施瓦布实践课程评析

在西方20世纪课程发展史上,以施瓦布为代表的实践课程模式是重要的课程流派之一.施瓦布的实践课程理论包括五个方面的主要内容:把能力德性提高视为“实践兴趣“的课程目的观;以教师和学生作为课程创造者的课程主体观;以课程过程和结果相统一的课程价值观;以教师作为研究者的课程行动研究方法论;以课程理论与实践相结合为主要特征的实践艺术观.分析施瓦布实践课程模式对于搞好我国课程改革具有积极意义.     

施瓦布“实践课程观”之我见

施瓦布的《实践1：课程的语言》论文发表之后,引起了许多课程理论家的震动,并由此引发了对传统课程探究模式的批判,在这过程中,有人批评施瓦布怀疑理论的作用,有人批评施瓦布没有具体说明集体审议如何在课程理论中运行,因此没有实际价值,针对以上的发问,笔者阐述了对施瓦布实践课程观的认识。     

课程开发意识:语文校本课程开发中的重中之重

美国施瓦布提出了著名的实践课程模式,为随之而来的校本课程的产生奠定了思想基础。然而,在如今的基础教育改革中,校本课程仍还属于探索期,而教师课程开发意识方面的问题往往阻碍了校本课程的发展。本文基于施瓦布实践课程模式理论的视野,对此进行一些反思。     

施瓦布实践课程理论对我国高职课程改革的启示

美国著名课程论专家施瓦布提出实践课程理论,强调课程的实践价值和动态过程,重视发挥教师和学生在课程开发中的主体作用,主张用集体审议方式解决课程问题.现阶段我国高职教育课程模式存在一定的问题,制约着高职教育的发展,施瓦布实践课程理论对我国高职教育课程改革有积极的启示意义.     

课程开发意识：语文校本课程开发中的重中之重

美国施瓦布提出了著名的实践课程模式,为随之而来的校本课程的产生奠定了思想基础。然而,在如今的基础教育改革中,校本课程仍还属于探索期,而教师课程开发意识方面的问题往往阻碍了校本课程的发展。本文基于施瓦布实践课程模式理论的视野,对此进行一些反思。     

用施瓦布实践课程观设计培养教师问题解决能力的课程

在教师教育中,以施瓦布实践课程开发理论为指导,设计培养教师问题解决能力的课程旨在从新的角度认识学科结构,使教师学科问题解决过程中的思维更加清晰。课程以师生为双主体,以学科问题为内容中心,以教师为课程的行动研究者,强调在学科情境之中践行理论与实践的结合。从课程本身出发,对各种实际需要和问题进行综合的建设性探讨,是施瓦布实践课程观的根本思想。     

论施瓦布探究型课程思想

施瓦布探究型课程思想的主要内容有六个方面:转变实验室功能取向;渗透怀疑成分;创建探究性课堂;原始科学论著作为课程内容;探究的叙述;探究的诱导。施瓦布探究型课程思想的启示是:施瓦布探究型课程思想呈现了一个探究型课程的基本范式;施瓦布探究型课程思想与他的实践性课程理论密切关联;借鉴施瓦布探究型课程思想以下几点应须注意,施瓦布探究型课程思想只是提供范式并非照搬的固定模式,探究性科学教学不是控制性实验,探究性教学不是脱离于具体内容的教学方法。     

施瓦布实践性课程思想对我国高职课程改革的启示

美国课程论专家施瓦布提出实践性课程理论,批判了传统"学科中心"为主的课程模式,主张以"实践为中心"的课程体系。简介实践性课程理论,分析我国职业教育课程的问题,借鉴施瓦布课程理论,归纳出科学的职业教育定位、职教课程模式创新、鼓励企业与社会参与课程开发、激发教师参与行动研究的热情四个方面的启示。     

施瓦布的课程理论述评

施瓦布是美国著名的课程理论专家，他提出的实践模式的课程理论与传统模式的课程理论背道而驰，强调课程的实践价值和动态过程，重视教师和学生在课程开发中的作用。主张用集体审议的方式解决课程问题。     

施瓦布的实践性课程开发理论及其评价

施瓦布是美国著名的课程理论专家,他在批判传统模式的课程理论的基础上,提出了实践性课程开发理论,强调课程的实践价值和动态过程,重视教师和学生在课程开发中的作用,主张用集体审议的方法解决课程问题。     

Knowledge,judgement and the curriculum: on the past,present and future of the idea of the Practical

In 1970, Joseph Schwab published the first of four papers that argued for a turn to the idea of the Practical in curriculum research and practice. In this paper, I revisit Schwab’s original paper and explore the extent to which his case for the Practical is still relevant today. I first look at the past of the deliberative tradition in which Schwab’s argument is located. I argue that a more precise engagement with the work of Aristotle – particularly the distinction between making/production and doing, and between knowledge of the eternal and of the variable – can strengthen Schwab’s case and allow for a better understanding of the kind of knowledge and judgement needed in education. In relation to the present, I highlight three ways in which the current context has changed from when Schwab published his paper. These concern the strongly diminished space for teachers’ professional judgement; the rise of a call for evidence-based education; and the shift in curriculum studies away from practical questions. To (re)connect the field of curriculum studies and research with questions about the ‘doing’ of curriculum is, in my view, where a deliberative approach such as the one articulated by Schwab remains highly relevant.     

