تبیین مبانی نظریۀ متامدرن و دلالت‌های آن در تعریف عناصر برنامه‌درسی
محورهای موضوعی :
مصطفی زبان دان
1
(آموزش و پرورش)
عین الله عابدی
2
(دانشگاه شاهد)
مصطفی قادری
3
(دانشگاه علامه)
کلید واژه: متامدرنیسم, مبانی, برنامه‌درسی, آموزش, پست‌مدرن.,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف این پژوهش معرفی برنامه‌درسی متامدرن و توانمندسازی معلمان برای فراتر رفتن از گرفتاری‌ها و عوارض جانبی برنامه‌های درسی مدرن و پست‌مدرن است. به همین منظور جهت پاسخ‌گویی به سؤالات از رویکرد چند روشی مشتمل بر روش اسنادی، تحلیل مفهوم از نوع تفسیر مفهوم و استنتاجی از نوع پیش‌رونده استفاده شده است. در بخش یافته‌های این پژوهش علاوه بر آشکار کردن بحران‌های موجود در برنامه‌درسی مدرن و پست‌مدرن به تبیین الگوی برنامه‌درسی متامدرن و ارائه عناصر برنامه‌درسی متامدرن پرداخته شده است؛ به گونه‌ای که به واسطه این برنامه‌درسی، جامعه معلمان و دانش‌آموزان، بازتاب یادگیری در اندیشه‌ها و اقدامات در زمینه‌های اجتماعی، فرهنگی و نهادی را مدنظر قرار می‌دهند و فرصت‌های متمایز برای افراد دارای مهارت ذهنی و افراد دارای مشکلات یادگیری فراهم می‌شود. نتیجه این پژوهش، ارائه مبانی سه‌گانه برای تدوین برنامه‌درسی متامدرن است که شامل این موارد می‌شود: 1. برنامه‌درسی مدرن و پست‌مدرن به مثابه تجارب تاریخی مؤثر 2. برنامه‌درسی متامدرن به مثابه رویکرد مراقبتی 3. برنامه‌درسی متامدرن به مثابه امید.
The purpose of this research, in addition to presenting a metamodern curriculum, is to empower teachers to overcome the difficulties and negative side effects of modern and postmodern curricula. For this purpose, to answer the questions, a multi-method approach including the documentary method, the interpretive conceptual analysis, and the progressive type of practical syllogism are used. As the results, in addition to revealing the crises of the modern and postmodern curriculum, a model of the metamodern curriculum including the elements of curriculum is presented in such a way that through this curriculum, the community of teachers and students can consider the reflection of learning in thoughts and actions in social, cultural, and institutional contexts. By means of this model, distinct opportunities are provided for people with mental abilities as well as for people with learning disabilities. The result of this research is the presentation of three bases for developing a metamodern curriculum, which include: 1-Considering the modern and postmodern curriculum as effective historical experiences; 2- The metamodern curriculum as a care approach; 3-The metamodern curriculum as hope.
آزرم، محمد(1398) : www.honaronline.ir
رهنما، اکبر و زبان‌دان، مصطفی (1401). بررسی تطبیقی دلالت های تربیتی در سه رویکرد مدرن، پست‌مدرن و متامدرنیسم. فصلنامه آموزش‌وپرورش تطبیقی، 6(1), 2327-2349. doi: 10.22034/ijce.2023.381750.1467
زبان‌دان، مصطفی و میرزامحمدی، محمدحسن (1402). متامدرنیسم و تعلیم‌وتربیت، تهران: انتشارات ماهواره.
زبان‌دان، مصطفی؛ میرزامحمدی، محمدحسن و فرمهینی فراهانی، محسن (1401). ارائه مبانی، اهداف، اصول و روش‌های اخلاقی برای متامدرنیسم. غرب شناسی بنیادی: 13(2), 1-27. doi: 10.30465/os.2023.43495.1875
قادری، مصطفی (1391). نوفهم گرایی در مطالعات برنامه درسی: از نوفهمی تا پسا نوفهمی، تهران: انتشارات آوای نور.
