The curriculum, teaching, and learning
<<< Back Article by Sven Cederberg
Education in times of societal change
Politicians, educators, and more or less professional thinkers express their opinions on the state of current educational needs in sweeping statements :   "waves of change are now billowing out over our educational system" "The industrial society is on the way out, and a society of knowledge is emerging" "The role of the teacher has to change dramatically" "Students must seek their own knowledge" This they do in a very conservative and dogmatic manner from their podia, showing that they, themselves, have not yet been affected by any changes. Futurologists do indeed confirm that we are at the beginning of a major change of societal systems. Just like the agricultural society was succeeded by the industrial society, the latter is now being left behind for something new. At the beginning of a new life cycle visions and ideas abound. The struggle between the new and the old is at its peak, and in the heat of the debate the mediator tries to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It can't be argued that a new societal system doesn't require new knowledge, but to talk about a "society of knowledge" as if earlier societies were not societies of knowledge is going far too far.
Spontaneous and directed learning
Man has a unique ability to adapt to new situations and almost inexhaustible resources for lifelong learning. Nothing is more natural for a human being than to adapt and learn in order to compete successfully in any kind of society or natural surrounding. The way the individual adapts and develops does not always correspond with the needs or wishes of her society. That's where education and didactics come in. With this in focus it is rather natural to divide learning processes into two categories, spontaneous and directed (as opposed to self-directed). Spontaneous processes start already in the womb and are part of the development of the individual until death. They are the basis of man's ability to adapt and survive. They are triggered by outside stimuli, but the great driving force comes from within. The survival of street children, or the ingenuity of the shrewd to find loopholes in tax legislation, are good examples of spontaneous learning processes. It is quite obvious that these processes may be enhanced by guided processes like basic school education. Directed learning processes are a political issue. There are uncountable examples of educational systems being uprooted time and again by the change of political leadership. Leaders who believe that what is good for the individual is also good for society, will probably use public funding to back spontaneous learning to a great extent. Those who believe that it is the task of society to shape the individual for the common good, may try to choke spontaneous processes. Most societies seem to find a balance between the two. Finding that balance is the essence of didactics. Directed learning processes are initiated by society in curricula, syllabi, and other guiding documents, but "teaching" may also take on the hue of a parking ticket. A national curriculum, e.g. the one they have in Sweden for both primary and secondary education, may be an important political document and it may also be interesting reading. It reflects the government's policies on the country's needs of education. From experience we know that implementing new laws and regulations takes time. In times of fast change, a politically initiated process may be too slow to achieve its goals. If society can't succeed in governing the learning processes, spontaneous learning may take over, and a different society starts taking shape. In view of a possible tremendous potential in information technology, some analysts believe public authorities may lose their role as society's main provider of education. For centuries directed learning processes have developed in contact between tutor and pupil, more often than not in an authoritarian way. Now we are talking about learner autonomy, student participation in decision-making, and a new interface, that between the screen and the pupil. Does that change learning drastically? Shall we question the role of the teacher?
How do teachers respond?
Let's take another look at the above-mentioned Swedish national curriculum. It used to be an extremely detailed "guide" (directive), which teachers were to avow. Some read it carefully, others not at all. As from the 1960's it shrank in size and by the beginning of the 1990's it had become a document of visions and more or less clear goals with no "guidelines". If you believe that knowledge basically is the result of learning processes in the brain of the student, and that it can't be transfused from the teacher, the real learning process as such will remain the same over time and over changes of educational systems. The human brain hasn't, from a biological point of view, changed in the past 100,000 or so years. The roles of teachers and students haven't changed very much in past centuries. We are now seeing a shift of focus from teaching to learning, and from the authoritarian teacher to the autonomous student. There is a major change in the making. It is common knowledge that students learn not only thanks to teacher efforts, but sometimes despite them.
Didactics
A school's distinct didactic and pedagogical guidelines are linked to its pedagogical leadership. It is assumed that the principal of a school has the overall responsibility. The snag is he or she is usually overburdened with funding and other practical problems, and there are hardly any schools with a 'production' manager. There are also very few schools where someone is appointed for the task of keeping in touch with university departments for scientific research. Principals often limit their leadership to the confinement of their staff to the classroom. Devoting time to the making of a didactic programme is a super investment. It should lay the foundations of freedom rather than confinement. Teachers are supposed to foster autonomy in their pupils. How can they do that if their own everyday work is ruled by detailed regulations?
<<< Back