Memorizing a memory: Schwab’s the Practical in a German context

The paper outlines the reception of Schwab’s essay ‘The practical: A language for curriculum’ in German-speaking countries in the 1970s and 1980s. The story is a good demonstration of the ways in which different circumstances and phases of development determine transatlantic exchanges and the influence of concepts in the field of education, and especially of curriculum. The central ideas of Joseph J. Schwab’s concept of curriculum theory and curriculum-making were related to the traditions of general Didaktik in the German-speaking world. It would have been well suited for a reception. Nevertheless, the reception the essay received was at first not a story of success; on the contrary, we have to diagnose a historical neglect. Circumstances today are much better for rethinking Schwab’s analysis under the new conditions of standardizing and competence-oriented curriculum policies.     

Reading Schwab’s the ‘Practical’ as an invitation to a curriculum enquiry

In this retrospective essay reviewing the implications of Joseph Schwab’s essay, ‘The practical: A language for education’ (2013 [1970]), 40?+?years after its first publication, I identify two ‘practicals’. The first is a comprehensive ‘Practical 1.1’ embracing ends, subject matter, problem source and methods. This ‘practical’ has radical implications for curriculum studies, and for educational theory and research more generally. However, these implications have not been recognized. On the other hand, Schwab’s deliberation-centred interpretation of the ‘practical’, the ‘Practical 1.2’, has been widely discussed but has not captured the field of curriculum studies because it fails to map onto the structures of most school systems.     

Joseph Schwab,curriculum, curriculum studies and educational reform

The ‘Practical 1’ paper combines Schwab’s abiding concern, for the nature and quality of educational experience with another abiding concern, for how we think about what we do. The Practical 1 is the first of a set of four ‘practical’ essays. These in turn are the product of his thinking about college education and his ideas on the principles of scientific inquiry applied to education in the Practical 1. What Schwab said about education was considered provocative at its time. What Schwab was doing has continuing value. He would, no doubt, say different things in the current educational environment but what he was doing as he said them would remain close to the original.     

Phases in Collaboration: Using Schwab’s Deliberation to Respond to Change in Teacher Education

The literature suggests that radical changes to teacher education are common but rarely well-planned or resourced. Such changes can be detrimental to the quality of learning and it is challenging for educators to know how to respond. Joseph Schwab argued that for balanced curriculum development to occur, deliberation must take place with the four commonplaces (teachers, learners, subject matter and milieu). In this study, three teacher educators in a research intensive university in New Zealand were forced to combine three distinct courses (Health, Outdoor and Physical Education) into one course. Concerned that student learning would be compromised, we embarked on a series of deliberations informed by Schwab’s ideas. The deliberations involved meeting regularly over six months, inviting representatives from the commonplaces (program leaders, pedagogical specialists, pre-service teachers and teachers) into our deliberations and reflecting on the process. Analysis revealed that our deliberations could be characterized by phases: (1) creating the necessary conditions, (2) the problem emerges, (3) the solution emerges, (4) evaluation and (5) beyond deliberation. These phases of deliberation were distinguished by different concerns and timeframes and roughly reflected the stages of deliberation identified by Schwab. Convergence and divergence from Schwab’s stages are discussed. While much of Schwab’s work on deliberation remains relevant today, we recommend the addition of an initial phase focused on establishing a collaborative basis at the beginning of the process. We found this phase not only generated respect and care amongst the collaborators, but also helped frame the problem and enabled new solutions to emerge.     

小学语文课程统整:内涵、目标与设计思路

小学语文教学受现代语文教育范式的深刻影响,至今仍存在着教学内容孤立、教学模式单一、教学环境单调等现象,造成语文教学的低效。在新一轮基础教育课程改革进入全面深化的阶段,聚焦课程的深度整合是语文课程改革面临的新的重大课题。建立在系统理论基础上的课程统整是实现课程与教学以及教学内部各要素有机统一的实践路径,已成为国际教育变革的趋势,基于学科开展课程统整成为学界普遍认可的推进策略。小学语文课程统整在内涵、目标和设计思路上有其自身特点,梳理相关理论与实践经验有助于对课程层面的深入研究。