是时候结束南非十年来对大英帝国勋章的困惑了

W. Spady
{"title":"是时候结束南非十年来对大英帝国勋章的困惑了","authors":"W. Spady","doi":"10.4102/SATNT.V27I1.79","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The fundamental elements of what is known today as Outcome-Based Education are clearly embodied in numerous familiar models of learning, assessment, and credentialing in the non-education world that, in some cases, are many centuries old. In virtually all of these models, successful outcome performance is the clear/fixed/pre-determined/known/constant factor in the equation, and time is the flexible/variable/adaptable factor. In formal education, however, exactly the opposite pattern exists: time is the clear/fixed/pre-determined/known/ constant factor, and learning successes the flexible/variable/adaptable factor. This makes “authentic” OBE implementation extremely difficult for modern education systems to implement because they are fundamentally Time-Based – defined, organized, and driven by the calendar, schedule, and clock – not Outcome-Based as some profess. South Africa is no exception to this rule – which made its enthusiastic embracing of OBE in 1997 problematic from the start. In explaining the core fundamentals of the OBE concept and how those fundamentals evolved(particularly in North America) prior to 1997, this paper makes clear that South Africa’s Curriculum2005 initiative missed the OBE mark on almost every essential count: 1) not having a clear, compelling, and operational framework of “Exit Outcomes” on which to ground the reform and the curricular changes which drove it; 2) making no reference, either in theory or practice, to OBE’s Four Operating Principles – which enable modern day educators to get as close to “real “implementation as the Time-Based paradigm of education allows; 3) missing the mark significantly on understanding and implementing what Outcomes are – culminating demonstrations of learning– the multiple forms they take, and the multiple ways in which they can be designed and assessed;4) bogging down in micro content, assessments, marking, and record-keeping – which advanced BE implementers warn strongly against; 5) lacking the future-focused grounding of OBE designs that are legitimately called “transformational;” and 6) falling into the familiar pattern of calling its “CBO” thinking and practices “OBE.”The latter relates to an almost universal constellation of practices that make educational systems virtually unchangeable from an OBE perspective: Curriculum Based Outcomes, Content Bound Objectives, Calendar Based Opportunities, Cellular Based Organization, Contest Biased Orientations, Convenience Based Operations, and Convention Bound Obsolescence. Unfortunately, Curriculum 2005 and its key advocates appeared to take these seven CBO’s as givens, which made their continuous reference to OBE incongruous at best. Consequently, the paper argues that, had South Africa’s key educational policy makers in1997, and since, taken the time to understand the six key points above, they would have been able to make a more constructive choice about the educational reforms they sought to bring about. First, recognizing these major disparities between their Curriculum 2005 strategies and the fundamentals of genuine OBE, they could have chosen to bring C2005 more strongly into alignment with OBE and modified their initial course of action considerably. Or, recognizing these major disparities, they could have chosen to drop the OBE label altogether and thereby reduced or avoided a lot of the confusion generated by implying that Curriculum 2005 required significant changes in familiar practice. For example, by maintaining the very “non-OBE” Matric and annual examination systems that had always been in place, the government kept everyone locked into traditional/conventional modes of thinking about learning, curriculum, achievement, assessment, and qualifications. Conclusion: South Africa should stop referring to OBE in any form. OBE never existed in1997, and has only faded farther from the scene as C2005 was replaced by the Revised National Curriculum Statement. The real challenge facing educators is how to implement educational practices that are sound and make significant differences in the lives of ALL South African learners.","PeriodicalId":30428,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Science and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It’s Time to End the Decade of Confusion about OBE in South Africa\",\"authors\":\"W. Spady\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/SATNT.V27I1.79\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The fundamental elements of what is known today as Outcome-Based Education are clearly embodied in numerous familiar models of learning, assessment, and credentialing in the non-education world that, in some cases, are many centuries old. In virtually all of these models, successful outcome performance is the clear/fixed/pre-determined/known/constant factor in the equation, and time is the flexible/variable/adaptable factor. In