Abstract
The aim of the study is to characterize the concept of curriculum and to present selected research findings which may be useful when updating the physics curriculum of upper secondary school. The concept of curriculum may be understood in different ways. It may be seen as the contents of education, an educational plan and, most generally, as contents of all the experience pupils obtain at school and in activities connected to school. The meanings and the complexity of this concept are represented by its dimensions — dimension of aims, content, organization and methodical dimension. The curriculum exists in various forms — conceptual, project, implementation, resulting and effective. The aim of the review part was to search for studies in databases of SCOPUS and Web of Science which describe changes of physics (respectively science) curriculum and to identify methods which are used when creating new curricula. The result of the review was, among others, the finding that the number of such studies is very limited in international environment. Another identified problem is, for example, the low level of pupils’ mathematical knowledge which limits their education in physics. The investigated studies point out that the core of curriculum reforms lies only in minute changes of the existing curriculum. All these findings and some others may be used in prospective changes of physics curriculum.References
Carlone, H. B. (2003). Innovative science within and against a culture of “achievement”. Science Education, 87(3), 307–328.
Cheung, D. & Ng, P.-H. (2000). Science teachers’ beliefs about curriculum design. Research in Science Education, 30(4), 357–375.
Fenclová, J. (1984). Didaktické myšlení a jednání učitele fyziky: Cvičení z didaktiky fyziky. Praha: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství.
Grayson, D. J. (2006). Rethinking the content of physics courses. Physics Today, 59(2), 31–36.
Hejnová, E. (2011). Integrovaná výuka přírodovědných předmětů na základních školách v českých zemích – minulost a současnost. Scientia in educatione, 2(2), 77–90.
Henderson, J.G. (1996). Reflective teaching. Englewood Cliffs: Merrill.
Hestenes, D. (2003). Oersted medal lecture 2002: Reforming the mathematical language of physics. American Journal of Physics, 71(2), 104–121.
Hrabal, V. & Pavelková, I. (2010). Jaký jsem učitel? Praha: Portál.
Janík, T. (2009). Obsah vzdělávání. In J. Průcha (Ed.), Pedagogická encyklopedie (138–142). Praha: Portál.
Maňák, J. & Janík, T. (2009). Kurikulum. In J. Průcha (Ed.), Pedagogická encyklopedie (117–121). Praha: Portál.
Mullis, I.V. S. & Martin, M.O. (Eds.). (2013). TIMSS 2015 Assessment frameworks. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
Ornstein, A.C. & Levine, D.U. (1989). Foundations of education. Boston: Hougton Mifflin Co.
Průcha, J. (2017). Moderní pedagogika. Praha: Portál.
Průcha, J., Walterová, E. & Mareš, J. (2013). Pedagogický slovník. Praha: Portál.
Riess, F. (2000). Problems with German science education. Science and Education, 9(4), 327–331.
Roth, L. (Ed.). (1991). Pädagogik – Handbuch für Studium und Praxis. München: Ehrenwirth.
RVP ZV. Rámcový vzdělávací program pro základní vzdělávání. (2017). Praha: MŠMT. Dostupné z http://www.nuv.cz/uploads/RVP ZV 2017 cerven.pdf
Sheppard, K. & Robbins, D.M. (2003). Physics was once first and was once for all. Physics Teacher, 41(7), 420–424.
Schneider, R.M., Krajcik, J. & Marx, R. (2000). The role of educative curriculum materials in reforming science education. In B. Fishman & S. O’Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth international conference of the learning sciences (54–61). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schulz, R.M. (2009). Reforming science education: Part I. The search for a philosophy of science education. Science and Education, 18(3–4), 225–249.
Žák, V. (2015). Disertační práce z didaktiky fyziky obhájené v České republice v letech 2004 až 2013 – přehled a analýza. Scientia in educatione, 6(2), 35–50.
Žák, V. (2016). Metody sběru dat využívané didaktikou fyziky v mezinárodním prostředí. Scientia in educatione, 7(2), 18–33.