아시아 고등교육에서 성과-기반 협력적 교수학습 (NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, 2015) [출력완료]

아시아 고등교육에서 성과-기반 협력적 교수학습 (NEW DIRECTIONS FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING, 2015)

Outcomes-Based Collaborative Teaching and Learning in Asian Higher Education

Gertina J. van Schalkwyk

 

OBCTL 환경을 연출하는 것은 고등교육을 전통적인 내용-기반, 투입-기반 교육 접근법으로부터 학생-기반, 총체적holistic, 지식의 공동-구성co-construction을 향한 것이다.

Choreographing an outcomes-based collaborative teaching and learning (OBCTL) environment aims to move learning in higher educa- tion settings from the traditional content-based and input-driven teaching approaches (i.e., information transference) to an approach that is student- centered, holistic, and geared toward knowledge co-construction.

아시아 고등교육에 국한되지 않더라도, 이러한 원칙을은 손쉽게 유교적 유산이 퍼져있는 맥락CHC에 전이가능하다

Although not specific to the Asian higher educational setting, the principles are easily transferable to contexts where the Confucian heritage culture (CHC) pre- vails (e.g., China, Japan, Southeast Asia).

 

성과바탕교육

Outcomes-Based Education

OBE는 20세기 후반부에 기원하여, 전통적 내용-기반, 투입-기반 접근법과는 달랐다.

Outcomes-based education (OBE) originated in the second half of the twen- tieth century and differs from traditional content-based and input-driven approaches in the sense that those types of teaching and learning were mainly textbook driven and instructor centered (Pliner and Johnson 2004; Van der Horst and McDonald 2004).

OBE의 근원은 1950년대에 '교육목표'를 설정하려는 움직임과 관련되어 있다. Ralph Tyler는 학생들이 학습프로세스를 마친 이후에 무엇을 할 수 있는가에 초점을 둔 명확한 목표를 설정하는 것이 중요함을 밝혔다. Bloom 등은  잘 알려진 Bloom’s taxonomy를 개발

The roots of OBE lie in the 1950s with the movement toward setting educational objectives. Ralph Tyler (1949) identified the importance of for- mulating clearly defined objectives with the focus on what the student should be able to do after completing the learning process and mastering the content. Bloomand colleagues (1956) developed the well-known Bloom’s taxonomy

1960년대에 미국에서 역량바탕교육competency-based education 이 등장하였고, 이것의 주된 목표는 학생들이 학교과정을 다 마친 이후에 적절히 준비되게끔 하는 것이었다.

The 1960s saw the emergence of competency-based education in the United States with the main purpose of ensuring the adequate preparation of students for a life after school.

여기서 초점은 모든 학생들이 특정 스킬이나 커리어에 있어서 도달가능한 가장 높은 수준을 달성하게 해주는 것이다. 이를 위해서 교수자는 demonstrable capabilities에 대한 학습목표를 개발해야 했다. 평가는 점수grade 그 자체를 내기 위한 것이 아니라, 역량을 확실하게 도달하게 만들기 위한 것이고, 추가적 훈련이 필요한지 결정하기 위한 것이었다. 구성주의적 패러다임에 굳건한 기반을 둔 CBE는 학습은 개인의 것이며, 개인의 목적-지향적이어야 한다는 생각을 지지했다. 

The focus was to ensure understanding and enable all students to achieve the highest possible levels of learning of a particular skill or career. To this end, the instructor developed learning objectives geared toward demonstra- ble capabilities. Assessment was not to determine a grade per se but to en- sure competency and to determine if more training was necessary. Firmly rooted in the constructivist paradigm, competency-based education sup- ported the idea that learning was individual and that the individual needed to be goal oriented (Voorhees 2001; Weddel 2006).

OBE의 또 다른 선조는 완전학습이다.

Another predecessor of OBE was mastery learning,

OBE에 영향을 준 마지막 선조는 준거-기반 평가이다.

The final pre- decessor that influenced OBE was the development of criteria-referenced as- sessment.

OBE가 초반에는 학생이 무엇을 해야하는가(학습의 성과)에만 초점을 두었지만, 이후에는 성과를 확실하게 달성하기 위한 OBTL에서의 '교육 프로세스'에 대한 발달도 포함하였다.

