Приказ основних података о документу

Curriculum from the perspective of preschool teachers

dc.contributor.advisorPešić, Mirjana
dc.contributor.otherPavlović-Breneselović, Dragana
dc.contributor.otherKrnjaja, Živka
dc.contributor.otherMarinković, Snežana
dc.creatorMiškeljin, Lidija
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-12T09:57:15Z
dc.date.available2021-10-12T09:57:15Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.urihttp://eteze.bg.ac.rs/application/showtheses?thesesId=550
dc.identifier.urihttp://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/3254
dc.identifier.urihttp://vbs.rs/scripts/cobiss?command=DISPLAY&base=70036&RID=521961367
dc.identifier.urihttp://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/handle/123456789/9
dc.description.abstractPraksa vaspitanja i obrazovanja dečjeg vrtića zahteva ozbiljno promišljanje, refleksiju i diskusiju kako bi se bolje razumela i tumačila kao društveni fenomen. Ukoliko smo spremni da se ozbiljno pozabavimo sopstvenim diskursima i njegovim obrascima koji su prisutni u i oblikuju praksu dečjeg vrtića, pre ćemo biti u stanju da je razumemo i otkrijemo značenja koja nosi sa sobom – jer, u krajnjem slučaju, vaspitanje i obrazovanje se zasniva i počiva na jeziku, govorenom i pisanom. Informacije koje primamo u procesu komunikacije sa tekstom jednog programskog dokumenta (u kontekstu ovog rada Osnova programa predškolskog vaspitanja i obrazovanja – model A) ne vode uvek nužno razumevanju. Način na koji vaspitači razumeju i tumače kurikulum (formalni program kao službeni tekst ili „delatni“ program, odnosno ono što se dešava i konstruiše u konkretnom kontekstu vaspitno obrazovne prakse) zavisi od njihovih implicitnih pedagogija, znanja, uverenja i pretpostavki koje imaju o programu, detetu i sopstvenoj ulozi. Ovakva razumevanja i tumačenja vaspitača često ne moraju biti u skladu sa formalnim programom kao modelom. Imajući u vidu da se pedagoška praksa ne može razvijati „po receptu“, uvođenjem određenih isprobanih modela, niti preslikavanjem tuđih rešenja, s jedne (kao) i pristup kritičke analize diskursa, sa druge strane, pošla sam od pretpostavke da način na koji vaspitači razumeju koncepciju programa kao modela zavisi od diskursa zastupljenog u praksi određenog dečjeg vrtića, kroz koji se zvanična koncepcija „filtrira“, menja i gradi kao zajednički konstrukt u konkretnim uslovima. Pristup u ovom istraživanju zasniva se na postavkama kritičke analize diskursa i analize narativa (kao načina predstavljanja unutar konteksta diskursa) i odnosi se na značenja i načine konstrukcije značenja. Diskurs se u radu tumači kao institucionalni način mišljenja, koji deluje na shvatanja, određuje način izražavanja i delovanja vaspitača. Polazeći od shvatanja kurikuluma kao obrazovnog predloga koji pruža osnovu za kritičko preispitivanje programa i kao modela i kao prakse, u istraživanju su sagledavane različite perspektive vaspitača u odnosu na programski dokument i praksu – kurikulum. Kroz narativno istraživanje u pet dečjih vrtića u Beogradu, istraživan je način na koji vaspitači razumeju i grade značenja upisana u zvanični programski dokument kroz prepoznavanje i ekspliciranje svojih implicitnih pedagogija, uočavanje koherentnosti između teorije i prakse i (re)konstrukcije kurikuluma. Rukovodeći se osnovnim istraživačkim pitanjem `Kako vaspitači razumeju i koja značenja (implicitna i/ili eksplicitna) pripisuju u tumačenju polazišta programa, načela vaspitno-obrazovnog rada, slike o detetu i ulogama vaspitača i kako rekonstruišu značenja kroz diskurs` ceo proces istraživanja je prošao kroz tri opšte faze. Sa vaspitačima koji su se dobrovoljno opredelili da učestvuju u istraživanju i time zauzeli ulogu ko-istraživača, prva faza ili faza značenja započela je kreiranjem i građenjem ličnih priča. Vaspitači su, na osnovu smernica i delova teksta Modela A navodili različita značenja pojma `program` , `dete`, `uloga/načelo vaspitno-obrazovnog rada` i uz njihovo korišćenje pisali sopstvene priče. Druga faza ili faza tumačenja i građenja mreže značenja obuhvatila je narative (lične priče i refleksivne dnevnike vaspitača, kvalitativne pojedinačne intervjue i transkripte grupnih diskusija) koji su, u kontekstu ovog istraživanja, predstavljali resurs za građenja i mapiranje značenja osnovnih pojmova `program` , `dete`, `uloga/načelo vaspitno-obrazovnog rada`. U okviru treće faze ili faze refleksije smo, kroz aktivan proces interpretacije sopstvenih značenja, namera i načina postupanja, konstruisanja značenja i pregovaranja o značenjima, postavljali okvir za iznošenje različitih perspektiva vaspitača. Analizom narativa, mapa značenja vaspitača i dijaloga među vaspitačima o sopstvenim pričama i mapama značenja istraživano je kako vaspitači razumeju ključne koncepte kurikuluma. Na taj način obezbeđivan je potencijal za razumevanje konkretnog obrazovnog konteksta, jer se bazirao na samovođenom učenju kroz refleksiju sa drugima. Postavljeni model istraživanja oslanja se na iskustva savremenih istraživanja kurikuluma, kojima se naglašava da zajedničke praktične akcije omogućavaju vaspitačima da razviju dijalog na osnovu onoga što čine zajedno i da iz toga grade i preispituju značenja. Tokom konstruktivnog dijaloga vaspitači su dolazili do uvida u to koja značenja vezuju za koji „znak“ (pojam) – program, dete, uloga. Različite perspektive, s druge strane, vodile su različitim interpretacijama i novom građenju značenja, što je predstavljalo put ka daljoj komunikaciji i refleksiji. U procesu refleksije vaspitači su postajali ko-konstruktori značenja kroz proces razmene sopstvenih perspektiva preuzimajući ulogu istraživača sopstvenih razumevanja značenja programa/kurikuluma.sr