Aoki, T. T. (1992). Layered voices of teaching. The uncannily correct at the elusively true, in W. Pinar, & W. Reynolds (Eds.). Understanding Curriculum as Phenomenological and Deconstructed Texts. New York: Teachers College Press.
Apple, M. (1993). Official Knowledge. New York: Routledge.
Apple, M. (1995). Education and Power. London: Routledge.
Becker, A., M. Cummins, A. Freeman, and K. Rose. (2017). NMC technology outlook for Nordic.
Schools: A horizon project regional report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
Brunton, J. 2018. Whose (meta) modernism?: Metamodernism, race, and the politics of failure. Journal of Modern Literature 41(3): 60–76. https ://doi.org/10.2979/jmode lite.41.3.05.
Black, C.E. (1966). The Dynamics of Modernization. New York: Harper & Row.
Bishop, J., and M. Verleger. 2013. The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In Proceedings of the ASEE National Conference. Atlanta, GA: ASEE.
Cowen, R. (1996). Last Past the Post: comparative education, modernity and perhaps post – modernity. Comparative Education, 32(2), 151-170.
Di Francesco, E. (2019). Circular Conversations. Available at: https://www.circularconversations.com/conversations/metamodern-values-for-a-listening-society?format=amp (Accessed 19 February 2019).
Dumitrescu, A. (2011)."Interconnections in Blakean and Metamodern Space". On Space. Deakin University. Archived from the original on March 23, 2012. Retrieved September 15.
Elstad, E. (2016). Educational technology in schools: Policymaking and policy enactment. In Digital expectations and experiences in education, ed. E. Elstad, 47–58. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Freire, P. (1972). Cultural Action for Freedom. Harmodsworth: Penguin.
Featherstone, M. (Ed.) (1990). Global Culture: nationalism, globalization and modernity. London: Saga.
Fein, E. (2020). Hanzi Freinacht (2017). The Listening Society. A Metamodern Guide to Politics. Book One. Metamoderna ApS. INTEGRAL REVIEW, 16(2).
Foucault, M. (1961). The History of Folly (Greek translation). Athens: Iridanos.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and Punish, London: Allen Lane.
Foucault, M. (1980). The History of Sexuality: Vol. 1. An introduction, New York: Vintage.
Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum Product or Praxis? The Falmer Press.
Giroux, H. A. (1983). Theory and resistance in Education: A pedagogy of the opposition, London: Heinemann Educational Books.
Giroux, H.A. (1988). Border pedagogy in the age of postmodernism. Journal of Education 170(3): 162–181. https ://doi.org/10.1177/00220 57488 17000 310.
Giroux, H.A. (1990). Curriculum Discourse as Critical Postmodernist Practice, Geelong: Deaking University Press.
Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
GIddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-identity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Goodson, I. F. (1987) School Subjects and Curriculum Change, New York: Falmer Press.
Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and Human Interests, London: Heinemann.
Harvey, D. (1989). The Condition of Postmodernity, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hargreaves, A. (1992). Time and teachers’ work: An analysis of the intensification thesis. Teachers College Record, 94(1), 87-108.
Freinacht, H. (2019). Nordic ideology: a metamodern guide to politics, book two. Metamoderna ApS.
Freire, P. (1972). Cultural Action for Freedom. Harmodsworth: Penguin.
Fuchs, J.A. (2017). “It takes a village”—(Catholic) education in the 21st century. In Schools in transition: Linking past, present, and future in educational practice, ed. P. Siljander, K. Kontio, and E. Pikkarainen, 241–254. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Jordan, P. (2018). Metamodernism and The idw, www.reddit.com.
Klafki, W. (1995). Didactic analysis as the core of preparation for instruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(1), 13-30.
Pinar W., & Reynolds, W. (Eds.). (1992). Understanding Curriculum as Phenomenological and Deconstructed Text. New York: Teachers College Press.
