Ana Žnidarec Čučković [1] Monika Czyżewska [2] Ciprian Simuț [3] & Ewa Dąbrowa [4]
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10439743
[1] Faculty of Teacher education, University of Zagreb, Croatia, E-mail: ana.znidarec.cuckovic@ufzg.hr
[2] Institute of Education, The Maria Grzegorzewska University in Warsaw, Poland, mczyzewska@aps.edu.pl
[3] Teacher Training Department, University of Oradea, Romania, E-mail: ciprian.simut.dppd@gmail.com
[4] Institute of Education, The Maria Grzegorzewska University in Warsaw, Poland, E-mail: edab@aps.edu.pl
Abstract
The article analyzes the language of legislation relating to the core curriculum in 3 countries: Croatia, Poland and Romania, which, freed from socialism, since the 1990s have been building their education systems in an evolutionary way. In particular, the factors of effective teaching are considered. Some other selected aspects of the education system, relevant to the implementation of the curriculum assumptions and contents will also be discussed. The research questions we posed were ‘what language is used in educational legislation for indicators for effective teaching and what is the role of the language?’ For analysis curriculum discourse language was used in comparative perspective. The research indicates the differences in the core curriculum and the language in all three countries. Understanding the context for teaching and understanding the needs of teachers and learners seem to be leading in Croatia. In Romania there is a gap between the language of the official texts and the classroom realities. The need for change of the practical aspects of teaching in the classroom becomes fundamental. While in Poland the language of the curriculum becomes more formal and subordinated to exam requirements, which not so much limits its understanding, but rather stiffens the teaching and learning process.
Keywords: curriculum development, national core/school curriculum, school curriculum in comparative perspective, curriculum in school systems, curriculum discourse language in comparative perspectivc
References
Akker, Jan van den (2007). “Curriculum Design Research.” In: Plomp, T. and Nieveen, N. eds 2007. An Introduction to Educational Design Research. Netherlands: SLO.
Alimuddin, Z., Tjakraatmadja, J. H., & Ghazali, A. (2020). Developing an Instrument to Measure Pedagogical Content Knowledge Using an Action Learning Method. International Journal of Instruction, 13(1), 425-444. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13128a
Christie, F. (1995). “Pedagogic Discourse in the Primary School”. Linguistics and Education 7(3) (January 1, 1995), 221–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(95)90024-1.
Deno, S. L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative. Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
Deno, S. L., & Fuchs, L. S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19 (8), 1-16.
Espin, C. A., & Yell, M. L. (1994). Critical Indicators of Effective Teaching for Preservice Teachers: Relationship Between Teaching Behaviors and Ratings of Effectiveness. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 17(3), 154–169.
European Commission (2023). “Overview | Eurydice.” Accessed April 6, 2023. https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-education-systems/romania/overview.
European Commission (2005). Common European Principles for Teacher’ Competences and Qualifications. Retrieved 15 December 2020 from http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/2010/doc/principles_en.pdf .
Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1991). Paradigmatic distinctions between instructionally relevant measurement models. Exceptional Children, 57, 488-500.
Fuchs, L. S., & Deno, S. L. (1992). Effects of curriculum within curriculum-based measurement. Exceptional Children, 58, 232-243.
Harb, M. (2017). “Curriculum as a Discourse: Using Critical Discourse Analysis to Revive Curriculum Reconceptualists’ Thought.” Journal of Curriculum and Teaching 6 (March 10, 2017), 58. https://doi.org/10.5430/jct.v6n1p58.
Hardley, S., Gray, S., and McQuillian, R. (2021). “A Critical Discourse Analysis of Curriculum for Excellence Implementation in Four Scottish Secondary School Case Studies.” Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 42(4) (July 4, 2021), 513–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2019.1710463.
Henderson, J. G. (1992). “Curriculum Discourse and the Question of Empowerment.” Theory Into Practice 31(3) (June 1, 1992), 204–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543544.
Huebner, D. (1976). “The Moribund Curriculum Field: Its Wake and Our Work.” Curriculum Inquiry, 6(2) (December 30, 1976), 153–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1976.11075526.
Institut otvoreno društvo (2007). Ravnopravan pristup Roma kvalitetom odgoju i obrazovanju. Izvještaj o praćenju IOD/Program EU za praćenje i zagovaranje u suradnji s Institutom za demokraciju, Zagreb, Hrvatska.
Kliebard, H. M. (2022). “The Tyler Rationale.” The School Review, 78(2) (February 1970), 259–72. https://doi.org/10.1086/442905.
