Investigate the relationship between epistemological beliefs with elements of teaching faculty (Shahed University Study)

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor and Faculty Member of Shahed University in Tehran

2 Master of Science in Philosophy of Education, Shahed University

3 Master of Educational Management at Allameh Tabataba'i University (RA)

Abstract

Objective:The present study seeks to investigate the relationship between faculty members 'epistemological beliefs and faculty members' teaching components. The research method is survey-correlation type. The statistical population consisted of 320 faculty members of Shahed University who were selected by random stratified sampling of 167 individuals. Measurement tools consist of Schumer's Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire and the factors influencing the microreserves teaching method.
Method: To analyze the data, descriptive statistical methods with inferential tests such as "t" univariate and "r" Pearson correlation coefficient have been used.
Results: The Results showed that: The system of epistemological beliefs of the faculty members of Shahed University in one aspect is "knowledge simplicity" in the row of the system of beliefs or low level of beliefs, but in two other aspects, namely, "certainty of knowledge" and "dependent on the source" The existence of knowledge "is in the ranks of the system of expert beliefs or high level. Also, between the dimensions of Schumer's epistemic beliefs in the "simplicity of knowledge" dimension with teaching components: "classroom management techniques", "maintaining appropriate classroom behavior", "preparing students for review and practice", "displaying questioning skills", "using methods Various education "," positive atmosphere in the classroom "and" education quality "have been directly and positively correlated. Also, there is a negative relation between Schummer's epistemological dimensions in the "determinism of knowledge" dimension with teaching components: "using different teaching methods", "establishing positive atmosphere in class" and "teaching quality", and finally between epistemological dimensions In the "dependent on knowledge" dimension, Schumer existed with the nine components of the microscope's teaching of negative relation (inverse).
Conclusion:The teaching function and activity of faculty members is influenced by their beliefs and values about the nature of knowledge. The overwhelming majority of the faculty members in the target community, from the knowledge, considered "simple knowledge" to be ranked in the "system of beliefs" or "low level". On this basis, it can be concluded that because of the vast majority of faculty members from the technical and medical fields, due to the sharp and tunneling of their studied phenomena, they have such an understanding of knowledge, as among the members of the staff Scientific findings of the humanities and basic sciences did not find this finding.

