초복잡성 사회의 대학 이념과 교육과정 = Towards a University Curriculum for a Supercomplex Society

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this paper is to explore a university curriculum which is suitable for a supercomplex society. To this end, we critically examine the limits of a knowledge-oriented curriculum and a market-led curriculum which are dominant in a current university curriculum, explore characteristics of a university curriculum in a supercomplex era, and consider a competence-based curriculum as a candidate for a supercomplex society. A knowledge-oriented curriculum as a dominant idea of a university curriculum is based on a liberal education idea. It is purpose of a liberating human mind through the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. But it is inclined to overlook needs of actual life. In contrast, a market-led curriculum addresses that education should solve real-life problems through the pursuit of economical efficiency. However, it tends to disregard the intrinsic value to education. A knowledge-oriented curriculum and a market-led curriculum have a common limit in that they are not appropriate for a supercomplex society. A supercomplex society has four features: uncertainty, unpredictability, contestability, and challengeability. A curriculum for a supercomplex society should include a self. It entails that changing from knowledge to knowing and from technique to method. A curriculum for a supercomplex society should be flexible and open. A competence-based curriculum might relevant to a curriculum for a supercomplex society. Competence shares with features of supercomplex in terms of epistemology and empiricism. The idea of a university should be specified by establishing a university curriculum. They are complementary. In conclusion, Korean university should not only discuss an idea of a university, also prepare a university curriculum for a supercomplex society.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 유재봉, "현대 교육철학 탐구" 교육과학사 2002

2 소경희, "학교지식의 변화요구에 따른 대안적 교육과정 설계방향 탐색" 한국교육과정학회 24 (24): 39-59, 2006

3 유재봉, "초복잡성 사회에서의 대학 이념: 바넷(R. Barnett)의 논의를 중심으로" 한국교육철학학회 (50) : 145-164, 2010

4 윤정일, "인간 능력으로서의 역량에 대한 고찰 : 역량의 특성과 차원" 한국교육학회 45 (45): 233-260, 2007

5 Bok,D, "University in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education" Princeton University Press 2003

6 Readings,B, "The University in Ruins" Harvard University Press 1996

7 Becher,T, "The State and University Curriculum in Britain" 29 (29): 321-245, 1994

8 Lyotard,J-F, "The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge" Manchester University Press 1984

9 Boyatzis,A.R, "The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance" J. Wiley 1982

10 McClelland,D.C, "Testing for Competence rather than for "Intelligence" 28 (28): 1-14, 1973

11 Barnett,R, "Supercomplexity and the Curriculum" 25 (25): 255-265, 2000

12 Delanty,G, "Rethinking the University: The Autonomy, Contestation and Reflexivity of Knowledge" 12 (12): 103-113, 1998

13 Barnett,R, "Realizing the University in an Age of Supercomplexity" Open University Press 2000

14 Hirst,P.H, "Philosophical Analysis and Education" Routledge & Kegan Paul 1965

15 Popper,K, "Objective Knowledge" Oxford University Press 1972

16 White,R, "Motivation Reconsidered: The Concept of Competence" 66 : 279-333, 1959

17 Barnett,R, "Knowing and Becoming in the Higher Education Curriculum" 34 (34): 429-440, 2009

18 Rychen, D, "Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society" Hogrefe & Huber Publishers 2003

19 Bolton, T, "Implementing Key Skills in Further Education: Perceptions and Issues" 27 : 15-26, 2003

20 Sumison, J, "Identifying Generic Skills through Curriculum Mapping: A Critical Evaluation" 23 (23): 329-346, 2004

21 Clanchy, J, "Generic Skills in the Context of Higher Education" 14 : 155-166, 1995

22 Rychen, D, "Defining and Selecting Key Competencies" Hogrefe & Huber Publishers 2001

23 Barnett, R, "Conceptualising Curriculum Change" 6 (6): 435-449, 2001

24 Spencer, L, "Competence at Work: Models for Superior Performance" John Wiley & Sons 1993

25 Wood, R, "Aspects of the Competence-Performance Distinction: Educational, Psychological and Measurement Issues" 19 (19): 409-424, 1987