CCR OECD-DeSeCo knowing doing being AI AI Frey & Osborne, EU VUCAvolatilityuncertainty complexityambiguity Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling,

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "CCR OECD-DeSeCo knowing doing being AI AI Frey & Osborne, EU VUCAvolatilityuncertainty complexityambiguity Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling,"

かずきたつざわ
5 years ago
Views:

Title < センター教員共同研究論考 > 資質能力の新たな枠組み 3 3 1 モデルの提案 Author(s)

1 Title < センター教員共同研究論考 > 資質能力の新たな枠組みモデルの提案 Author(s) 松下, 佳代 Citation 京都大学高等教育研究 (2016), 22: Issue Date URL Right Type Departmental Bulletin Paper Textversion publisher Kyoto University

2 CCR OECD-DeSeCo knowing doing being AI AI Frey & Osborne, EU VUCAvolatilityuncertainty complexityambiguity Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling,

3 OECD-PISA OECD-DeSeCo Rychen & Salganik, P Trilling & Fadel, ATCSGriffin, McGaw, & Care, González & Wagenaar, AAC&U essential learning outcomes AAC&U, 1.3 literacycompetence competency skill ver. i ii iii

4 2 2.1 jingle-jangle fallacy 1 OECD DeSeCo Rychen & Salganik,, p. PISA OECD-AHELO OECD,, p. OECD National Research Council: NRC NRC, Center for Curriculum Redesign: CCR Fadel et al., 2.2knowing doing being knowing doing being knowinginert knowledge Whitehead, doing knowing doing Bonwell & Eison, being The Limits of CompetenceBarnett, Barnett, R. being dispositions qualities Barnett, b being vs. vs. 1 p.

5 vs. vs. 2 vs. vs. 1 vs. vs. 3 vs. 2 1vs. p. vs EU ATCS P CCR OECD-DeSeCo NRC European Commission Griffin, McGaw, & Care Trilling & Fadel CCR Fadel, Bialik, & Trilling C character working ICT Rychen & Salganik NRC

6 CCR four-dimensional education 2CCR 4 Fadel et al., p. KSA knowledge, skills, and attitudes knowingdoingbeing OECD-DeSeCo OECD Education a CCR Fadel, C. Trilling, B. P P C CreativityCritical thinking CommunicationCollaboration C C CCR Fadel et al.,, p. b character agency aptitude attitudes attributes behaviors dispositions temperamentvalues beliefs

7 resilienceluthar, Cicchetti, & Becker p. c growth mindset p. CCR EU ATCS Toffler, A. illiterate learnunlearnrelearn Toffler, Dweck, unlearn relearn 2 3 CCR OECD a knowing doing being CCR CCR p DeSeCo CCR KSA CCR OECD Education OECD- DeSeCo DeSeCo CCR DeSeCo DeSeCo Rychen & Salganik,, pp. f DeSeCo CCR CCR DeSeCo DeSeCo

8 CCR DeSeCo DeSeCo <> <> <> reflectivity reflectiveness DeSeCo CCR Fadel et al.,, p knowingdoing being Engeström, 4 3 Rychen & Salganik, NRC, cognitive interpersonal intrapersonal Côté & Levine, CCR DeSeCo CCR DeSeCo

9 Fadel et al.,, p. CCR DeSeCo knowing doing being triad CCR 4.2 CCR DeSeCo Rychen & Salganik,, Chap. OECD, Fadel et al.,, p. DeSeCo CCR 5 CCR OECD-DeSeCo CCR DeSeCo

10 knowing doing being a p. CCR Future ShockToffler, p. 414 H. Gerjuoy CCR Fadel et al.,, p. JSPS H Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2007). College learning for the new global century: A report from the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education & America s Promise. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Barnett, R. (1994). The limits of competence: Knowledge, higher education and society. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press. Barnett, R. (2007). A will to learn: Being a student in an age of uncertainty. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. a OECD

11 b Côté, J. E., & Levine, C. G. (2016). Identity formation, youth, and development: A simplified approach. New York, NY: Psychology Press. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activitytheoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit. Y. European Commission (2007). Key competences for lifelong learning: European reference framework. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Fadel, C., Bialik, M., & Trilling, B. (2015). Four-dimensional education: The competencies learners need to succeed. Boston, MA: The Center for Curriculum Redesign. Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2013).The future of employment: How susceptible jobs to computerisation? ( The_Future_of_Employment.pdf) González, J., & Wagenaar, R. (Eds.). (2008). Tuning educational structures in Europe, Universities contribution to the Bologna Process: An introduction. (2nd ed.). J.R. Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2012). Assessment and teaching of 21st Century Skills: Methods and approach. Netherlands: Springer. P. B.E. NTT Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), a. b. b_menu/shingi/toushin/ icsfiles/afieldfile/2014/07/ 22/ _02.pdf houkoku.pdf National Research Council (NRC). (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

12 pdf/kohyo-22-t pdf OECD (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies: Executive summary. ( org/pisa/ pdf) OECD (2011). A Tuning-AHELO conceptual framework of expected/desired learning outcomes in engineering. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 60. Paris: OECD Publishing. ( Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (2003). Key competencies: For a successful life and a well-functioning society. Boston, MA: Hogrefe & Huber. D. S. L. H.. Toffler, A. (1970). Future shock. New York, NY: Random House. A. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21 Century Skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education. New York, NY: Macmillan. Articles by the Center Staff and Research Fellows A New Framework for Competencies: Model Kayo Matsushita (Center for the Promotion of Excellence in Higher Education, Kyoto University) The purpose of this paper is to construct a theoretical model of competencies which is one of the most important concepts of today s educational reform. First, we analyzed the dichotomies in the discourse on competencies, such as knowledge vs. skills, and the ways of reconciling them by presenting and applying a nested structure of competencies model. Then we classified a huge variety of competency lists into two types: one focuses on an individual s properties included in the competencies to be developed, and the other focuses on the relations in which the competencies are developed. We inquired into the characteristics and limits of these two types by examining their examples, the four-dimensional education framework by the Center for Curriculum Redesign (CCR) (Fadel et al., 2015) and the OECD DeSeCo s key competencies (Rychen & Salganik, 2003), respectively. How can we combine them? We proposed crossing three dimensions with three relations, instead of synthesizing the one into the other, because the two models are built on different triads: knowing doing being and the learner s relations with the world, the others, and the self. In addition, the fourth dimension of the CCR was integrated into the reflectivity of DeSeCo s key competencies. Thus we presented the model denoting three dimensions and three relations of competencies along with reflectivity as their core. Keywords: Competencies, Nested structure of competencies, model, Reflectivity

~ ご再 ~

~ ご再 ~ Title 經濟法令 Author(s) Citation 經濟論叢 (1925), 20(5): 925-942 Issue Date 1925-05-01 URL http://dx.doi.org/10.14989/128271 Right Type Departmental Bulletin Paper Textversion publisher Kyoto University ~ ご再