دو فصلنامه علمی جامعه شناسی آموزش و پرورش

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی (کیفی)

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری، گروه فلسفه تعلیم وتربیت، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار، گروه فلسفه تعلیم و تربیت، واحد تهران، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران.

3 استادیار، گروه علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه علوم انتظامی امین، تهران، ایران.

10.22034/ijes.2023.2011514.1466

چکیده

هدف: داده ها و جمع بندی روش گراندد تئوری یا زمینه بنیاد است. برای شناسایی مولفه های تخیل در برنامه آموزش فلسفه برای کودکان در این پژوهش: در گام اول با مراجعه به متون تخصصی تخیل در برنامه آموزش فلسفه برای کودکان از جمله مقالات داخلی و خارجی، کتاب ها و نشریات معتبر، شاخص های تخیل در برنامه آموزش فلسفه برای کودکان شناسایی، بررسی و با روش مطالعه کرنل خلاصه نویسی شد. در این مرحله بعد از 22 نفر تا حد اشباع نظری مولفه ها شناسایی شد. در گام دوم برای اطمینان از موثر بودن شاخص های شناسایی شده به عنوان تخیل در برنامه آموزش فلسفه برای کودکان از روش مصاحبه نیمه ساختار یافته بین خبرگان استفاده شد. خبرگان برگزیده، گروهی از کارشناسان امر مدیریت آموزشی و آموزش و پرورش بودند که سال ها در مشاغل آموزشی سابقه داشته و در رابطه با شاخص ها و مولفه های منتخب، با تجربه و صاحب نظر و دارای مقالات متعدد در این زمینه بودند. 
یافته ها: در گام دوم پژوهش با توجه به نتایج مصاحبه با خبرگان، نتایج حاصل از پژوهش نشان داد که ابعاد تخیل در برنامه آموزش فلسفه برای کودکان شامل دانش محوری با مولفه های کدگذاری تخیل در آموزش فلسفه برای کودکان با 5 شاخص، اهداف (فردی، اجتماعی و آموزشی) (26 سوال)، مبانی (عمومی و تخصصی) (12 سوال)، روش (استدلال ورزی، مهارت آموزی و دانش اندوزی) (15 سوال) و محتوا (آموزشی، انگیزشی و چالش برانگیزی) (13 سوال) و سازوکارها (مدیریتی، فناورانه، آموزشی و محیطی) (22 سوال) بود.
نتیجه گیری: نتایج نشان دادند که تخیل در اهداف فلسفه برای کودکان شامل  جایگاههای فردی، اجتماعی و آموزشی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Identifying the Mechanisms of Using the Place of Imagination in the Philosophy Education Program for Children

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fatemeh Sadat Najmolhoda 1
  • Yahya Ghaedi 2
  • Sadegh Rezaie 3

1 PhD student, Department of Philosophy of Education, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy of Education, Tehran Branch, Khwarazmi University, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Amin University of Police Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Purpose: The main purpose of this research is to identify the mechanisms of using the place of imagination in the philosophy education program for children.
Methodology: This research is one of the qualitative researches, which is applied in terms of purpose, descriptive research in terms of data collection and summarizing, grounded theory method. To identify the components of imagination in the philosophy education program for children in this research: in the first step, by referring to specialized texts on imagination in the philosophy education program for children, including domestic and foreign articles, books and authoritative publications, indicators of imagination in the philosophy education program for children, it was identified, reviewed and summarized using the Cornell study method. In this stage, after 22 people, up to the theoretical saturation of the components were identified. In the second step, semi-structured interviews between experts were used to ensure the effectiveness of the indicators identified as imagination in the philosophy education program for children. The selected experts were a group of experts in educational management and education who had years of experience in educational jobs and were experienced and knowledgeable in relation to the selected indicators and components and had numerous articles in this field.
Findings: In the second step of the research, according to the results of interviews with experts, the results of the research showed that the dimensions of imagination in the philosophy education program for children include knowledge-centered with coding components of imagination in philosophy education for children with 5 indicators, goals (individual, social and educational) (26 questions), basics (general and specialized) (12 questions), method (reasoning, skill training and knowledge acquisition) (15 questions) and content (educational, motivational and challenging) (13 questions) and mechanisms ( managerial, technological, educational and environmental) (22 questions).
Conclusion: The results showed that imagination in the goals of philosophy for children includes individual, social and educational positions.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • imagination
  • teaching philosophy
  • mechanisms
Abedini Nazari M. (2016), The effect of teaching philosophy for children on the self-confidence and critical thinking of male students in the first year of high school in District 6 of Tehran, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology. [In Persian]
Cassidy C, Marwick H, Deeney L, McLean G. (2018). Philosophy with children, self-regulation and engaged participation for children with emotional-behavioural and social communication needs. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties23(1), 81-96.
Daniel M F, Belghiti K, Auriac-Slusarczyk E. (2017). Philosophy for Children and the Incidence of Teachers’ Questions on the Mobilization of Dialogical Critical Thinking in Pupils. Creative Education, 8(06), 870-892.
Figueiredo F F. (2022). On the theoretical foundations of the ‘Philosophy for Children’programme. Journal of Philosophy of Education.
HACIOĞLU Y, GÜLHAN F. (2021). The effects of STEM education on the students’ critical thinking skills and STEM perceptions. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health7(2), 139-155.
Lipman M. (2017). The Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children (IAPC) program. In History, Theory and Practice of Philosophy for Children (pp. 3-11). Routledge.
Mubasheri F, Manochehri M, Nowrozi F. (2016). Critical thinking skills in undergraduate students of Fasa University of Medical Sciences. Development Strategies in Medical Education, 2(7), 15-4. [In Persian]
Rahdar A, Pourghaz A, Marziyeh A. (2018). The Impact of Teaching Philosophy for Children on Critical Openness and Reflective Skepticism in Developing Critical Thinking and Self-Efficacy. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3).
Tsarava K, Moeller K, Román-González M (et al). (2022). A cognitive definition of computational thinking in primary education. Computers & Education179, 104425.
Uğraş T, Rızvanoğlu K, Gülseçen S. (2022). New co-design techniques for digital game narrative design with children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction31, 100441.
Vahedi M, Kabiri A A. (1401), The effectiveness of the philosophy program for children with technology enrichment on the happiness and rumination of neglected and abused girls. Culture of Counseling and Psychotherapy, 49, 193-162. [In Persian]
Von Wright M. (2021). Imagination and Education. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education.
Wang B, Ginns P, Mockler N. (2022). Sequencing tracing with imagination. Educational Psychology Review34(1), 421-449.
Wang Z, Liu L, Duan Y (et al). (2022). Continual learning through retrieval and imagination. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 8).
Wu C. (2022). Can Philosophy for Children improve critical thinking and attainment for Chinese secondary students?. In Making Your Doctoral Research Project Ambitious (pp. 117-128). Routledge.
Xu A. (2022). The Importance of Philosophy for Children.
Yarmohammadi Vasel M, Zoghi Padayar M, Mohammadi A. (2016). The effect of exploratory method training on the cognitive processes of critical thinking; Analysis, inference, evaluation, speculative and inductive reasoning. Journal of Cognitive Strategies in Learning, 5(8), 92-79. [In Persian]
Yusuf Y. (2022). Improving Students' Critical Thinking Skills Against Environmental Problems: Practicum Mini Project" Understanding Public Perceptions of Environmental Problems". Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA8(1), 209-215.
Zulhamdi Z, Rahmatan H, Artika W (et al). (2022). The Effect of Applying Blended Learning Strategies Flipped Classroom Model on Students’ Critical Thinking Skills. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA8(1), 86-93.