Subscribe

Subscribe to our Newsletter and get informed about new publication regulary and special discounts for subscribers!

ILSHS > Volume 70 > A Comparative Study on Objectives and Components...
< Back to Volume

A Comparative Study on Objectives and Components of Writing Skill in National Curriculum of Iran and America (New Jersey) at High School

Full Text PDF

Abstract:

This study aims to provide an introductory of the codification of the objectives and components of teaching writing within the National Language curriculum in upper secondary in correlation with elementary and lower secondary curriculums. The method is a qualitative analysis of the contents. The data includes the Persian Language curriculum in Iranian upper secondary schools (version 2007) and American core curriculum for Language Arts (in New Jersey, 2004) collected through library study and note taking from Iran and foreign documents. In the present research, objectives and components of teaching writing within the curriculums in countries cited are analyzed and perused based on Autonomous and Ideological approaches to literacy; suggesting that objectives and components of American curriculum for teaching writing are formularized and influenced by Ideological approach, whereas Iranian writing curriculum possess properties of Autonomous Approach(consciously or unconsciously)and characteristics concerned with Ideological approach are marginal in Iran. After discussing features of curriculums in America (New Jersey), impressed by the Ideological approach to literacy, we proceed to bring forward the advantages and drawbacks of objectives and components of Iranian curriculum for teaching writing and some suggestions to improve are mentioned

Info:

Periodical:
International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences (Volume 70)
Pages:
70-80
Citation:
E. Ghaderi Doust " A Comparative Study on Objectives and Components of Writing Skill in National Curriculum of Iran and America (New Jersey) at High School", International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, Vol. 70, pp. 70-80, 2016
Online since:
Jun 2016
Export:
Distribution:
References:

[1] Agnello, M.F., A postmodern literacy policy analysis, Peter Lang Pub Inc, New York, (2001).

[2] H. Beder, Adult literacy: Issues for policy and practice, Krieger Pub Co., Malabar, India, (1991).

[3] H. Beder, Adult literacy: Issues for policy and practice, Krieger Pub Co., Malabar, India, (1991).

[4] B. Bloome, M. Englehart, E. Frust, W. Hill, D. Krathwohl, Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals, Handbook 1, cognitive domain, Longmans, Green: New York, Toronto, (1956).

[5] Tousi Maryam Danaye, Ali Reza Kiamanesh, The theoretical approaches to literacy: evidence from America, Canada, England, Singapore, Senegal, Indonesia and Iran's curriculum, Iranian Journal of Educational Innovations, 31: 8 (2009) 31-46.

[6] Leili Dastoori, Comparative study of teaching creative writing (composition) in national curriculum of Iran, America & England at primary stage, M.S. thesis, Dept. Linguistic and Languages, Univ. Payame Nour university, Tehran, Iran, (2009).

[7] P. Drucker, The age of social transformation [Electronic version], Atlantic Monthly, 1994, pp.53-79.

[8] Marlo Ediger, Writing, The pupil and the social studies, College student journal, 34: 1 (2000).

[9] J. Flood, J.M. Jensen, Handbook of research on teaching the language arts, Free Press, (1991).

[10] Moghadam Hossein Ghasempour, Bahman Zandi, Maryam Bakhshesh, A comparative study on national language programs at elementary level in Iran and US, Journal of curriculum studies. 3: 8 (2008) 1-22.

[11] Moghadam Hossein Ghasempour, The study of philosophic, psychological and linguistic principles of Persian curriculum in elementary level, Journal of curriculum studies. 3: 10, (2008) 18-41.

[12] R.M. Hammett, B.R. Barrell, Media literacy and English language arts, Ricci Nipissing Univ., Carlo, Canada, (2002).

[13] Vantassel-Baska Joyce, A curriculum study of gifted-students learning in the language arts, Gifted child quarterly. 46: 1 (2002) 30-44.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620204600104

[14] Mir Javad Kermani, Survey contents of Persian books (1, 2) of the first course in High Schools based on planning and psychological doctrines from teachers' and students' standpoints in the first course of high school in Tabriz, M.S. thesis, Dept. Education, Univ. Kharazmi, Tehran, Iran, (1998).

[15] A.J. Liddicoat (ed. ), Language planning and Policy: Issues in language planning and literacy, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, United Kingdom, 2007, pp.13-29.

[16] L. Malkin, C.J. Diaz, C. Mclanchlar, Literacy's in early childhood, changing views, challenging practice, 2nd ed., Marrickvill, Australia, 2002, pp.257-271.

[17] Nader Salsabili, Presenting a guide schema in applying policies in planning curriculum systems in modern high school course, PhD dissertation, Dept. Education and lesson planning, Univ. Kharazmi, Tehran, Iran, (2000).

[18] Manijeh Sepehri, National curriculum in primary education, M.S. thesis, Dept. Education, Univ. Sheffield, London, England, (1996).

[19] Sandra Stotsky, An English language arts curriculum framework for American public schools, University of Arkansas, USA, Feb. (2013).

[20] B. Street, Social literacy: critical approaches to literacy in development, Education and Ethnography, Longman, London, United Kingdom, (1995).

[21] B. Street, Literacy and development: Ethnographic Perspectives, Rout ledge, London, United Kingdom, (2001).

[22] B. Street, Cross-cultural approaches to literacy, Cambridge University press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1993, pp.1-21.

Show More Hide