Student Teachers' Competence in Curriculum Development: Comparison between the Czech Republic and China

Li LIU

Doctoral thesis

Abstract:

This dissertation is a comparative study related to the preparation of English teachers in lower secondary schools, which has accompanied by the current curriculum reform in the Czech Republic and in China to pose new demands on teachers. The aim of this study is threefold. First aim is to construct the theoretical framework to understand the concept of student teachers' competence in curriculum development that is the underlying construct for the study. To fulfil it, relevant literature has been reviewed and key concepts related to constructing the framework have been identified, defined and mutually linked to analyze its elements and structure. The second aim is related to the development of the research tool. Interviews with teacher educators were conducted in order to obtain rich information that could be used as one of parameters to construct questionnaire. Content analysis was used to interpret the data. The third is to explore what Czech and Chinese student teachers competence in curriculum development is like, and to identify the possible similarities or differences. The questionnaire survey was completed by 123 Czech student teachers and 401 Chinese student teachers. Descriptive statistics were first used to organize and summarize the collected data. Independent-samples t test was then used to examine the difference and relationship among questions. The results reveal that both Czech and Chinese first-year student teachers can take into account language teachers' different roles, specific needs of learning English, different resources, and contexts during uses of curriculum materials, however, they value teachers' roles and needs in a different order. With regard to the implementation of a lesson, Czech firs-year student teachers value the lesson planning, followed by the using lesson plans and content, the teaching methodology, the evaluation, and the classroom management, whilst, Chinese firs-year student teachers value the classroom management, followed by the teaching methodology, the evaluation, the using lesson plans and content, and the lesson planning. Regarding Czech and Chinese last-year student teachers they can take into account specific needs of learning English, different resources, language teachers' different roles, and contexts during uses of curriculum materials, however, they value resources and teacher's role in a different order. With regard to the implementation of a lesson, they are all confident in using lesson plans and content, the classroom management and the teaching methodology than in the lesson planning and the evaluation. The results show that the differences between Czech and Chinese student teachers, including first-year and last-year student teachers, their competence in curriculum development appear in general pedagogical knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, curriculum knowledge, knowledge of learners and their characteristics, and knowledge of educational contexts in according to the Shulman's (1987) major categories of teacher knowledge. In terms of student teachers' understanding of curriculum, results show that firs-year and last-year Czech and Chinese student teachers value multiple orientations toward the curriculum rather than "adhere to one orientation". However, the differences of their comprehension of curriculum are reflected on five orientations. The research findings have shed light on our understanding of the present preparation of student teachers' competence in curriculum development, which could be seen as necessary to a teacher's expertise and professionalism in light of the current educational realities within the Czech and Chinese contexts, and should not be postponed or left as the student teacher' own concern after graduation. Therefore, it gives an indication of the impact of teacher education. In addition, limitations of this study and suggestions for future research are outlined.

Language used: Czech

Date on which the thesis was submitted / produced: 16. 7. 2014

Accessible from:: 16. 7. 2014

Thesis defence

PALACKÝ UNIVERSITY IN OLOMOUC

Faculty of Education

Doctoral programme / field:
Education / Education