Volume 6, Issue 3 (September 2024)
IEEPJ 2024, 6(3): 333-356 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Pirkamali M A, Momeni Mahmouei H, Mahdipour Y. (2024). The Current Model of Literacy Assessment and Curriculum Evaluation in Elementary School Teachers (Presenting a Model with a Grounded Theory Approach). IEEPJ. 6(3), 333-356. doi:10.22034/6.3.333
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-755-en.html
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-755-en.html
1- Ph.D student in Curriculum Planning, Department of Educational Sciences, Torbat Heydarieh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran
2- PhD in Curriculum Planning, Department of Educational Sciences, Torbat Heydarieh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran ,Momenimahmouei@yahoo.com
3- Associate Professor, Faculty of Paramedicine, Health Sciences Research Center, Torbat Heydarieh University of Medical Sciences, Torbat Heydarieh, Khorasan e Razavi, Iran
2- PhD in Curriculum Planning, Department of Educational Sciences, Torbat Heydarieh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Torbat Heydarieh, Iran ,
3- Associate Professor, Faculty of Paramedicine, Health Sciences Research Center, Torbat Heydarieh University of Medical Sciences, Torbat Heydarieh, Khorasan e Razavi, Iran
Abstract: (3656 Views)
Objective: This research investigates the current state of literacy assessment and curriculum evaluation among primary school teachers.
Methods: A qualitative research methodology employing grounded theory was adopted, with the statistical population comprising individuals engaged in elementary school curriculum initiatives, selected through purposive sampling based on predetermined criteria. Data acquisition was facilitated through semi-structured interviews conducted with a cohort of twelve teachers, seven school administrators, and four supervisory figures in primary education. The ensuing data were subjected to analysis via open, axial, and selective coding techniques, with the validation and reliability of the findings being ensured through the application of Lincoln and Guba's criteria.
Results: This study delineated twenty-two principal concepts alongside seven thematic categories, which are articulated within a paradigmatic model. The model encompasses a central theme of consolidating curriculum power and authority within a broader macro context, in addition to causal conditions that encompass factors contributing to educators' limited engagement, expertise, and motivation in the evaluation of curricula, as well as elements pertinent to the curriculum itself. Contextual determinants such as psychological, cultural, and professional factors were also elucidated, along with enabling conditions for intervention, which include a focus on teacher training and professional development in curriculum evaluation, needs assessment, and support mechanisms. Furthermore, constraining conditions for intervention, such as individual impediments, structural obstacles, and economic challenges were identified, in conjunction with strategies aimed at empowering educators in curriculum evaluation, emphasizing individual motivation and cognitive competencies, and fostering networking and professional dialogue regarding curriculum evaluation.
Conclusions: The results establish a foundation for the advocacy of Literacy Assessment among educators and administrators within primary educational institutions, while also yielding significant practical ramifications.
Methods: A qualitative research methodology employing grounded theory was adopted, with the statistical population comprising individuals engaged in elementary school curriculum initiatives, selected through purposive sampling based on predetermined criteria. Data acquisition was facilitated through semi-structured interviews conducted with a cohort of twelve teachers, seven school administrators, and four supervisory figures in primary education. The ensuing data were subjected to analysis via open, axial, and selective coding techniques, with the validation and reliability of the findings being ensured through the application of Lincoln and Guba's criteria.
Results: This study delineated twenty-two principal concepts alongside seven thematic categories, which are articulated within a paradigmatic model. The model encompasses a central theme of consolidating curriculum power and authority within a broader macro context, in addition to causal conditions that encompass factors contributing to educators' limited engagement, expertise, and motivation in the evaluation of curricula, as well as elements pertinent to the curriculum itself. Contextual determinants such as psychological, cultural, and professional factors were also elucidated, along with enabling conditions for intervention, which include a focus on teacher training and professional development in curriculum evaluation, needs assessment, and support mechanisms. Furthermore, constraining conditions for intervention, such as individual impediments, structural obstacles, and economic challenges were identified, in conjunction with strategies aimed at empowering educators in curriculum evaluation, emphasizing individual motivation and cognitive competencies, and fostering networking and professional dialogue regarding curriculum evaluation.
Conclusions: The results establish a foundation for the advocacy of Literacy Assessment among educators and administrators within primary educational institutions, while also yielding significant practical ramifications.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Psychology
Received: 2023/05/14 | Accepted: 2023/08/26 | Published: 2024/09/1
Received: 2023/05/14 | Accepted: 2023/08/26 | Published: 2024/09/1
References
1. Ababaf, Z., Fathi, V. K., & Mehr, A. Y. (2015). Curriculum literacy in educators is the theme for empowering faculty members. Journal of Training and Development of Human Resources, 1(3), 23-49.
