A comparative study of Educational Technology Graduate Programs in Some selected countries and Iran

Document Type : Original Article



The purpose of this paper is a comparative study of educational technology curriculum in selected countries with Iran. Therefore, using descriptive - comparative world's 12 leading universities from nine countries were selected and graduate curriculum with course curriculum in Iran three areas of the curriculum, syllabus, and procedures and policies were analyzed. The results showed that in the three areas between developed countries and between developed countries and Iran, there are differences and similarities. Also, some of the innovations in this field were identified. Among the most important innovations, curriculum goals of diversity, multiplicity, and elective courses, students have exams and the curriculum was revised in committee. Based on studies performed proposals for Iran, especially in the area of curriculum objectives, curriculum and administrative procedures were presented. the world's leading universities were identified based on their recommendations for Iran curriculum, especially in the area of goals, curriculum and administrative procedures were presented. 


-     رضایی باقر، سارا، هاشمی مقدم، سید شمس‌الدین و اکبری بورنگ، محمد (1388). بررسی برنامه درسی دوره‌های کارشناسی و کارشناسی ارشد رشته فنّاوری آموزشی از نظر اعضای هیئت علمی و دانشجویان، مجله‌نامه آموزش عالی، شماره 8، سال دوم: 69-83.
-     فردانش، هاشم (1390). مبانی نظری فنّاوری آموزشی، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
-     فردانش، هاشم (1391). ارزیابی کیفیت برنامه درسی رشته فنّاوری آموزشی، فصلنامه مطالعات اندازه‌گیری و ارزشیابی آموزشی، شماره 1، سال اول: 9-31.
-     Aesaret, K., Vanderlinde, R., Tondeur, J., Braak, J. V. (2013). The content of educational technology curricula: a cross-curricular state of the art, Education Tech Research Dev, (61):131–151.
-     Azimi, S., & Fazelian, P. (2013). New Trends and Approaches in Instructional Design and Technology, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (82): 525 – 528.
-     Boonyeun, P. (2008). Development of curriculum standards for Masters and Doctoral degree programs in educational technology in Thailand, Educational Journal of Thailand, 1 (1): 59- 68.
-     Cox, G. (2010). Sustaining innovations in educational technology: Views of innovators at the University of Cape Town, Proceedings ascilite Sydney,:240-243.
-     Fazelian, P. (2011). Future of Instructional Technology, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (30): 2052 – 2056.
-     Garcia, J. H., & Kim, E. (2008). Comparative analysis of higher education of technology in China, Indian, and Mexico as a factor for economic development 2000-2005, Latin American and Caribbean Conference for Engineering and Technology, Tampico Mexico.
-     Gudanescu, N. (2010). Using modern technology for improving learning process at different educational levels, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, (2): 5641– 5645.
-     Hamidi, F., Ghorbandordinejad, F., Rezaee, M., & Jafari, M. (2011). A Comparison of the Use of Educational Technology in the Developed/Developing Countries, Procedia Computer Science, (3): 374–377.
-     Hewitt, T. W. (2006). Understanding and shaping curriculum: What we teach and why. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
-     McDonald, J., & Gibbons, A. S. (2009). Technology I, II, and III: criteria for understanding and improving the practice of instructional technology, Education Tech Research Dev, (57): 377-392.
-     Perkmen, S., & Sahin, S. (2013). Who should study instructional technology? Vocational personality approach, British Journal of Educational Technology, 44, (1): 54-65.
-     Raja Hussain, R. M. (2007). E-learning in Higher Education Institutions in Malaysia, Department of Curriculum and Instructional Technology.
-     Rasinen, A. (2003). An analysis of the Technology Education Curriculum of six countries, Journal of Technology Education, 1, (15): 31- 47.
-     Reiser, R. A. (2007) A history of instructional design, Educational Technology Research and Development, 49 (2) 57-67.
-     Souza, K. H., Kamin, C., Sullivan, P. O., Moses, A. M., & Heestand, D. (2008). Organizational models of educational technology in U. S. and Canadian medical schools, Academic Medican, 83 (7): 691-699.
-     Van Den Akker, J., Wang, Q., & Nieveen, N. (2008). Designing a computer support system for multimedia curriculum development in Shanghai, Education Tech Research Dev, (55): 275-295.
-     Vanderlinde, R., Braak, J. V., & Hermans, R. (2009). Educational technology on a turning point: curriculum implementation in Flanders and challenges for schools, Education Tech Research Dev, (57):573–58.
-     Vanderlinde, R., van Braak, J., De Windt, V., Tondeur, J., Hermans, R., & Sinnaeve, I. (2008). Technology curriculum and planning for technology in schools: The Flemish case. TechTrends, 52 (2): 23–26.
-     Vicoria-Torii, C. & Carmen, A. (2013). The Impact of Educational Technology on the Learning Styles of Students, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, (83): 851 – 855.
-     Voogt, J., & Pelgrum, H. (2006). ICT and curriculum change. Human Technology, (1): 157–175.
-     Yelland, N. (2006). Changing worlds and new curricula in the knowledge era. Educational Media International, (43): 121–131.
-     Yongqian, L., Dongyuan, C., & Xinli, L. (2010). The mechanism for organizing and educational technology in China, British Journal of Educational Technology, 41 (4): 549- 55.
-     Ziguras, C. (2003). Educational technology in transnational higher education in South East Asia: the cultural politics of flexible learning, Educational Technology & Society, 4 (4): 8- 18.