方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 课程分析× | 教育行动研究× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 田野方法 | 田野方法 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1949 (Tyler); 1980s–2000s (Posner's analytic framework) | 1940s (Lewin); educational context developed 1970s–1980s |
| 提出者≠ | George J. Posner (systematic framework); Ralph Tyler (foundational rationale) | Kurt Lewin (action research foundations); Lawrence Stenhouse and John Elliott (educational adaptation) |
| 类型≠ | Qualitative / mixed document analysis | Participatory qualitative research design |
| 开创性文献≠ | Posner, G. J. (2004). Analyzing the Curriculum (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 978-0072823899 | Elliott, J. (1991). Action Research for Educational Change. Open University Press. ISBN: 978-0335096190 |
| 别名 | curriculum evaluation, curriculum review, syllabus analysis, curriculum appraisal | EAR, practitioner research, teacher action research, classroom action research |
| 相关 | 6 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | Curriculum analysis is a systematic research method for examining the content, structure, goals, and underlying assumptions of educational curricula — including written syllabi, textbooks, lesson plans, and policy documents. By mapping what is taught, how it is sequenced, and what values are embedded, researchers and educators can evaluate alignment with learning objectives, identify gaps or biases, and guide curriculum reform across all levels of education. | Educational action research is a cyclical, practitioner-led inquiry method in which educators systematically investigate a problem or opportunity in their own classroom or school, implement a change, observe its effects, and reflect on findings to guide the next cycle. Rooted in Kurt Lewin's action research framework and developed for educational contexts by Lawrence Stenhouse and John Elliott, it bridges the gap between educational theory and classroom practice by making teachers agents of rigorous inquiry. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|