2. Ahn, R. (2016). Japan's communal approach to teacher induction: Shokuin shitsu as an indispensable nurturing ground for Japanese beginning teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 420-430. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.023]
3. Buczynski, S., & Hansen, C. B. (2010). Impact of professional development on teacher practice: Uncovering connections. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 599-607. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2009.09.006]
4. Datu, J. A. D., Wong, G. S. P., & Rubie-Davies, C. (2021). Can kindness promote media literacy skills, self-esteem, and social self-efficacy among selected female secondary school students? An intervention study. Computers & Education, 161, 104062. [DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104062]
5. DeLuca, C., LaPointe-McEwan, D., & Luhanga, U. (2016). Teacher assessment literacy: A review of international standards and measures. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 28, 251-272. [DOI:10.1007/s11092-015-9233-6]
6. Fathi Vajargah, K. (2013). Curriculum towards new identities. Aeij Publications.
7. Fathi Vajargah, K. (2015). Basic principles and concepts of curriculum. Elm e Ostadan Publications.
8. Fino, L. B., Alsayed, A. R., Basheti, I. A., Saini, B., Moles, R., & Chaar, B. B. (2022). Implementing and evaluating a course in professional ethics for an undergraduate pharmacy curriculum: A feasibility study. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 14(1), 88-105. [DOI:10.1016/j.cptl.2021.11.031]
9. Golombek, P. R., & Johnson, K. E. (2021). Recurrent restorying through language teacher narrative inquiry. System, 102, 102601. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2021.102601]
10. Goodwin, A. L., Smith, L., Souto-Manning, M., Cheruvu, R., Tan, M. Y., Reed, R., & Taveras, L. (2014). What should teacher educators know and be able to do? Perspectives from practicing teacher educators. Journal of teacher education, 65(4), 284-302. [DOI:10.1177/0022487114535266]
11. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2(163-194), 105.
12. Khamri, H. (2022). Investigating the relationship between the level of curriculum literacy of male and female teachers and educational learning of elementary school students in non-government schools in Iranshahr city. Journal of New Researches in Entrepreneurial Management and Business Development, 2(4), 176-154.
13. Land, T. J., Tyminski, A. M., & Drake, C. (2015). Examining pre-service elementary mathematics teachers' reading of educative curriculum materials. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 16-26. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2015.05.009]
14. Maba, W., & Mantra, I. B. N. (2017). An analysis of assessment models employed by the Indonesian elementary school teachers. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (IJSSH), 1(1), 39-45. [DOI:10.29332/ijssh.v1n1.38]
15. Mendoza, N. B., Cheng, E. C., & Yan, Z. (2022). Assessing teachers' collaborative lesson planning practices: Instrument development and validation using the SECI knowledge-creation model. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 73, 101139. [DOI:10.1016/j.stueduc.2022.101139]
16. Mira Leal, S., Pereira, J. C., & Morais, F. (2013). How do teachers evaluate their training on the portuguese language curriculum in basic education? International Conference on New Horizons in Education 2013, [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.148]
17. Önal, İ. (2010). Tarihsel değişim sürecinde yaşam boyu öğrenme ve okuryazarlık: Türkiye deneyimi. Bilgi dünyası, 11(1), 101-121. [DOI:10.15612/BD.2010.258]
18. Pianta, R. C., Lipscomb, D., & Ruzek, E. (2022). Indirect effects of coaching on pre-K students' engagement and literacy skill as a function of improved teacher-student interaction. Journal of School Psychology, 91, 65-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.jsp.2021.12.003]
19. Rahman, M. M., Pandian, A., & Kaur, M. (2018). Factors affecting teachers' implementation of communicative language teaching curriculum in secondary schools in Bangladesh. The Qualitative Report, 23(5), 1104-1126. [DOI:10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3220]
20. Shawer, S. F. (2017). Teacher-driven curriculum development at the classroom level: Implications for curriculum, pedagogy and teacher training. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 296-313. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2016.12.017]
21. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research (Vol. 15). sage Newbury Park, CA.
22. Troyer, M. (2019). Teachers' adaptations to and orientations towards an adolescent literacy curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 51(2), 202-228. [DOI:10.1080/00220272.2017.1407458]
23. Tuna, H., & Başdal, M. (2021). Curriculum evaluation of tourism undergraduate programs in Turkey: A CIPP model-based framework. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 29, 100324. [DOI:10.1016/j.jhlste.2021.100324]
24. Yamtim, V., & Wongwanich, S. (2014). A study of classroom assessment literacy of primary school teachers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2998-3004. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.696]
25. Yarmohamedian, M. H. (2016). Basics and principles of curriculum planning. Yadavareh Ketab Publications.
26. Zhao, D., Ma, X., & Qiao, S. (2017). What aspects should be evaluated when evaluating graduate curriculum: Analysis based on student interview. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 54, 50-57. [DOI:10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.11.003]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