formal education, however, exactly the opposite pattern exists: time is the clear/fixed/pre-determined/known/ constant factor, and learning successes the flexible/variable/adaptable factor. This makes “authentic” OBE implementation extremely difficult for modern education systems to implement because they are fundamentally Time-Based – defined, organized, and driven by the calendar, schedule, and clock – not Outcome-Based as some profess. South Africa is no exception to this rule – which made its enthusiastic embracing of OBE in 1997 problematic from the start. In explaining the core fundamentals of the OBE concept and how those fundamentals evolved(particularly in North America) prior to 1997, this paper makes clear that South Africa’s Curriculum2005 initiative missed the OBE mark on almost every essential count: 1) not having a clear, compelling, and operational framework of “Exit Outcomes” on which to ground the reform and the curricular changes which drove it; 2) making no reference, either in theory or practice, to OBE’s Four Operating Principles – which enable modern day educators to get as close to “real “implementation as the Time-Based paradigm of education allows; 3) missing the mark significantly on understanding and implementing what Outcomes are – culminating demonstrations of learning– the multiple forms they take, and the multiple ways in which they can be designed and assessed;4) bogging down in micro content, assessments, marking, and record-keeping – which advanced BE implementers warn strongly against; 5) lacking the future-focused grounding of OBE designs that are legitimately called “transformational;” and 6) falling into the familiar pattern of calling its “CBO” thinking and practices “OBE.”The latter relates to an almost universal constellation of practices that make educational systems virtually unchangeable from an OBE perspective: Curriculum Based Outcomes, Content Bound Objectives, Calendar Based Opportunities, Cellular Based Organization, Contest Biased Orientations, Convenience Based Operations, and Convention Bound Obsolescence. Unfortunately, Curriculum 2005 and its key advocates appeared to take these seven CBO’s as givens, which made their continuous reference to OBE incongruous at best. Consequently, the paper argues that, had South Africa’s key educational policy makers in1997, and since, taken the time to understand the six key points above, they would have been able to make a more constructive choice about the educational reforms they sought to bring about. First, recognizing these major disparities between their Curriculum 2005 strategies and the fundamentals of genuine OBE, they could have chosen to bring C2005 more strongly into alignment with OBE and modified their initial course of action considerably. Or, recognizing these major disparities, they could have chosen to drop the OBE label altogether and thereby reduced or avoided a lot of the confusion generated by implying that Curriculum 2005 required significant changes in familiar practice. For example, by maintaining the very “non-OBE” Matric and annual examination systems that had always been in place, the government kept everyone locked into traditional/conventional modes of thinking about learning, curriculum, achievement, assessment, and qualifications. Conclusion: South Africa should stop referring to OBE in any form. OBE never existed in1997, and has only faded farther from the scene as C2005 was replaced by the Revised National Curriculum Statement. The real challenge facing educators is how to implement educational practices that are sound and make significant differences in the lives of ALL South African learners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Science and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/SATNT.V27I1.79\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/SATNT.V27I1.79","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

今天所谓的“结果导向教育”的基本要素,在非教育领域的许多熟悉的学习、评估和认证模式中得到了明确体现,在某些情况下,这些模式已经有好几个世纪的历史了。在几乎所有这些模型中,成功的结果表现是等式中明确的/固定的/预先确定的/已知的/恒定的因素,时间是灵活的/可变的/可适应的因素。然而,在正规教育中,存在着完全相反的模式:时间是明确的/固定的/预先决定的/已知的/恒定的因素,学习成功是灵活的/可变的/可适应的因素。这使得“真正的”OBE实现对于现代教育系统来说极其困难,因为它们基本上是基于时间的——由日历、时间表和时钟定义、组织和驱动——而不是像某些专业那样基于结果。南非也不例外,这使得它在1997年热情接受大英帝国勋章从一开始就存在问题。在解释了OBE概念的核心基本原理以及这些基本原理在1997年之前是如何演变的(特别是在北美),本文明确指出,南非的2005年课程计划几乎在每一个重要方面都没有达到OBE的标准:1)没有一个明确的、引人注目的、可操作的“退出结果”框架,在这个框架上,改革和推动改革的课程变化奠定了基础;2)无论在理论上还是在实践中,都没有参考大英帝国的四项操作原则——这四项原则使现代教育工作者能够尽可能接近“真实”地实施基于时间的教育范式;3)在理解和实施什么是成果(学习的最终演示)、成果的多种形式以及设计和评估的多种方式上严重失分;4)在微观内容、评估、评分和记录保存方面陷入困境——这是高级be实施者强烈反对的;5)缺乏面向未来的OBE设计基础,这种基础被合理地称为“转型”;6)陷入了将其“CBO”思维和实践称为“OBE”的熟悉模式。从OBE的角度来看,后者涉及几乎普遍的一系列实践,这些实践使教育系统几乎不可改变:基于课程的结果、内容绑定的目标、基于日历的机会、基于细胞的组织、竞赛偏向性、基于便利的操作和基于惯例的过时。不幸的是,2005年课程及其主要倡导者似乎把这七个CBO视为既定的,这使得他们不断提到的OBE充其量是不协调的。因此,本文认为,如果南非的主要教育政策制定者在1997年和此后花时间了解上述六个要点,他们就能够对他们试图实现的教育改革做出更具建设性的选择。首先,认识到他们的2005年课程策略与真正的OBE基本原则之间的这些主要差异,他们本可以选择将2005年课程与OBE更加紧密地结合起来,并大大修改他们最初的行动方针。或者,认识到这些主要的差异,他们可以选择完全放弃OBE标签,从而减少或避免由于暗示课程2005需要在熟悉的实践中进行重大更改而产生的许多混乱。例如,通过维持一直存在的“非出窍”的矩阵和年度考试制度,政府将每个人都锁定在传统/传统的学习、课程、成就、评估和资格的思维模式中。结论:南非应该停止以任何形式提及OBE。OBE在1997年根本不存在,而且随着2005年《国家课程声明修订版》的出台,OBE也逐渐淡出了人们的视线。教育工作者面临的真正挑战是如何实施合理的教育实践,并在所有南非学习者的生活中产生重大影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
