On an evidence-less curricular reform

Vol.23,No.5(2013)

Abstract
The topic of the study consists in the analysis of the „story“ of the Czech curricular reform based on the comparison of its concepts and logic with the results of educational and psychological research in teaching and learning. The first part attempts to prove that the failure of the reform mostly rejected by teachers doesn’t consist in the lack of communication with them. The following part reveals the old tension between thinking/student oriented vs. subject oriented teaching behind current reform clichés. As the core and the symbol of the curricular reform, the notion of competence is critically analyzed: it is a bad answer, because it is not research evidence-based, to a good question. The last part deals with three issues from psychological research the results of which the reform largely ignored: (1) predominant focus on problem solving ignoring the results of research on the relationship between working memory and long-term memory and in the cognitiveload theory, (2) stress on the transversal competences as the goal of teaching ignoring the narrow and strong link of the thinking skills with the specific object of thinking and its epistemological constraints, and (3) challenging the belief the (far) transfer could play the role of the criterion of the learning eff ectiveness. Thus, the curricular reform was more ideology-driven than evidence-based.

Keywords:
curriculum; educational reform; competence; learning; transfer
References

Gardner, D. P. et al. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: National Commission on Excellence in Education.

Baillargeon, N. (2006). La réforme québécoise de l’éducation: une faillite philosophique. Possibles, 30(1), 139–184.

Bílá kniha Růst, konkurenceschopnost a zaměstnanost – výzvy a cesty vpřed do 21. století. (1994). Praha: Ústav mezinárodních vztahů.

Bosman, C., Gérard, F., & Roegiers, X. (2000). Quel avenir pour les compétences? Bruxelles: De Boeck Université.

Boutin, G., & Julien, L. (2000). L’obsession des compétences. Son impact sur l’école et la formativ des enseignants. Montréal: Editions Nouvelles.

Crahay, M. (2006). Dangers, incertitudes et incomplétude de la logique de la compétence en éducation. Revue française de pédagogie, 154(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.4000/rfp.143

Deer, C. (2006). Le Curriculum national en Angleterre: entre logique politico-idéologique et didactico-pédagogique. In F. Audigier, M. Crahay, & J. Dolz (Eds.), Curriculum, enseignement et pilotage (s. 85–98). Bruxelles: De Boeck.

de Jong, T. (2010). Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: Some food for thought. Instructional Science, 38(2), 105–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9110-0

European Commission (1995). White paper on education and training. Teaching and learning – Towards the learning society. Luxembourg: Office for official publications of the European communities.

European Round Table (1989). Education and European competence in Europe. Brussels: ERT.

Fayol, M. (1991). From sentence production to text production. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 6(2), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03191929

Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39(2), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.2.93

Goodson, I. F. (2008). Curriculum reform and curriculum theory: A case of historical amnesia. In N. Norris (Ed.), Curriculum and the teacher. 35 years of the Cambridge Journal of Education (s. 131–141). London: Routledge.

Harlé, I. (2010). La fabrique des savoirs scolaires. Paris: La Dispute.

Hirtt, N. (2009). L’approche par compétences: une mystification pédagogique. L’école démocratique, 39(septembre). Dostupné z http://www.skolo.org/spip.php?article1099&lang=fr.

Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121–152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2

Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (Eds.). (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kaščák, O., & Pupala, B. (2011). PISA v kritickej perspektíve. Orbis Scholae, 5(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2018.74

Kaščák, O., & Pupala, B. (2012). Škola zlatých golierov. Vzdelávanie v ére neoliberalismu. Praha: SLON.

Lannoye, C. et al. (1999). L’école vit… au rythme de ses tensions. Bruxelles: De Boeck Education.

Martinand, J.-L. (2003). La question de la référence en didactique du curriculum. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 8(2), 125–130.

Minsky, M. (1974). A framework for representing knowledge. Dostupné z http://web.media.mit.edu/~minsky/papers/Frames/frames.html

MŠMT (2008). Školská reforma pokračuje. Vzdělávání v r. 2008 v tématech. Praha: Ústav pro informace ve vzdělávání.

OECD (2001). Quel avenir pour nos écoles? Paris: OECD Publishing.

Parlement européen (2006). Les compétences clés pour l’éducation et la formation tout au long de la vie. Luxembourg: Office des publications officielles des Communautés européennes.

Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Eff ect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 16–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.1.16

Rendl, M., & Štech, S. (2012). Should learning (mathematics) at school aim at knowledge or at competences? Orbis Scholae, 6(2), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2015.38

Resnick, L. B., & Ford, W. W. (1981). The psychology of mathematics for instruction. Hillsdale: LEA.

Rey, B. (1996). Les compétences transversales en question. Paris: ES.

Rey, O. (2008). From the transmission of knowledge to a competence-based approach. Dossier d’Actualité, 34(april). Dostupné z http://www.academia.edu/706747/From_the_transmission_of_knowledge_to_a_competence-based_approach

Rey, O. (2010). Contenus et programmes scolaires: comment lire les réformes curriculaires? Dossier d’Actualité, 53(avril). Dostupné z http://www.inrp.fr/vst/LettreVST/53-avril-2010.php.

Rey, B., Carette, V., & Kahn, S. (2002). Lignes directrices pour la construction d’outils d’évaluation relatifs aux socles de compétences. Rapport auprès de la Commission des outils d’évaluation. Bruxelles: Commission de pilotage.

Rychen D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (Eds.). (2001). Defining and selecting key competencies. Göttingen: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.

Schneider-Gilot, M. (2006). Quand le courant pédagogique „des „compétences“ empêche une structuration des enseignements autour de l’étude et de la classification de questions parentes. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 154(janvier-février-mars), 85–96. Dostupné z http://rfp.revues.org/136 https://doi.org/10.4000/rfp.136

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). All’s well that ends well, but it’s a sad tale that begins at the end: A reply to Glaser. American Psychologist, 40(5), 571–573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.40.5.571.b

Straková, J. (2010). Postoje českých učitelů k hlavním prioritám vzdělávací politiky. In R. Váňová & H. Krykorková (Eds.), Učitel v současné škole (s. 167–175). Praha: FF UK.

Straková, J. (2013). Jak dál s kurikulární reformou. Pedagogická orientace, 23(5), 735–744. https://doi.org/10.5817/PedOr2013-5-734

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Eff ects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5

Sweller, J. (2005). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (s. 159–167). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sweller , J., Mawer, R. F., & Ward, M. R. (1983). Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112(4), 639–661. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.112.4.639

Štech, S. (2009). Zřetel k učivu a problém dvou modelů kurikula. Pedagogika, 59(2), 105–115.

Tardif, J. (1999). Le transfert des apprentissages. Montréal: Éd. Logiques.

Thorndike, E. L. (1922). The psychology of arithmetic. New York: The MacMillan Company.

Tilmant, F. (2005). Les compétences: concepts et enjeux. Cahiers des Sciences de l’Education, 21–22, Service de pédagogie expérimentale, ULg.

Young, M. (2007). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. London: Routledge.

Young, M. (2010). Alternative educational futures for a knowledge society. European Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2010.9.1.1

Metrics

0


2041

Views

1571

PDF (Čeština) views