Although OBE initially focused only on what the students need to do (the outcomes of learning), later developments also referred to the teach- ing process involved in outcomes-based teaching and learning (OBTL) to ensure achievement of the outcomes.

 

이 모델에서 교육자들은 학습성과를 교육적 결정, 평가 설계, 수업 계획 등에 사용해야 한다.

Educators in this model were required to use the learning outcomes as a focus when they make in- structional decisions, design assessments, and plan their lessons.

 

교육 프로세스는 세 가지 핵심적 특징을 포함한다.

Biggs and Tang (2007): teaching process involves three essential features:

• (1) the intended outcomes of teaching and learning stated at the start;
• (2) in- tended learning outcomes guide the teaching process and increase the like- lihood that most students will achieve success; and
• (3) assessment should determine how well students achieve the outcomes.

따라서 OBTL은 학생이 전체 과정의 일반적 목표general objectives를 달성하기 위해서 특정 학습상황 또는 학습섹션의 중간 혹은 마지막에 무엇을 할 수 있어야 하는가에 초점을 둔다.

Thus, OBTL focuses on what students must be able to do or achieve during or at the end of a learning situation or section in order to attain the general objectives of the course.

또한 OBTL 은 모든 학생이 높은 수준의 학습을 하게끔 서포트해주는 방향으로 패러다임 변화를 시사한다. 동기부여가 덜 되었거나 능력이 없다고 학생을 비난하거나 선생이 부적절하다고 비난하지 않는다. OBTL에서는 학생이 무엇을 할 수 있으며, 학생이 하는 것이 어떻게 교육과 관련되는가에 초점을 둔다. OBTL에서 교수자의 역할은 'teach'가 아니라 'facilitte'이다.

Furthermore, OBTL implies a paradigm shift toward supporting high levels of learning for all students. It comprises an approach that moves away from blaming students for lacking motivation or capabilities or blaming teachers for assumed inadequacies. Rather, it focuses on what students can do and how what students do relates to teaching (Biggs and Tang 2007). In the OBTL approach, the role of the instructor changes: The instructor should not teach but rather facilitate learning by stimulating a range of activ- ities that will support the achievement of the learning outcomes.

따라서 과정 설계에 있어서 학습목표 설정이 가장 중요하다.

Therefore, determining the learning outcomes is the most important aspect of course planning,

 

OBCTL

Outcomes-Based Collaborative Teaching and Learning

CTL은 실제 삶의 상황과 연결된 교수-학습 프로세스에 초점을 두고, real world에서 성과가 달성되도록 한다.

Collaborative teaching and learning (CTL) focuses on the teaching and learning processes that connect to real- life situations and the ways outcomes are achieved in the real world.

OBCTL 은 "다른 사람과의 결합된 활동으로서의 지식 - 사람들이 함께 하는 것"에 초점을 둔다.

OBCTL fo- cuses on “knowledge as constructed in conjoint activities with others—in what people do together” (McNamee 2007, 314).

이러한 (OBCTL) 접근법에는 모든 집단(교수, 학생, 교육내용)의 '협동적 노력'이 의도한 학습목표를 달성하는데 관련된다는 믿음이 전제되어 있다.

Underlying this approach is the belief that collaborative efforts among all parties—that is, the instructor, the students, and the subject matter—are relevant in order to achieve in- tended learning outcomes for a program or course.

따라서 OBCTL은 교육적 세팅에 참여하는 학생의 노력에 가치를 두는 실용적 접근법이다. 많은 아시아 유교문화권의 expectations of success, social responsibility, and up- ward mobility 등과 잘 맞는다. Shi는 중극 학생들이 - 서양학생들과 마찬가지로 - 능동적 학습과 교사-학생간 더 많은 상호작용을 가치롭게 여김을 주장했다. 비록 "서양에서는 성공을 노력보다는 능력에 따르는 것으로 보는 경향이 있지만, 중국인들은 노력을 더 중요하게" 보지만, OBCTL은 개인과 그룹이 교육 맥락에서 excel하게끔 해주며, 능력과 노력을 모두 적용한다.

