反思在学校度过的时间：灵活性能否提高学生和教师的参与度和表现？

Q1 Social Sciences

Prospects Pub Date : 2023-05-03 DOI:10.1007/s11125-023-09638-9

Jim Watterston, Yong Zhao

{"title":"反思在学校度过的时间：灵活性能否提高学生和教师的参与度和表现？","authors":"Jim Watterston, Yong Zhao","doi":"10.1007/s11125-023-09638-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Is it possible to reduce the time students spend in classrooms and schools? Would such a reduction be better for learning and retaining teachers? How should learning be more flexibly enacted in the post-pandemic era? This article discusses the possibilities of rethinking school participation and calls for schools to reconsider the necessity and costs/benefits of forcing students and teachers to be physically present in schools for the traditional 5 days a week.","PeriodicalId":35870,"journal":{"name":"Prospects","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10155142/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking the time spent at school: Could flexibility improve engagement and performance for students and teachers?\",\"authors\":\"Jim Watterston, Yong Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11125-023-09638-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Is it possible to reduce the time students spend in classrooms and schools? Would such a reduction be better for learning and retaining teachers? How should learning be more flexibly enacted in the post-pandemic era? This article discusses the possibilities of rethinking school participation and calls for schools to reconsider the necessity and costs/benefits of forcing students and teachers to be physically present in schools for the traditional 5 days a week.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35870,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prospects\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10155142/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prospects\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-023-09638-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prospects","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-023-09638-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

有可能减少学生在教室和学校的时间吗？这样的减薪对学习和留住教师会更好吗？在后疫情时代，应该如何更灵活地实施学习？本文讨论了重新思考学校参与的可能性，并呼吁学校重新考虑强迫学生和教师在传统的每周5天的时间里亲自到校的必要性和成本/收益。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Rethinking the time spent at school: Could flexibility improve engagement and performance for students and teachers?

Is it possible to reduce the time students spend in classrooms and schools? Would such a reduction be better for learning and retaining teachers? How should learning be more flexibly enacted in the post-pandemic era? This article discusses the possibilities of rethinking school participation and calls for schools to reconsider the necessity and costs/benefits of forcing students and teachers to be physically present in schools for the traditional 5 days a week.

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

Prospects Social Sciences-Education

CiteScore

13.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Prospects provides comparative and international perspectives on key current issues in curriculum, learning, and assessment. The principal features of the journal are the innovative and critical insights it offers into the equitable provision of quality and relevant education for all; and the cross-disciplinary perspectives it engages, drawing on a range of domains that include culture, development, economics, ethics, gender, inclusion, politics, sociology, sustainability, and education. Prospects aims to influence a wide range of actors in the field of education and development, whether academics, policy-makers, curriculum-developers, assessors, teachers or students. Unlike other journals in the field, which deal only with theoretical or research-related aspects, Prospects also focuses on policy implementation and aims at improving the extent and effectiveness of communication between theorists and researchers, on one side, and policy makers and practitioners, on the other. The journal thus welcomes innovative empirical research, case studies of policy and practice, conceptual analyses and policy evaluations, as well as critical analyses of published research and existing policy. Founded in 1970 and published in English by Springer, Prospects is among the most well-established journals in the field. Editions in Arabic and Mandarin Chinese are available as well. The journal is edited by the International Bureau of Education (IBE), in Geneva. A leading UNESCO Institute and a global center of excellence in curriculum and related matters, the IBE is recognized and valued for the specialist knowledge and expertise that it brings to Member States, promoting new shared global understanding of curriculum, teaching, learning, and assessment.