dc.description.abstractThe practice of preschool education must be a topic of serious consideration, reflection and discussion in order to better understand and interpret it as a social phenomenon. If we are ready to seriously deal with our own discourses and their forms that are present in and shape the practices of the kindergarten, we will be able to understand meaning of those practicest - because, ultimately, education is based on language, spoken and written. Informations that we gain in the process of communication with the text of a program document (in the context of this research, Foundations of the Program of Preschool Education for children aged three to seven – model А) do not necessarily lead to understanding. The way in which preschool teachers understand and interpret the curriculum (formal program - the official text, or "the implemented" program - what is actually happening and is being constructed in a given context of educational practices) depends on their implicit pedagogies: the knowledge, beliefs and assumptions they have about the program, child and their own role. Such understandings and interpretations do not necessarily correspond with the formal program as a model. Based on this and the critical discourse analysis approach, I have started with the assumption that the preschool teachers understanding of the given official program will depend on the discourse present in a specific practice of their kindergarten. It is through this discourse that the formal program is "filtered", changed and constructed as a common conception. The research is based on critical discourse analysis and the analysis of narrative (as a method of representation within the context of adiscourse) and is related to meanings and ways of meanings reconstruction. The discourse in this study is interpreted as an institutional way of thinking which acts on the views, specifies the manner of expression and action of preschool teachers. Proceeding from the understanding of the curriculum as an educational proposal that provides the basis for a critical review of the program,both as a model and as a practice, we were studying different perspectives of preschool teachers in relation to the program document and to the practice - curriculum. The narrative inquiry included teachers from five Belgrade kindergartens. The manner in which preschool teachers understand and construct meanings written in the official program document was studied through recognition and explanation of their implicit pedagogies. This lead to the identification of correspondance between theory and practice and (re)construction of the curriculum. Guided by the basic research questions: `How preschool teachers understand the meaning (implicit and / or explicit) of attributed to the basic element of the official program: the concept of the child, the principles of educational work, and the roles of preschool teachers" and "How they reconstruct the meanings through the discourse` the whole process of research has gone through three general phases. The first phase or "the meanings’ phase, started with creation and construction of personal stories by preschool teachers who volunteered to participate in the research and who have taken the role of co-researchers. The preschool teachers have listed various meanings of the terms `programe`, `child`, `role/principles of educational work`, based on the guidelinesthey were given and parts of the text of the official program - model A, and while using the mentioned terms, wrote their own stories. The second phase or "the interpretation phase" and construction of network of meanings included the narratives (personal stories and reflective diaries of preschool teachers, qualitative individual interviews and transcripts of group discussions) that, in the context of this research, represented a resource for the construction and mapping of the meanings of basic terms `program`, `child`,` roles/principle of educational work'. In the last phase of reflection we have set the framework for the expression of various preschool teachers’ perspectives through an active process of interpretation of their own meanings, intents and modes of action, construction and negotiation of meanings. The analysis of narrative, a map of meaning and dialogue among preschool teachers about their own stories and maps of meaning were used to explore how preschool teachers understand key concepts of the curriculum, thus providing the potential for understanding the specific educational context, as it was based on learning through reflection with others. During the constructive dialogue preschool teachers have come to gain insight into the meanings they associated with the "sign" (the term) - program, child, roles. Different perspectives on the other hand, lead to different interpretations and meanings of the new construction, which was a way of further communication and reflection. In the process of reflection, preschool teachers became co-constructors of meaning through a process of sharing their own perspectives and took on the role of researchers of their own understanding of the program/curriculum.en
dc.languagesr
dc.publisherUniverzitet u Beogradu, Filozofski fakultet
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MESTD/MPN2006-2010/149015/RS//
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectznačenjasr
dc.subjectperspektive vaspitačasr
dc.subjectnarativsr
dc.subjectkurikulumsr
dc.subjectdiskurssr
dc.subjectteachers perspectivesen
dc.subjectnarrativeen
dc.subjectmeaningsen
dc.subjectdiscourseen
dc.subjectcurriculumen
dc.titleKurikulum iz perspektive vaspitačasr
dc.titleCurriculum from the perspective of preschool teachersen
dc.typedoctoralThesis
dc.rights.licenseBY-NC-ND
dc.identifier.fulltexthttp://reff.f.bg.ac.rs/bitstream/id/2231/6.pdf
dc.identifier.rcubhttps://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_nardus_3254
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion


Документи

Thumbnail

Овај документ се појављује у следећим колекцијама

Приказ основних података о документу