Thus, OBCTL is a pragmatic approach to teaching and learning that values the effort students espouse when engaging in an educational setting. It aligns well with the expectations of success, social responsibility, and up- ward mobility instilled in many Asian students coming from Confucian her- itage cultures (Phuong-Mai, Terlouw, and Pilot 2005). Shi (2006) claims that Chinese students, like Western students, value active learning and a more interactive relationship with teachers and peers. Although “western- ers tend to see success as being attributable more to ability than to effort, [and] ethnic Chinese see effort as more important” (Biggs and Tang 2007, 33), OBCTL allows individuals and groups to excel in the educational con- text, applying both ability and effort.

 

OBCTL연출하기

Choreographing OBCTL.

Sound한 OBCTL환경에서 학생들은 지지적 요소supportive elements를 활용employ하고, 기본을 배우고, 다른 사람과 상호작용적, 협동적인 방식으로 성과에 도달한다.

Thus, in a sound OBCTL environment, stu- dents will achieve the outcomes once they employ the supportive elements, learn the basics, and engage with others (the instructor, peers, and the broader context) in an interactive and collaborative manner (Van Offenbeek 2001).

잘 연출된 OBCTL환경에서 학생들은 자신에게 필요한 supportive elements 를 얻을 필요가 있다.

In a well-choreographed OBCTL environment, students need to ac- quire the necessary supportive elements instrumental in achieving the out- comes

supportive elements 에는 다음과 같은 것이 있으며, supportive elements 는 성과가 아니다. 한 예를 들자면 해당 분야의 개념을 알고 이해하는 것과 같은 내용에 대한 마스터는 성과가 될 수 없다.

These supportive elements involve preparation, performance, interactions with others, completion of various tasks, and continuous assessment of progress and are intended to enable students to successfully achieve the outcomes of a course or program. The supportive elements are not out- comes. As an example, mastering content, as in know and understand con- cepts of the discipline, can never be an outcome,

OBCTL 과목 설계와 기획의 핵심 요소

Key Elements of Course Design and Planning for OBCTL

다섯 개 요소를 포함한다.

Most of the examples take a systematic approach involving five key elements—

• analysis,
• planning and conceptualizing,
• conducting,
• assessment, and
• re- flecting.

첫 요소는 교수-학습이 일어나는 맥락(기관, 과, 교실, 시설)을 분석하는 것이다.

The first element entails an analysis of the context in which teach- ing and learning will take place—that is, the institutional, departmental, and classroom resources and facilities.

분석과 밀접하게 연결된 것이 계획과 개념화planning and conceptualizing 이다. 이 요소는 학습경험의 최종 목표로서 specific learning outcome을 작성하고, 이 outcome을 outcome 도달을 촉진할 수 있는 전략들과 건설적 합치constructive alignment 하는 것이다.

Closely linked to the analysis is the planning and conceptualizing of a course in OBCTL. This element refers primarily to the writing of specific learning outcomes as the end product of the learning experience and the constructive alignment of these outcomes with strategies for facilitating the achievement of the outcomes.

과목을 계획planning할 때, 교수자는 교수-학습의 최종 목표로서 달성하고자 하는 목표를 그려야 한다. 과목의 목표(objective of a course)는 교수자가 그 교육적 설계로부터 달성하고자 바라는 것의 단순한 기술이며, 과목의 goal과 그 과목이 들어가있는 프로그램의 outcome이 잘 align되어야 한다.

In the planning for a course, the instructor begins with envisioning the objectives or goals that he or she wants to achieve as the end prod- uct of teaching and learning. The objective of a course is a simple state- ment of what the instructor hopes to achieve with the instructional design and involves aligning the course goal with the expected outcomes of the study program in which the course fits.

objective of a course 가 전체적 내용과 전체적 학습경험의 맥락에 대한 것이라면, 학습성과learning outcome은 특정한 지식 혹은 스킬에 대해서 학생에게 기대되는 것으로, 특정한 맥락에서 보여지는 것이고displayed, 학습의 관찰가능한 최종 산출물로서 평가 대상이 된다.

