1st International Symposium On Unlimited Education And Research (AI)
Yayıncı:
Sınırsız Eğitim ve Araştırma Derneği Yayınları
Disiplin:
Contemporary Theatre,Regional Theatre and Performance
Konu:
Contemporary Theatre,Regional Theatre and Performance
Summary in this study, the 2017 draft social information teaching program is aimed at mutual examination with the 2004 and 2015 social information teaching programmes.The research was used on the basis of the "document review" based on the qualitative imaging research approach.As a data source in the research, the 2004, 2015 social information curriculum and 2017 social information draft curriculum have been used.These programs discussed have been mutually evaluated in terms of content, achievements, the basic philosophy of the program, basic skills, values, measurement and evaluation approaches.According to the findings obtained in the study, when the objectives and approaches of social information included in the 2017 draft programme are assessed, the objectives are the same as the 2004 programme.However, the approach to social information can be considered to remain at the "social information as social sciences" level.The number of learning fields included in the 2017 draft programme has been reduced or re-expressed by changing names.The fields of learning are prepared in the focus of disciplines such as history, geography, and the achievements are not given by interdisciplinary approach and are limited to the relevant discipline.However, it appears that some of the skills included in the 2017 draft programme are updated in accordance with the current needs, while some are included in the basic skills of the subcompetences included in the previous programs and the number is reduced.It causes the idea that it does not bring too much innovation into this direction.Although the number of values included in the 2017 draft programme has increased, the changing current conditions have been rewrite, it has not been specified which approaches will be used in the value training.In terms of measurement and evaluation, the use of classical and alternative methods in the 2017 draft programme has been emphasized, and it has not been stated which aspects are distinct from other programs.When assessed with all aspects, it can be said that the 2017 draft programme has not brought much innovation compared to the previous programs.