پایان نامه با واژه های کلیدی not، dimension، language، critical

Inferential statistics for dimension 5 Test Value = 0 t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower
Upper
fac5
27.153
99
.000
4.76000
4.4122
5.1078 As the results in Table 4.18 shows, there is a significant difference between mean of sample and that of population (sig=.000, df=99, mean difference=4), and mean of those participants who agreed with this dimension is less than those who disagreed with this dimension. Therefore, it can be said that Iranian language teachers believe that students’ comments must be taken into account in process of language teaching.
4.3.6 Importance of first language
This dimension consists of 3 items:
25. Learning English has priority over learning Persian.
26. In English teaching, to make students accent close to that of native speaker is the most important point.
27. In English teaching as a foreign language, Persian language must not be used.
Descriptive statistics for participants’ responses to dimension (6) are shown in the Table 4.19.
Table 4.19
Descriptive statistics for participants’ responses to dimension (6)
items
Strongly agree
agree
No comment
disagree
Strongly disagree
Q25
12%
15%
17%
34%
22%
Q26
18%
26%
10%
26%
20%
Q27
10%
18%
14%
43%
15% As in the Table 4.19 has been shown, 34% of participants disagreed that learning English has priority over learning Persian, 24% strongly disagreed, 17% had no comment, 15% agreed, and 12% strongly disagreed with this perspective toward English and Persian languages. In item 26, 26% of respondents disagreed that making students accent close to that of native speaker is the most important point in English language teaching, 20% strongly disagreed, 10% had no comment, 18% strongly agreed, and 26% agreed that closeness to native speaker accent is the most important point in English language teaching. In the last item of this dimension, 43% of participants disagreed that in English teaching as a foreign language, Persian language must not be used, while 15% strongly disagreed, 14% had no comment, 18% agreed, and 10% of participants strongly agreed with this item. In order to see whether there is a significant difference between the means of sample and population on the sixth dimension of critical pedagogy, a one sample t-test was run and the results are shown in the following table.
Table 4.20
Inferential statistics for dimension 6 Test Value = 0 t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower
Upper
fac6
27.774
99
.000
4.82000
4.6328
5.8072 As the results in Table 4.20 indicates, there is a significant difference between mean of sample and mean of population (sig=.000, df=99, mean difference=4).
4.3.7 Critical thinking
This dimension consisted of 3 items:
28. Learning is a dynamic process which students learn by doing not only by memorization.
29. Prior experiences of students provide the basis for learning new subjects and materials.
30. Students must think about what they learn and take practical steps to realize them.
Descriptive statistics for participants’ responses to dimension (7) are shown in the Table 4.21
Table 4.21
Descriptive statistics for participants’ responses to dimension (7)
items
Strongly agree
agree
No comment
disagree
Strongly disagree
Q28
53%
40%
6%
0%
1%
Q29
36%
50%
5%
8%
1%
Q30
55%
35%
2%
2%
6% As Table 4.21 shows, 53% of respondents strongly agreed that learning is a dynamic process which students learn by doing not only by memorization, 40% agreed, 6% had no comment, 1% strongly disagreed with this item. In item 29, 50% agreed that prior experiences of students provide the basis for learning new subjects and materials, 36% strongly agreed, 5% had no comment, 8% disagreed, and 1% strongly disagreed. In the last item, 55% of participants strongly agreed that students must think about what they learn and take practical steps to realize them, 35% agreed, 2% had no comment, 6% strongly disagreed, and 2% disagreed. In order to see whether there is a significant difference between the means of sample and population on the sixth dimension of critical pedagogy, a one sample t-test was run and the results are shown in the following table. Table 4.22
Inferential statistics for dimension 7 Test Value = 0 t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)
Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower
Upper
fac7
64.406
99
.000
12.87000
12.4735
13.2665 As the results in Table 4.22 shows, there is a significance difference between sample’s mean and that of population (sig=.000, df=99, mean difference=12). Mean of sample exceeds mean of population, so it can be said that Iranian language teachers believe that critical thinking principles must be used in language classes. 4.4 Qualitative results
The second question of this study intended to find the min barriers of application of critical pedagogy principles in Iranian schools from teachers᾽ points of view. To do so, a face to face in-depth interview was conducted with 10 participants of this study (those who answered the questionnaire positively and it appeared that were aware of principles of critical pedagogy). After running interviews, they were transcribed. Then, using qualitative content analysis, the following themes were extracted: organizational barriers, personal barriers, and learners’ barriers.
4.4.1. Organizational barriers
Almost all of the participants in the interviews believed that organizational barriers are the main obstacles for application of critical pedagogy in the language classrooms. This theme is divided into some sub-themes of centralized education system, centralized testing system, prescribed teaching method, rigid teacher training programs, and education goals.
4.4.1.1 Centralized education system:
The majority of interviewees believed there is a Center in the country that produces all of the educational materials for all students without taking to account the different needs and interests of students. This Center, also, obliges all of the English language teachers to teach all of the produced materials, if they do not do so, they may be reprimanded. The following examples illustrate this theme. One participant stated:
“I must teach what I do not believe in, because I know my students better than someone else, I know my students᾽ needs and differences. There is not a significant place for my own innovation in produced materials by the Center. In fact we are slaves of textbooksˮ.
Another participant stated:
“There are some prescribed materials that must be taught by the teacher. You know that some of the students are weak and some are strong, and the same materials should be taught to all students in the same way. Guess what the results of such teaching would beˮ.
An experienced male teacher argued that:
“We are imposed what to teach by the Center, we are just transmitter of prescribed materials. What is the role of our intellects as a teacher? ˮ.
4.4.1.2 Centralized testing system:
Some of the participants argued that centralized testing system is another problem in appl ication of critical pedagogy in language classrooms. The Center decides what must be taught and what must not. Tests act as a kind of controlling instruments that, to some extent, harness the creativities of teachers. The following quotations from the participants are given to illustrate this theme.
One of participants argued:
“The education system in Iran is test-oriented; you must prepare students to be good at final tests. If students have not a good performance in final tests (do not pass the test), you may be reprimanded.‒well it is clear that we, teachers, have to teach for tests and lay emphasis on the main points which help students pass the test. Therefore, we do not pay attention to the learners᾽ level of proficiency and teach all the same thingsˮ.
Another participant stated:
“Although we are creative and able to use the best methods of teaching, if we do not prepare students for final tests, we are not viewed as good teachers. Therefore, you should improve students’ knowledge of testing rather than knowledge of subject mattersˮ.
The other participant argued that:
“Test designers are not aware of the process of teaching, they just taking into account the product. That is, they only measure the contents of the text books, so we have to follow the contents step by step so that students are prepared for final test, it is clear that we cannot change any part of textbookˮ.
4.4.1.3 Prescribed teaching methods:
Another indicated problem in application of critical pedagogy from teachers᾽ points of view was prescribed teaching methods. How to teach a textbook is usually dictated by education department either via a teacher manual or through some in-service training courses.
One of the participants said:
“We are told how to teach different parts of course book, and we have some periodical in-service education to remind us how to teach. Actually, we are not allowed to make a change in the way materials are presented to the learners. We cannot introduce some supplementary textbooks. Better or worse, one or more supplementary textbooks such as sample tests are dictated and we have to introduce them to the students, although there are some other better textbooks available in both electronic and hard copyˮ.
Another participant stated:
“There are supervisors from educational system who sometimes come and examine our way of teaching and if they do not become satisfied with our teaching, we will receive some negative points which influence our promotion and position for the following years. Because of this we just follow the table of the contents of the prescribed textbooks and teaching stratetegiesˮ. 4.4.1.4 Rigid teacher-training programs:
Another theme that emerged from interviewing participants was teacher training program. Some believed that these trainings do not take into account the needs of teachers. Teacher training programs are determined by some individuals that are not aware of real needs of teachers and they do not hear the teachers᾽ voices. The following examples illustrate this theme.
“A disappointing point on formal teacher education is that student teachers have been reduced or have reduced themselves to mere passive recipients of information. In this kind of teacher education there is no space for student teachers comments and needsˮ.
Another participant stated:
“The quality of teacher training programs is very low, and administrators of these programs ignore the real needs of teachers, and do not equip teachers with necessary skills to deal with critical issues in the classrooms. That is, we are rarely made aware of the consequences of ignoring critical pedagogy points of viewsˮ.
4.4.1.5 Educational goals:
The participants of the study believed that educational goals are determined by the educational organization and they are obliged to follow the educational objectives determined by authorities in the ministry of education. Therefore, teachers are limited and have no choice. The following examples illustrate this theme.
“I must, by hook or by crook, finish the course book. Quantity is more important than quality. If I do not finish the book, I will be reprimanded by parents, principal and educational system administratorsˮ.
Another participant stated:
“We are given a framework for teaching that its ends have been determined in advance and we have limited amount of time to achieve these ends. So, there is not enough time to deal with critical issues or act in other waysˮ.
4.4.2. Personal]]>

پاسخی بگذارید

نشانی ایمیل شما منتشر نخواهد شد. بخش‌های موردنیاز علامت‌گذاری شده‌اند *