It’s Time to End the Decade of Confusion about OBE in South Africa
The fundamental elements of what is known today as Outcome-Based Education are clearly embodied in numerous familiar models of learning, assessment, and credentialing in the non-education world that, in some cases, are many centuries old. In virtually all of these models, successful outcome performance is the clear/fixed/pre-determined/known/constant factor in the equation, and time is the flexible/variable/adaptable factor. In formal education, however, exactly the opposite pattern exists: time is the clear/fixed/pre-determined/known/ constant factor, and learning successes the flexible/variable/adaptable factor. This makes “authentic” OBE implementation extremely difficult for modern education systems to implement because they are fundamentally Time-Based – defined, organized, and driven by the calendar, schedule, and clock – not Outcome-Based as some profess. South Africa is no exception to this rule – which made its enthusiastic embracing of OBE in 1997 problematic from the start. In explaining the core fundamentals of the OBE concept and how those fundamentals evolved(particularly in North America) prior to 1997, this paper makes clear that South Africa’s Curriculum2005 initiative missed the OBE mark on almost every essential count: 1) not having a clear, compelling, and operational framework of “Exit Outcomes” on which to ground the reform and the curricular changes which drove it; 2) making no reference, either in theory or practice, to OBE’s Four Operating Principles – which enable modern day educators to get as close to “real “implementation as the Time-Based paradigm of education allows; 3) missing the mark significantly on understanding and implementing what Outcomes are – culminating demonstrations of learning– the multiple forms they take, and the multiple ways in which they can be designed and assessed;4) bogging down in micro content, assessments, marking, and record-keeping – which advanced BE implementers warn strongly against; 5) lacking the future-focused grounding of OBE designs that are legitimately called “transformational;” and 6) falling into the familiar pattern of calling its “CBO” thinking and practices “OBE.”The latter relates to an almost universal constellation of practices that make educational systems virtually unchangeable from an OBE perspective: Curriculum Based Outcomes, Content Bound Objectives, Calendar Based Opportunities, Cellular Based Organization, Contest Biased Orientations, Convenience Based Operations, and Convention Bound Obsolescence. Unfortunately, Curriculum 2005 and its key advocates appeared to take these seven CBO’s as givens, which made their continuous reference to OBE incongruous at best. Consequently, the paper argues that, had South Africa’s key educational policy makers in1997, and since, taken the time to understand the six key points above, they would have been able to make a more constructive choice about the educational reforms they sought to bring about. First, recognizing these major disparities between their Curriculum 2005 strategies and the fundamentals of genuine OBE, they could have chosen to bring C2005 more strongly into alignment with OBE and modified their initial course of action considerably. Or, recognizing these major disparities, they could have chosen to drop the OBE label altogether and thereby reduced or avoided a lot of the confusion generated by implying that Curriculum 2005 required significant changes in familiar practice. For example, by maintaining the very “non-OBE” Matric and annual examination systems that had always been in place, the government kept everyone locked into traditional/conventional modes of thinking about learning, curriculum, achievement, assessment, and qualifications. Conclusion: South Africa should stop referring to OBE in any form. OBE never existed in1997, and has only faded farther from the scene as C2005 was replaced by the Revised National Curriculum Statement. The real challenge facing educators is how to implement educational practices that are sound and make significant differences in the lives of ALL South African learners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Ondersoek na energiekoste van die inkorporering van ’n latentehitte-termiese-energieopbergstelsel in ’n Suid-Afrikaanse koelkamer Zircon as feedstock for zirconium chemicals, ceramics, the metal and alloys: A review Gesondheidsevaluasie van stedelike eike ( Quercus robur L.) met behulp van fisiologiese parameters: ’n Suid-Afrikaanse gevallestudie Investigation of energy costs for incorporating a latent heat thermal energy storage system into a South African cold room Structural equations model to analyse the critical variables related to smart card technology adoption in South African public healthcare
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1