Whereas the objective for the course describes the overall content and context of the learning experience, the learning outcomes refer to achieve- ments expected of students and draw on specific knowledge and skills, dis- played in a particular context and demonstrated and evaluated as clearly observable end products of learning.

OBCTL에서 course outline에서 드러나는 과목의 설계와 계획은 교수자와 학생 사이의 contract of learning로서 정점을 찍는다culminate. course outline은 종종 syllabus라고도 불린다.

In OBCTL, the design and planning culminate in a course outline that serves as a contract of learning between instructor and student. The course outline is sometimes referred to as the syllabus, and, similar to a syllabus, it guides the planning and design of a course as a unique learning experience aimed at achieving the desired outcomes or results (Biggs and Tang 2007; Pliner and Johnson 2004).

 

 

 

ILO 작성

Writing Intended Learning Outcomes

knowledge, skills, standards, performances, objectives, courses, modules,and goals  등의 용어는 outcome이란 용어를 대체할 수 없다.

Prior to writing a learning outcome, one needs to understand that knowledge, skills, standards, performances, objectives, courses, modules,and goals are not in- terchangeable terms for the word “outcome.”

두 종류의 학습성과가 있다. Critical cross-field outcome과 specific outcome이다.

There are two kinds of learning outcomes: critical cross-field outcomes and specific outcomes (Olivier 1998; Van der Horst and McDonald 2004).

 

• Critical cross-field outcomes are usually designed by the programand apply to all the learning areas within the field or discipline in the programof study. Thus, critical outcomes are generic and cross-curricular and are linked or aligned to all levels of the program and the institutional vision in general (Biggs and Tang 2007).
• Specific outcomes, the second kind of outcomes, are the ILOs that an instructor develops when planning for the course.

 

 

ILO의 기능은 두 가지이다.

Writing ILOs in OBCTL requires careful planning. It is advisable not to have more than seven outcomes for the course and often fewer for each lesson within the course. The function of ILOs is twofold:

• 교수자들에게 학생이 무엇을 알아야 하고 할 수 있어야 하는지 미리 알 수 있게 해준다.
  (1) They enable the instructor to know in advance what students are expected to know and do; and
• 학생들에게 자신들이 무엇을 알아야 하고 할 수 있어야 하는지 미리 알 수 있게 해준다.
  (2) they enable students to know in ad- vance what they will be expected to know and do or achieve.

 

 

 

 

ILO는 세 가지 핵심 요인을 고려해야 한다.

An ILO always involves consideration of three key components:

• 지식을 가지고 해야 하는 행위의 종류(동사)
  (1) the kind of action to perform with available knowledge (i.e., the verb);
• 달성해야 하는 과업(명사, 목적어)
  (2) the task or aspect relevant to the course area that should be achieved (i.e., the noun/object); and
• 성취의 복잡성 혹은 이해의 수준 (qualifier)
  (3) the intended level of understanding or complexity of the achievement (i.e., the qualifier) (e.g., Biggs and Tang 2007).

 

 

 

ILO를 작성할 때, '동사'는 해야 하는 활동을 강조한다. 즉, 동사는 성과의 특성을 보여준다.

When writing ILOs, the verb signifies the activity that is going to take place, for example,

• describe a procedure,
• compile a budget,
• solve a prob- lem,
• identify and explain the learning styles.

In a sense, the verb indicates the characteristics of the outcome,

일부 동사는 다양한 범위의 action을 함축한다. “explain,” “critique,” “compare,” “describe,” or “review,” 을 위해서는 분석적 기술, 비판적 사고, 다양한 의사소통 기술을 필요로 한다.

Some action verbs do im- ply a range of actions that embody the envisioned attributes set as critical outcomes for the program. For example, in order to “explain,” “critique,” “compare,” “describe,” or “review,” the student will have to exhibit ana- lytical skills, critical thinking, and various communication skills.

 

“explain how knowledge of different approaches to human develop- ment can enhance well-being” 와 같은 ILO를 위해서는...아래와 같은 스킬이 있어야 할 것이다.

