EDUCATIONAL WORK IN KINDERGARTEN AND SCHOOL – THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTINUITY IN THE CHOICE AND REALISATION OF TASKS
Keywords:
education, kindergarten, school, educator, teacher, continuityAbstract
Educational work in kindergarten and school includes complex actions of educators and teachers. The quality of their activities largely determines the development and achievements of each child (pupil). Education as the process involves the complementary activities of adults in the planning and implementation tasks, so that an educator prepares best children for school, and then a teacher continues meaningful educational work with them. In how far is this necessity really realized in the institutional system of preschool and school education? What are the starting points of educators and teachers for planning educational work with children? Those educational tasks are considered as priority? In seeking for answers to these questions, this paper presents the current pre-school educational programs work in Serbia. Subsequently, the results of research conducted among teachers and educators are presented. The aim was to determine the educational tasks they considered as a priority, how they decide on them and whether there is a connection in their implementation between preschool and school. The results confirmed that educators and teachers must cooperate more in the selection and implementation of these tasks, in order to achieve continuity in a single system. The final part provides recommendations to overcome this problem, with the possibility of actions of educators and teachers.
Downloads
References
[1] Avramović, Z., Aporije obrazovanja za demokratiju, Institut za pedagoška istraživanja, Beograd, str. 79–96, 2006.
[2] Zakon o osnovnoj školi, „Sl.glasnik RS“, br.50/92, 53/93, 67/93, 48/94, 66/94, 22/02
[3] Jovanović, B., „Ostvarivanje vaspitnih zadataka u osnovnoj školi“, Nastava i vaspitanje, Vol.41, Br. 1–2, str. 76–92, 1996. [4] Katalog programa stalnog stručnog usavršavanja nastavnika, vaspitača, stručnih saradnika i direktora za školsku 2010/2011. Beograd: Zavod za unapreñivanje obrazovanja i vaspitanja.
[5] Kopas-Vukašinović, E., „Osujećenje kreativnosti u likovnom izrazu prvaka”, Zbornik Instituta za pedagoška istraživanja, Vol. 37, Broj 2, str. 82–98, 2005.
[6] Kopas-Vukašinović, E., Predškolski programi u Srbiji, Pedagoški fakultet, Jagodina, 2010.
[7] Kopas-Vukašinović, E., „Uloga igre u razvoju dece predškolskog i mlañeg školskog uzrasta“, Zbornik Instituta za pedagoška istraživanja, Vol. 38, Broj 1, str. 174 – 189, 2006.
[8] Pravilnik o opštim osnovama predškolskog programa, „Prosvetni pregled”, 2006.
[9] Pravilnik o nastavnom planu i programu osnovnog obrazovanja i vaspitanja, „Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije – Prosvetni glasnik“, 1990.
[10] Pravilnik o izmenama Pravilnika o nastavnom planu i programu osnovnog obrazovanja i vaspitanja, „Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije – Prosvetni glasnik“, br. 2/2006.
[11] Pravilnik o izmenama i dopunama Pravilnika o nastavnom planu i programu osnovnog obrazovanja i vaspitanja, „Službeni glasnik Republike Srbije – Prosvetni glasnik“, br. 7/1991.
[12] Stojiljković, S., „Vaspitno-obrazovni ciljevi i autonomija ličnosti“, u: Joksimović, S. (prir.), Vaspitanje mladih za demokratiju, Institut za pedagoška istraživanja, Beograd, str. 112–128, 2005.
[13] Suzić, N., „Kako učenici vrednuju školu i kako uče“, u: Kadum,V. (ured.), Škola po mjeri, Meñunarodni znanstveni skup Deseti dani Mate Demarina, Sveučilište Jurja Dobrile u Puli, Odjel za obrazovanje učitelja i odgojitelja, Medulin, str. 221–236, 2009.
