A Critique on the Approach of Foreign Language Education Section in Iran National Curriculum

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Institute for Social and Cultural Studies

Abstract

This article examines the underlying approach of Iran National Curriculum to foreign language education. To this aim, it is necessary to refer to higher ranking writs such as ‘The Writ of Fundamental Development of Education’. The methodological approach of this article is ‘critical theory’, which seeks to reveal and criticize the ideological aspects of educational settings and practices. The data are mainly collected from the official documents about education, which have been obtained through library and data-base searching. The results of data analysis show that those parts of National Curriculum that are related to foreign language education have the advantage of taking into account the new theories of language education. However, at the same time it suffers from two crucial problems: 1) being affected by the ideological sphere of higher ranking writs, and 2) ignoring the normativity deficit inherent in the theories of language education which National Curriculum refers to. Therefore, the whole approach of National Curriculum to language education lacks the moral and normative aspects.

Keywords


 
Altusser; Louis. (1971). “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses”. Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. London: New Left Books.
Bernstein, Basil. (1977). “Class, Codes and Control”; Vol. 1. Theoretical Studies Towards a Sociology of Language. London: Taylor & Francis.
-----. (1996). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique. London: Taylor & Francis.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1986). “The Forms of Capital”. J. Richardson (ed.). Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press.
Bowles, Samuel & Herbert Gintis. (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America. New York: Basic Books.
Brookfield, Stephen D.; 2005; The Power of Critical Theory for Adult Learning and Teaching; New York: Open University Press.
Budd, John M. (2008). “Critical Theory”. In The Sage Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, edited by Liam M. Given, London: Sage Publication.
Freire, Paulo. (1985). The Politics of Education. London: McMillan.
-----. (1986). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum Publishing.
Godazgar, Hossein. (2001). “Islamic Ideology and its Formative Influence on Education in Contemporary Iran”. Economia, Sociedad Y Territorio. Vol. III, no. 10, 2001, p.p. 321- 336.
Gramsci; Antonio. (1971) Selections from Prison Notebooks. London: Lawrence & Wishart.
Habermas, Jürgen. (1973). Theory and Practice. Boston: Beacon Press.
Mauthner, N., & Doucet, A. (2003). “Reflexive accounts and accounts of reflexivity in qualitative data analysis”. Sociology, 37, 413–431.
Mehran, Golnar. (1990). “Ideology and Education in the Islamic Republic of Iran”. Compare: Vol. 20, Issue 1, 1990; p.p. 53- 65.
Ostovar Namaghi, Seyyed Ali. (2006). “Forces Steering Iranian Language Teachers’ work: A Grounded Theory”. The Reading Matrix: Vol. 6, No.2, September 2006.
----. (2010). “Parameters of Language Teaching in the Context of High Schools of Iran: A Data-first Approach”. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly: Vol. 12, Issue 2, June 2010, pp. 213-234.
-----. (2011). “Teaching as a Disciplined Act: A Grounded Theory”. Journal of Language Teaching and Research: Vol. 2, No.4, pp. 837-843, July 2011.
-----. (2012). “Constraints on Language Teacher Autonomy: A Grounded Theory”. TESL Reporter: Vol. 44, Issue 1., pp. 37ff.
Peivandi, Saeed. (2008). Discrimination and Intolerance in Iran’s Textbooks. Washington D.C: Freedom House Publications.
Mauthner, N., & Doucet, A. (2003). “Reflexive accounts and accounts of reflexivity in qualitative data analysis”. Sociology, 37, 413–431.