TEACHERS’ ROLES IN MEETING QUALITY-EXPECTATIONS IN THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS

Dragiša Vučinić, Radovan Antonijević

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME181214054V
First page
723
Last page
744

Abstract


Changes in the educational process caused by different social changes require teachers to continue to reassess their role in the educational and teaching processes. According with that, literature increasingly discusses the essence of teachers’ roles, their methods in the teaching process, and as well as the degree of achievement of the professional role of teachers as one of the key factors in the quality education process. Different approaches of the authors, insisting on a clear differentiation of teacher’s roles, different criteria for differentiation, includes a large number of divisions and classifications of teachers’ roles in pedagogical literature. These often include a great number of teaching roles. In this paper, based on the analysis of the different categorisations of teachers’ roles and didactic theories, the emphasis is placed on the essence of the teaching role seen in the context of the processes and work of teachers in the educational process, whose quality is reflected in the degree of student achievement. In this regard, what is pointed out here is the significance of the teacher’s role in planning and preparing classes, motivating students, developing their interest in learning the content, as well as in the realization of quality communication and interaction between teachers and students.


Keywords

teacher's roles, teaching areas, planning, preparation and the realization of teaching, motivation and interest, communication and interaction

Full Text:

PDF (Cрпски)

References


Arnold, K., H. (2012). Didactics (didaktik models) and learning. U: N. M. Seel (ur.). Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning, 986-990. Heidelberg: Springer.

Aunola, K., Viljaranta, J., Lehtinen, E., & Nurmi, J.E. (2013). The role of maternal support of competence, autonomy and relatedness in children's interests and mastery orientation. Learning and Individual Differences 25, 171-177.

Bailey, G.D. & Dyck, N. (1990). The administrator and cooperative learning: Roles and responsibilities in instructional leadership. Clearing House, 64, (1), 39-43.

Brophy, J. (2004). Motivating Students to Learn. Second Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London

Газивода, П. (2001). Наставник у савременој школи [Teacher in contemporary school], Педагогија, 1, 19–27.

Гвозденовић, С. (2004). Наставник и ученик у образовном процесу [Teacher and student in the educational process], Васпитање и образовање, 1, 71–84.

Glasersfeld, von E. (1995). Radical Constructivism: A Way of Knowing and Learning. London: The Falmer Press.

Gudjons, H. (1992). Didaktičke teorije. Zagreb: Educa.

Дубљанин, С. (2011). Функција наставника и функција ученика – да ли је та подела одржива? [Function of the teacher and function of the student, is it that dividing sustainable?], Настава и васпитање, (60), 1, 58–64.

Ђорђевић, Ј. (2008). Личност и функције наставника у савременим друштвеним и економским променама [Personality and function of the teacher in contemporary social and economic changes], Педагошка стварност, 9-10, 842–853.

Zierer, K., Seel, N. (2012), General Didactics and Instructional Design: eyes like twins. A transatlantic dialogue about similarities and differences, about the past and the future of two sciences of learning and teaching. SpringerPlus, 1(15).

(http://www.springerplus.com/content: 31. 7. 2016)

Ивић, И., Пешикан, А. и Антић, С. (2001). Активно учење 2, Приручник за примену метода активног учења/наставе [Active learning 2, Handbook for using method of the active learning], Београд, 2001: Институт за психологију, Министарство просвете и спорта Републике Србије и Министарство за просвјету и науку Црне Горе.

Ing, M. (2013). Can parents influence children’s mathematics achievement and persistence in STEM careers? Journal of Career Development. Retrieved from http://jcd.sagepub.com/.

Joksimović, S. i Stojiljković, S. (2007). Students values and their understanding of educational goals. In: Terzis, N.P. (Ed.). Education and values in the Balkan countries, (7). 161-168. Thessaloniki: Balkan Society for Pedagogy and Education.

Лакета, Н. и Василијевић, Д. (2012). Образовање и усавршавање наставника [Education and improvement of the teacher], Ужице: Учитељски факултет.

Mann, R. D., Arnold, S. M., Binder, J. L., Cyntrynbaum, S., Newman, B. M., Ringwald, B. E., Ringwald, J.W & Rosenwein, R. (1970): The Collage Classrom – Conflict, Change and Learning, New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Marzano, R. J. & Marzano, J. S. (2003). The key to classroom management, Educational leadership, 1(61), 6-13.

Поткоњак, Н., (2010). Идентификација и утврђивање диференцираних таксономија улога наставника основа су њиховог оспособљавања за остваривање тих улога [Identification and establishment of differentiated taxonomies of teacher roles are the grounds for teacher training leading to realization of these roles], Годишњак Срске академије образовања, 119–124.

Razdevšek-Pučko, C. (2005). Kakvog učitelja/nastavnika treba (očekuje) škola danas (i sutra)? [What kind of teacher today's school expects ( and tomorrow)]?, Napredak, 1, 75–90.

Сузић, Н. (2005). Педагогија XXI века [Pedagogy of the 21st century], Бања Лука: ТТ-центар.

Schulz, W., (1989). Die lehrtheoretistische Didaktik. In: H. Gudjons/R. Teske/r.Winkel (Hg.) 1989,a. a. O., S Terhart, E,: Lehr-Lern-Methoden. Wienhiem.

Frenzel., А, Thomas, G., Reinhard, P. &H. Watt, (2010); Development of mathematics interest in adolescence: Influences of gender, family, and school context, Journal of Research on Adolescence. (20), 2, 507–537.

Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of 800+ meta-analyses on achievement. Oxford: Routledge.

Heaverlo, C. (2011) STEM Development: A study of 6th-12th grade girls interest and confidence in mathematics and science. http:/network. bepress. com/ hgg/discipline.

Хавелка, Н. (1998). Улога наставника и ученика у основној школи [Role of the teacher in the primary school], У: Наша основна школа будућности, Београд. Заједница учитељских факултета Србије, 99–163.

Хавелка, Н. (2000). Ученик и наставник у образовном процесу [Student and teacher in the educational process], Београд: Завод за уџбенике и наставна средства.

Hirvi, V. (1996). Change Education Teacher Training. In Tella. S. Teacher education in Finland, 11-19. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

Wernke, S., Werner, J. & Zierer, K. (2015), Heimann, Schulz oder Klafki? Eine quantitative Studie zur Einschätzung der Praktikabilität allgemeindidaktischer Planungsmodelle. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 61 (4), 427-449.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME181214054V

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Print ISSN: 0353-7919
Online ISSN: 1820-7804