Manyukhina, Y. (2022). “Children’s Agency in the National Curriculum for England: A Critical Discourse Analysis.” Education 3-13 50(4) (May 19, 2022), 506–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2022.2052232.
Ministarstvo znanosti i obrazovanja (2014). Nove boje znanja – strategija obrazovanja, znanosti i tehnologije. Available at:https://mzo.gov.hr/UserDocsImages/dokumenti/Obrazovanje/Strategija%20obrazovanja,%20znanosti%20i%20tehnologije.pdf
Ministarstvo znanosti i obrazovanja [Ministry of Science and Education] (2017). Okvir nacionalnoga kurikuluma [Draft National Curriculum Framework]. Zagreb, Croatia.
Nopriyeni, Prasetyo, Z. K., & Djukri. (2019). The Implementation of Mentoring Based Learning to Improve Pedagogical Knowledge of Prospective Teachers. International Journal of Instruction, 12(3), 529-540. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12332a
OECD Directorate for Education (2007). Understanding the social outcomes of learning. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Office of the Secretary-General of the European Schools (2023). “Organisation of Studies.” Accessed April 5, 2023. https://www.eursc.eu/en/European-Schools/studies/studies-organisation.
Orstein A.C., Hunkins F.P. (2017). Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues. Pearson Education, 7th edition.
Palade, E. ed. (2020). Repere Pentru Proiectarea, Actualizarea Și Evaluarea Curriculumului Național. Cadrul de Referință al Curriculumului Național. Bucharest.
Pinar, W. F. (2006). The Synoptic Text Today and Other Essays: Curriculum Development after the Reconceptualization. New York: Peter Lang.
Reinhardt, K. S. (2018). “Discourse and Power: Implementation of a Funds of Knowledge Curriculum.” Power and Education, 10(3) (November 1, 2018), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757743818787530.
Schola Europaea/Office of the Secretary General. Pedagogical Development Unit (2022). Early education curriculum – Nursery and primary cycles of the European Schools. Approved by the Joint Teaching Committee – Meeting on the 10 and 11 February – 2022. Ref.: 2022-01-D-42-en-2
Schwab, J. J. (1969). “The Practical: A Language for Curriculum.” The School Review, 78(1) (November 1969), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1086/442881.
Shinn, M. R. (Ed.) (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: Guilford Press.
The Ordinance of the Minister of National Education on the Core Curriculum for Pre-School Education and General Education of December 23, 2008. [Poland]
The Ordinance of the Minister of National Education on the Core Curriculum for Pre-School Education and the Core Curriculum for General Education for Primary School of February 14, 2017 (Journal of Laws, item 356). [Poland]
The Ordinance of the Minister of National Education on the Core Curriculum of General Education of February 15, 1999. [Poland]
The Ordinance of the Minister of National Education on the Requirements for Schools and Institutions of August 6, 2015 (Journal of Laws, item 1214). [Poland]
The Ordinance of the Minister of National Education on the Requirements for Schools and Educational Institutions of August 11, 2017. [Poland]
Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher Professional Development: An International Review of the Literature. Paris: UNESCO International Institute for Educational Planning.
Vizek Vidović, V. et. al. (2005). Cjeloživotno obrazovanje učitelja i nastavnika: višestruke perspektive [Lifelong Learning for Teachers in Primary and Secondary Education: A Number of Perspectives]. Zagreb: Institut za društvena istraživanja [Institute of Research of Society].
Wraga, W.. “Understanding the Tyler Rationale: Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction in Historical Context.” Espacio, Tiempo y Educación, 4 (July 1, 2017), 227. https://doi.org/10.14516/ete.156.
Online resources accessed during April 2023:
Probleme majore la examenul de Română de la Evaluarea Națională, identificate într-un Raport de cercetare alarmant realizat de aceeași instituție a Ministerului Educației care face subiectele: subiecte concepute pe curriculumul care nu mai este în vigoare, cu barem de corectare care “compromite validitatea probei” prin punctaje alocate arbitrar / Plus: efectul backwash constatat oficial
https://www.edupedu.ro/interviu-medicul-florin-berghea-care-a-predat-un-curs-de-reumatologie-asistat-de-chatgpt-nu-mai-putem-sa-gandim-evaluarea-numai-in-termeni-de-memorare-zero-logica-se-evalueaza-la-rezidentiat-sper/.
https://www.edupedu.ro/mihaela-popa-fost-secretar-de-stat-in-educatie-alergam-prin-materie-dam-informatie-nu-facem-educatie-nu-avem-timp-sa-vorbim-cu-elevii/.l.