Thus, an ILO such as “explain how knowledge of different approaches to human develop- ment can enhance well-being” implicitly refers to the

• knowledge underlying human development,
• analytical skills for comparing different approaches, and
• written or oral modes of communication—

the student cannot explain anything without having developed appropriate skills.

 

 

 

 

명사/목적어는 무엇을 달성할 것인지를 표현해준다.

The noun/object spells out what is going to be achieved . It names and limits the issue or topic to be addressed and the knowledge area that has to be accessed in order to complete the task.

qualifier or context 는 성취의 파라미터 혹은 방법론을 의미한다.

The qualifier or context refers to the parameters and methodologies of the achievement . The qual-ifiers or modifiers, as they are sometimes called, also describe the range of complexity

• Bloom’s taxonomy has been in use for many decades, and
• Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) present the most up-to-date and comprehensive classification ac- cording to six cognitive domains relevant to learning at higher education level.
• Biggs and Collis (1982) devised a structure for the observed learning outcome (SOLO).

Biggs and Collis 는 학습의 양적단계와 질적단계에 대해서 언급했다.

Biggs and Collis also refer to the quantitative and quali- tative stages of learning that should occur over time as the student engages in the course or learning program.

• 양적단계: 디테일을 배우는 것 The quantitative stage relates to learning of detail, such as the specific knowledge aspects involved in a course, while
• 질적단계: 디테일을 통합하여 더 발전된 수준으로 적용시키는 것 the qualitative stage relates to the integration of the detail in more advanced levels of application and thus guides the assessment strategies that one can use to gain evidence of learning.

ILOs 는 두 가지의 지식과 관련되며, 다른 층위의 이해와 관련된다.

In the example, the ILOs represent the active verbs relevant to

• two kinds of knowledge (i.e., declarative knowledge and functioning knowl- edge) and
• different levels of understanding (i.e., unistructural, multistruc- tural, and relational) included in the SOLO model (see Biggs and Tang 2007).

선언적 지식Declarative knowledge : 추상적, 개념적. 사물에 대해서 아는 것. 내용 지식.

Declarative knowledge is knowledge that is abstract and conceptual, dealing with knowing about things. It usually refers to content knowledge accrued from reading and research and not from personal experience or application. Active verbs such as “identify,” “classify,” “select,” and “con- ceptualize” in the ILOs refer to knowing about the concepts, principles, and processes of physical geology. Knowledge about the subject matter or content is therefore embedded in the ILOs.

 

기능적 지식Functioning (or professional) knowledge : 구체적, 실용적. 선언적 지식을 활용하여 특정 과업을 수행하는 학습자의 경험에 있는 것

Functioning (or professional) knowledge refers to specific and pragmatic knowledge and is underpinned by understanding the subject matter. It is knowledge within the experience of the learner who uses declarative (the- oretical) knowledge to perform certain tasks, such as solving problems, analyzing results, or discussing key processes in the ILOs for the course example just presented.

 

ILO를 위한 평가 기준

Assessment Standards for ILOs

세 가지 유형의 평가로 구성된다.

Standard setting for acceptable evidence comprises three types of assessment (Wiggins and McTighe 2005):

1. The performance task is at the heart of the learning and is meant to be a real-world challenge in the thoughtful and effective use of knowledge and skills—an authentic test of understanding in context.

2. Criteria referenced assessment involves regular or continuous tasks such as quizzes, term papers, reflections, and various in-class and out of-class learning projects that provide the instructor and student with timely feedback on how well the facts and concepts are being understood and applied in different contexts.

3. Unprompted assessment and self-assessment engage the student actively in achieving the learning outcomes and are used to make adjustments in order to achieve the required standards of learning.

아시아 고등교육에서의 OBCTL

OBCTL in Asian Higher Education

적극적 참여와 공동-구성을 억압했던 이전의 경험이 OBCTL모델에서 아시아 학생들의 문제해결과 새로운 지식을 억압함. 아시아 학생들이 성공적인 과제 달성을 위해서 어떻게 협력할지 자동적으로 알게 될 것이라는 것은 오류

Prior learning experi- ences that suppressed active involvement and the co-construction of prob- lem solving and new knowledge often restrict Asian students in the OBCTL model. It is a fallacy to think that Asian students automatically know how to collaborate toward successful completion of a learning task.