Keywords

References

اسمیت، فیلیپ. (1998). فلسفه آموزش و پرورش. مترجم: سعید بهشتی، تهران: شرکت به‌نشر (انتشارات آستان قدس رضوی).
امامی، سها. (1377). بررسی رابطه باورهای معرفت‌شناختی و راهبردهای یادگیری. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
ذوالفقار، محسن و مهرمحمدی، محمود. (1383). «ارزیابی دانشجویان از کیفیت تدریس اعضای هیات علمی رشته‌های علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌های شهر تهران». مجله دانشور رفتار دانشگاه شاهد، دوره 11، شماره‌ 6 (ویژه مقالات علوم تربیتی 2)، 28-17.
ذوالفقار، محسن. (1375). بررسی و تحلیل کیفیت تدریس مربیان عضو هیئت علمی رشته‌های علوم انسانی (دانشگاه‌های شهر تهران). پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس.
رضایی، اکبر. (1395). «رابطه باورهای معرفت‌شناختی، هیجان‌های تحصیلی و خودکارآمدی با رویکردهای یادگیری سطحی و عمقی دانشجویان». دو‌فصلنامه راهبردهای شناختی در یادگیری، سال چهارم، شماره ششم، 81-59.
سرایی، حسن. (1372). مقدمه‌ای بر نمونه‌گیری در تحقیق. تهران: سازمان‌ مطالعه ‌و تدوین‌ کتب‌ علوم ‌انسانی ‌دانشگاهها (سمت).
غلامعلی‌لواسانی، مسعود؛ ندا، ملت و کرمدوست، نوروزعلی. (1388). «نقش باورهای معرفت‌شناختی، راهبردهای پردازش اطلاعات و ساختار انگیزشی در تنظیم یادگیری». مجله روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی(دانشگاه تهران)، دوره 39، شماره 3، 67-47.
قربان‌جهرمی، رضا؛ غلامعلی لواسانی، مسعود و رستگار، احمد. (1388). «ارایه مدلی برای اضطراب رایانه بر اساس باورهای معرفت شناختی و اهداف پیشرفت». مجلهروان شناسی و علوم تربیتی(دانشگاه تهران)، سال 39 ،شماره 2، ‏101-122.
لطیفیان، مرتضی؛ بشاش، لعیا؛ فروتن، صدیقه و سیف، دیبا. (1384). تأثیر باورهـای شناخت‌شناسی ریاضی بر رویکرد یادگیری. هفتمین کنگره پژوهش‌های روانپزشکی در ایران، تهران: دانشگاه علوم پزشکی و خدمات درمانی شهید بهشتی.
میلر، ماری و میلر، ویلبر. (1999). راهنمای تدریس در دانشگاه‌ها. مترجم: ویدا امیری، چاپ چهارم، تهران: سازمان‌ مطالعه ‌و تدوین‌ کتب‌ علوم ‌انسانی ‌دانشگاهها(سمت).
Bromme, R.; Pieschl, S. and Stahl, E. (2009). “Epistemological beliefs are standards for adaptive learning: a functional theory about epistemological beliefs and metacognition”. Metacognition and Learning, 5(1), 7-26.
Buehl, M. (2008). Assessing the multidimensionality of students’ epistemic beliefs across diverse cultures. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Knowing, knowledge and beliefs.Epistemological studies across diverse cultures (pp. 65–112). New York: Springer.
Buehl, M. M. and Alexander, P. A. (2006). “Examining the dual nature of epistemological beliefs”. International Journal of Educational Research, 45, 28-42.
Cano, F. (2005). “Epistemological beliefs and approach to learning: There change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance”. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 203-221.
Chen, J. A. and Pajares, F. (2010). “Implicit theories of ability of grade 6 science students:Relation to epistemological beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science”. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 75-87.
Elder, A. D. (2002). Characterizing fifth grade students’ epistemological beliefs in science. In B. K. Hofer, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epis- temology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hakan, K. and Munire, E. (2011). “Profiling individual differences in undergraduates, Epistemological beliefs: Gender, Domain and grade differences”. Procedia- Social and Behavioralsciences, 31, 738-744.
Hammer, D. and Elby, A. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 169–190). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hofer, B. K. (2000). “Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology”. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 378-405.
Phan, H. P. (2008). “Exploring epistemological beliefs and learning approaches in context: A sociocultural perspective”. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 6(3), 793-822.
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in collage years: Ascheme. NewYork: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ravindran, B.; Grene, B. A. and Debacker, T. K. (2000). “Predicting preserviceteachers’cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs”. Department of Educational Psychology, 22-32.
Schommer-Aikins, M.; Duell, O. and Hutter, R. (2005). “Epistemological beliefs,mathematical problem solving beliefs, and academic performance of middle school students”. The Elementary School Journal, 105(3), 290-304.
Schommer, M. (1990). “Effects of beliefsabout the nature of knowledge oncomprehension”. Journal of educationalpsychology, 82, 498-504.
Shabani Varaki, B. (2003). “Epistemological Belifes and Leadership Style among School Prancipals”. Intenational Education Journal, 4, 224-231.
Tickle, E. L.; Brownlee, J. and Nailon, D. (2005). “Personal epistemoligical beliefs and transformational leadership behaviors”. The Journal of management Development, 24, 1-15.
Yildiran, D.; Demirci, N.; Tuysuz, M.; Bektas, O. and Geban, O. (2011). “Adaptation ofan epistemological belief instrument towardschemistry and chemistry lessons”. Procediasocialand behavioral sciences, 15, 3718-3722.
 
Biquarterly Journal of Cognitive Strategies in Learning
Volume 6, Issue 10
August 2018
Pages 151-169

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics