Numéro

Vol. 13 No 1-2 (2015): Revue de l’enseignement supérieur en Afrique: Special Issue on Sustainable Rural Learning Ecologies: Border Crossing

5 - An Investigation into the Effectiveness of the University Curriculum in Preparing Pre-service Technology Teachers

https://doi.org/10.57054/jhea.v13i1-2.1518
Andile Mji

Revue de l’enseignement supérieur en Afrique, Vol. 13 No 1-2 (2015): Revue de l’enseignement supérieur en Afrique: Special Issue on Sustainable Rural Learning Ecologies: Border Crossing

Résumé

Le but de cette étude est d’examiner l’efficacité du programme universi- taire de formation initiale des professeurs de technologie. Il s’agit d’un examen du guide pédagogique de technologie utilisé dans une des uni- versités de technologie en Afrique du Sud, notamment par rapport aux années 7-9 (cycle supérieur) du document de politique technologique. L’étude a révélé que le programme d’enseignement de la technologie à l’université met l’accent sur l’étendue du contenu (CB) et les thèmes du contenu (CS). Cependant, certains thèmes du contenu (CS) du programme d’enseignement de la technologie à l’université ne sont pas pertinents par rapport à l’étendue du contenu (CB) et ne sont pas non plus conçus pour améliorer sa profondeur. Par conséquent, cela signifie que les thèmes du contenu (CS) dudit programme ne sont pas conçus pour se focaliser sur la notion de l’«aptitude aux fins recherchées», qui est axée sur le marché. Toutefois, il est impératif que les étudiants aient l’opportunité d’explorer à la fois l’étendue du contenu (CB) et la profondeur du contenu (CD) ainsi que la façon dont d’autres thèmes du contenu (CS) peuvent être utilisés pour une meilleure compréhension de l’étendue du contenu (CB).

Mji, A. (2022). 5 - An Investigation into the Effectiveness of the University Curriculum in Preparing Pre-service Technology Teachers. Revue De l’enseignement supérieur En Afrique, 13(1-2). https://doi.org/10.57054/jhea.v13i1-2.1518
Télécharger la référence bibliographique
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Les références
  1. Aguele, L.I. and Agwagah, U.N., 2007, ‘Female participation in science, technology and mathematics (STM) education in Nigeria and national development’, Journal of Social Science 15 (2): 121–26.
  2. Ball, D.L., Thames, M.H. and Phelps, G., 2008, ‘Content knowledge for teaching: what makes it special?’, Journal of Teacher Education 59 (5): 389–407.
  3. Bowen, G., 2009, ‘Document analysis as a qualitative research method’, Qualitative Research Journal 9 (2): 27–40.
  4. Creswell, J.W., 2013, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  5. Department of Education, 2000, Criteria for the Recognition and Evaluation of Qua- lifications for Employment in Education, Based on the Norms and Standards for Educators, Pretoria: Government Printer.
  6. Department of Education, 2007, National Curriculum Statement (NCS): Technology, Pretoria: Government Printer.
  7. Department of Education, 2007, National Policy Framework for Teacher Education and Development, Pretoria: Government Printer.
  8. Department of Basic Education, 2010, Curriculum Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS): Technology, Pretoria: Government Printer.
  9. Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET), 2011, Minimum Requirements for Teacher Education Qualifications (MARTEQ), Pretoria: Government Printer.
  10. Doerr, H.M., 2007, ‘What knowledge do teachers need for teaching mathematics through applications and modelling?’, Modelling and Applications in Mathe- matics Education 10: 69–78.
  11. Elo, S. and Kyngäs, H., 2008, ‘The qualitative content analysis process’, Journal of Advanced Nursing 62 (1): 107–15.
  12. Freedman, D. B., 2008, ‘Is the medical undergraduate curriculum “fit for purpose”?’,Annals of Clinical Biochemistry 45 (1): 1–2.
  13. Graneheim, U. H. and Lundman, B., 2004, ‘Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness’, Nurse Education Today 24 (2): 105–12.
  14. Kajander, A. and Holm, J., 2013, ‘Pre-service teachers’ mathematical understanding: searching for differences based on school curriculum background’, Fields Mathematics Education Journal 1 (1): 3.
  15. Marshall, J.H. and Sorto, M.A., 2012, ‘The effects of teacher mathematics knowledge and pedagogy on student achievement in rural Guatemala’, International Review of Education 58 (2): 173–97.
  16. National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (NCTM), 2000, Principles and Standards,Reston, VA: NCTM.
  17. Peters, R.S., 1977, Education and the Education of Teachers, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  18. Pitjeng, P., 2014, Novice unqualified graduate science teachers’ topic-specific peda- gogical content knowledge, and their beliefs about teaching. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (SAARMSTE), 13-16 January, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.
  19. Heritage, M., 2007, ‘What do teachers need to know and do?’, Phi Delta Kappan 89(2): 140–45.
  20. Hirsch Jr., E.D., 2001, ‘Seeking breadth and depth in the curriculum’, Education Leadership 59 (2): 22–25.
  21. Irwin, R., 2011, Designing engagement: breadth and depth through artistic inquiry. Speaking notes from a presentation at the Alberta Education Research Roundtable 2, 7 May, Calgary, Alberta.
  22. Kahan, J.A., Cooper, D.A. and Bethea, K.A., 2003, ‘The role of mathematics teachers’ content knowledge in their teaching: a framework for research applied to a study of student teachers’, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 6 (3): 223–52.
  23. Li, J., Klahr, D. and Siler, S., 2006, ‘What lies beneath the science achievement gap: the
  24. challenges of aligning science instruction with standards and tests’, Science Educator 15 (1): 12.
  25. Murtagh, T.P., 2001, Teaching breadth first depth first. Paper read at the 6th Annual SIGCSE/SIGCUE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Canterbury, England.
  26. Schwartz, M.S., Sadler, P.M., Sonnert, G. and Tai, R.H., 2008, ‘Depth versus breadth: how content coverage in high school science courses relates to later success in college science coursework’, Science Education 93 (5): 798–826.
  27. Shulman, L. S., 1987, ‘Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform’,Harvard educational review 57 (1): 1–23.
  28. UNESCO, 2002, Teaching and learning for a sustainable future. Paper read at the Education International Conference: The Second World Congress of Education International Meeting, 25-29 July, Washington, DC.
  29. Waghid, Y., 2002, ‘Knowledge production and higher education transformation in South Africa: towards reflexivity in university teaching, research and community service’, Higher Education 43 (4): 457–88.
  30. Wright, P., 2000, ‘Balancing breadth versus depth – an impossible task’, Studies inScience Education 35: 187–88.
Read More

Biographie de l'auteur

Andile Mji

Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa.

Télécharger ce document PDF
PDF (ENGLISH)
Statistic
Read Counter : 1014 Download : 88