• 개인의 책임과 경쟁에 대한 동기부여
  On one hand, they are highly motivated toward individual accountability and competi- tive when striving for grades.
• 조화와 갈등 회피에 대한 가치
  On the other hand, Asian students place a high value on harmony and the avoidance of conflict (i.e., argumentation).

CHC는 교사와 학생 사이에 거의 타협불가능한 권력 위계를 규정함

The Confucian heritage culture also defines the positioning of instructor and student in an almost nonnegotiable power hierarchy (Van Schalkwyk 2007).

지식의 공동구성 프로세스를 공유하는 것은 아시아 학생들에게 기존의 현실에 위배되는 것이다. conversational activity와 대화에 참여하는 것은 익숙치 않은 개념이다.

Sharing in the process of knowledge co-construction seems almost a violation of their existing “realities,” and engaging in conversational activity and talk as required for OBCTL is an unfamiliar concept to most students in an Asian higher education setting (Biggs and Tang 2007).

아시아 학생 이해

Understanding the Asian Student.

 

단순한 '이식'은 성공할 수 없음.

Merely “transplanting” teaching models from non-Asian contexts (e.g., Western pedagogies) to the Asian context is inappropriate and often unsuccessful. Although Asian stu- dents are predisposed to issues such as interrelatedness, social orientation, and expending effort in their educational activities, they still need guid- ance to ensure success in collaborating with others to co-construct knowl- edge and solve problems.

요즘 중국 학생들은 서양 학생들과 차이가 별로 없다.

Despite some apparent differences between Asian and non-Asian stu- dents, Shi (2006, 122) claims that “contemporary Chinese students demon- strate different characteristics from those described in many previous stud- ies” and that they “show little difference from their Western counterparts by being active learners and preferring a more interactive relationships with their teachers.” Li and Campbell (2008) also found that Asian stu- dents value the significance of group discussions, particularly when engag- ing in their nonnative language (e.g., English).

 

아시아 고등교육에서의 서구에서 훈련받은 교육자

Western-Trained Instructor in the Asian Higher Education Context.

1. Understanding one’s own motives.

2. Knowing how Asian students came to be.

동남아 학생들은 혼날 때 빙긋 웃는데, 이러한 미소가 존중하지 않음을 의미하는 것이 아니라 잘못을 인정하고 혼나는 것에 대한 불편한 감정이 없음을 보여주려는 노력이다.

For example, Weinstein, Tomlinson-Clarke, and Curran (2004, 26) comment that “Southeast Asian students smile while being scolded if they are unaware that the smiles are meant not as disrespect, but as an admission of guilt and an effort to show that there are no hard feelings.”

3. Understanding the context.

4. Reflecting on taken-for-granted assumptions.

중국학생들에게 의견을 드러내지 않는다고 혼내는 것은 그들 부모가 '선생님 말을 잘 듣고 배우라'라고 가르치는 것과 상충할 수 있다.

For example, “reprimanding Chinese students for not being willing to express their opinions may conflict with their parents’ directive to listen and learn what the teacher tells them” (Weinstein, Tomlinson-Clarke, and Cur- ran 2004, 32).

5. Choreographing a caring learning environment.

The aim is to grant “privilege and honour [to] the personal experiences, desires, motivations, knowledge and skills” (Carlson and Erickson 2001, 207) of students and to create a caring learning com- munity in which students feel respected, trusted, and supported by the instructor and by one another.

Weinstein, C. S., S. Tomlinson-Clarke, and M. Curran. 2004. “Toward a Conception of Culturally Responsive Classroom Management.” Journal of Teacher Education 55: 25–38.

 

 

 

 

---

Research Article

You have full text access to this content

Outcomes-Based Collaborative Teaching and Learning in Asian Higher Education

1. Gertina J. van Schalkwyk^1,2

Article first published online: 22 JUN 2015

DOI: 10.1002/tl.20128

© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Issue

New Directions for Teaching and Learning

Special Issue: From the Confucian Way to Collaborative Knowledge Co-Construction

Volume 2015, Issue 142,pages 19–40, Summer 2015