Mr. Sadegh Zaresefat, Dr. Marzieh Dehghani, Dr. Rezvan Hakimzadeh, Dr. Morteza Karami, Dr. Keyvan Salehi,
Volume 7, Issue 13 (3-2019)
Abstract
| This research is based on the experience of the faculty members of the College of Mathematics, Engineering, and Basic Sciences (STEM) at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in 2017 in implementing professional development curricula. The data of this research were extracted from a qualitative and descriptive phenomenological method with semi-structured interviewing tool. Data is analyzed through coding and categorization. Sampling in this section was targeted through a criterion type and a total of 21 people participated. To credited, Delphi technique was agreed by the experts and experts on issues. Given the research structure and the four areas in the curriculum, researchers' perceptions of the themes and concepts related to each field were referred. A total of 37 categories and finally four general categories including design, implementation, field and evaluation in three areas of strengths, leading issues and desirability of curriculum. The results of this study showed that a great deal has been reported between the design and implementation of the programs, as well as a conceptual model based on the life experiences of the faculty members and, finally, suggestions were presented. |
Mr. Morteza Moradi Doliskani, Dr. Seyed Ebrahim Mirshah Jafari, Dr. Mohammadreza Neyestani,
Volume 8, Issue 16 (9-2020)
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the type and extent of the curriculum commonplaces in the curriculum committee of selected universities in Iran using a qualitative research approach, it was a content analysis method. The statistical population of the study consisted of all curriculum development and subject matter specialists in university curriculum committees, out of which 21 were selected using purposeful sampling and "saturation criterion" and they were semi-structured interviews. Free categorization and coding were used to analyze the data obtained from the interviews. The findings showed that the type and curriculum commonplaces influencers in the curriculum committees were classified into three main categories: 1-Ageism and resistance to curriculum-policy-making, rent-seeking, and financial incentives to select members; 2- Minor contribution participation of curriculum specialists in curriculum development decision making; 3- Poor participation of employers and students in review curricula or creating new disciplines.