Kılıçoğlu, G & Yılmaz, D. (2020). The Birth of a New Paradigm: Rethinking Education and School Leadership with a Metamodern ‘Lens’. Studies in Philosophy and Education. 39.10.1007/s11217-019-09690-z.
Kolesnikova, I. A. (2019). Post-pedagogical syndrome of the digimodernism age, Higher Education in Russia, 28(8-9), 67- 82.
Koutselini, M. (1997). Contemporary Trends and Perspectives of the Curricula: Towards a meta-modern Paradigm for Curriculum. Curriculum Studies, 5(1), 87- 100.
Koutselini, M. (2001). The problem of discipline in light of the modern – postmodern debate. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 10(3).
Koutselini, M. (2006). Towards a Meta- modern Paradigm of Curriculum: Transcendence of a Mistaken Reliance on Theory. Educational Practice and Theory. 28. 55-68. 10.7459/ept/28.1.05.
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: describing conception of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177-200.
Marton, F., D. Hounsell, N. & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.). (1984). The experience of learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
Oelkers, J. (1994). Influence and development: Two basic paradigms of education. Studies in Philosophy and Education 13(2): 91–109. https ://doi.org/10.1007/BF010 75817 .
Reichenbach, R. (2010). Die Effizienz der Bildungssysteme und die Sinnkrise des schulischen Lernens. In Schule zwischen Effizienzkriterien und Sinnfragen, ed. J. Warwas and D. Sembill, 1–16. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Siljander, P. (2017). School in transition: The case of Finland. In Schools in transition: Linking past, present, and future in educational practice, ed. P. Siljander, K. Kontio, and E. Pikkarainen, 191–212. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Schِnig, W. (2017). The transformation of school in a changing society—A German example. In Schools in transition: Linking past, present, and future in educational practice, ed. P. Siljander, K. Kontio, and E. Pikkarainen, 213–228. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Slavin, R., S. Sharan, S. Kagan, R.H. Lazarowitz, C. Webb, and R. Schumuck. (2013). Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn, New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
Smith, R., & Wexler, P. (Eds.). (1995). After post – modernism. London: Falmer Press.
Telhaug, A.O., O.A. Mediهs, and P. Aasen. (2006). The Nordic model in education: Education as part of the political system in the last 50 years. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 50(3): 245–283. https ://doi.org/10.1080/00313 83060 07432 74.
Yousef, T. (2017). Modernism, postmodernism, and metamodernism: A critique. International Journal of Language and Literature, 5(1), 33-43.
Valerie J. H & Thomas P. M. (2021). Embracing metaliteracy: Metamodern libraries and virtual learning communities, |Hill| College & Research Libraries News https://crln.acrl.org/index.php/crlnews/article/view/24939/32794.
Vermeulen, T & Van den Akker, R. (2010).“Notes on Metamodernism.” Journal of Aesthetics & Culture, Vol. 2, 2010. Print.
Vermeulen, T., and R. van den Akker. (2015). Utopia, sort of a case study in metamodernism. Studia Neophilologica 87(1): 55–67, https ://doi.org/10.1080/00393 274.2014.98196 4.
van den Akker, C., Vermeulen, T., & Hanusch, F. (2017). Metamodernism: Historicity, affect, and depth after postmodernism.
Van Manen, M. (1986). The Tone of Teaching, Richmond Hill: Ontario: Scholastic Tab.
Westbury, I. (1999). The burdens and the excitement of the “new” curriculum research: a response to Hlebowitsh’s “The burdens of the new curricularist”, Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 355-364.
Westbury, I., Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, K. (Eds.). (2000). Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktik tradition, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wraga, W., & Hlebowitsh, P. (2003b). Conversation, collaboration, and community in the US curriculum field, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 453-457.
Young, M. F. D. (Ed.). (1971). Knowledge and Control, London: Collier Macmillan.
Zavarzadeh, M. (1975). The Apocalyptic Fact and the Eclipse of Fiction in Recent American Prose Narratives, Journal of American Studies, 9(1), 69-83.
