
如何使成人教育變革:提出正確的問題
- Posted on
教育面臨的挑戰需要真正具有變革性的回應。但我們應該如何理解變革性教育以及我們可以做些什麼來促進它?卡塔琳娜·波波維奇問道。
由 COVID-19 大流行引起的危機激發了一波新的、復興的教育概念、思想和實踐。為了響應 2030 年可持續發展議程,以及我們到 2030 年時可能無法實現關於教育的可持續發展(SDG) ,強調了採取新方法的必要性。持續的教育差距、加劇的隔閡和挫折凸顯了促進成人教育和全民終身學習的迫切需要。
這種緊迫感產生的想法之一是「變革性教育」,聯合國教科文組織將其定義為「旨在激勵和授權快樂健康的學習者在個人、社區和全球層面做出明智的決定和行動的教學和學習」。這一概念主導了有關教育危機的討論,並被視為解決當今教育中許多問題的靈丹藥。
仔細觀察變革性教育會發現這個想法的強大,但問題是:它有什麼創新之處嗎?變革性的教育支持並使學習者在個人和社會層面上成長和發展。它在生活的各個方面激勵並賦予他們權力。變革性教育旨在改善人類和地球,並支持消除不平等、壓迫和不公正。
可以說,這些都不是新鮮事。難道所有的教育都不應該以「變革性」為目標嗎?如果不是,那不就說明我們已經失敗了嗎?如果沒有改變生活並使他們變得更好,那麼教育在做什麼?如果它不能賦予人們使社會變得更好的能力,那麼我們的教育又是關於什麼?過去及現在,我們為人們提供技能、幫助他們適應挑戰和追求技術發展的雄心?在這種情況下,最好問問自己教育內涵,考慮缺少什麼?批判性地檢查現有的概念和方法,而不是僅僅引入一個新的標籤。
如果變革性教育的重點在於其深度:「旨在創造更深刻、更深刻的變化」——這表示我們不需要一個新概念,而是對於當前的概念和死記硬背的做法、收集和記憶信息、未經反思的技能發展及其虛假的中立性進行批判性審查。但是,單靠更深層次的做事,並不能將膚淺枯燥的教育轉變為「變革性」的教育。這不僅僅是識別或表示轉變開始的階層問題。變革性的教育不僅要深入研究,而且要以不同的方式做事。
也就是說,不能簡單地教不同的東西。增加新的教育領域,例如可持續發展教育或全球公民教育,並不能使教育「變革」。畢竟,任何事情都可以以重複、消極或膚淺的方式教授。
我們必須注意不要將「變革性教育」作為一種標籤,添加到我們希望加強或灌輸更多深度、抱負或成就的教育領域、主題和想法,例如:產生更多的參與度、積極性, 知識淵博和熟練的學習者。所有形式的教育都不應該這樣做嗎?這不就是教育的目的嗎?
對於如何更好地概念化變革性教育,我們需要尋找不同的理論理解。Jack Mezirow 和其他人贊同對「變革性學習」的理解,這種學習側重於當新信息或新見解與現有的知識、信仰和價值觀系統發生衝突時發生的學習類型(所謂的「迷失方向的困境」)。換句話說,對認知、社會文化和其他假設的批判性評估激發了新的學習,並帶來了質的不同變化。
教育可以基於類似的方法嗎?如果危機(無論是大流行還是其他危機)暴露了我們教育系統的弱點,讓我們走出舒適區,挑戰我們關於學習如何發生的許多基本假設,這難道不是一種迷失方向的困境嗎?
由於 COVID-19,我們繼續面臨的教育危機揭示了一些關於流行教育範例令人不快的事實,並迫使對圍繞教育的共同話語進行批判性審查(例如,質疑技能培養的主導地位,強調測量和量化,以及基於結果的方法)。變革性的學習方法需要我們關注教育面臨的問題根源,而不是僅僅解決當前的問題,尋找不平等背後的原因和結構,而不是僅僅減輕其後果,發展批判性的自主,而不僅只有彈性。換句話說,要問正確的問題,而不是追逐錯誤的答案。
原文網址:點這裡
The challenges facing education demand responses that are genuinely transformative. But how should we understand transformative education and what can we do to promote it, asks Katarina Popović.
The crises caused by the COVID-19 pandemic inspired a wave of new and revived concepts, ideas and practices in education. The need for a new approach had been highlighted in response to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and our likely failure to deliver against Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 on education by 2030. Continuing educational disparities and exacerbated gaps and setbacks underscore the urgent need to promote adult education and lifelong learning for all.
One of the ideas born out of this sense of urgency is ‘transformative education’, which UNESCO defines as teaching and learning ‘geared to motivate and empower happy and healthy learners to take informed decisions and actions at the individual, community and global levels’. The concept dominates discussions about post-crises education and is perceived as a panacea for many of today’s problems in education.
A closer look at transformative education reveals the power of the idea, but the question is: is there anything innovative about it? Education that is transformative supports and enables learners to grow and develop at individual and social levels. It motivates and empowers them in all aspects of their lives. Transformative education seeks the betterment of people and the planet and supports the eradication of inequalities, oppressions and injustices.
It might be said that none of this is new. Shouldn’t all education aim to be ‘transformative’? And if it isn’t, doesn’t that suggest that we have failed spectacularly? What was education doing, if not transforming lives and making them better? If it did not empower people to transform societies for the better, what was our education about? Was and is the height of our ambition to equip people with skills, help them adapt to challenges and chase technological development? In that case, it would be better to ask ourselves about the quality of education, consider what is missing and critically examine existing concepts and approaches, instead of just introducing a new label?
If the point of transformative education is its depth – the aim to create deeper, more profound changes – this suggests we do not so much need a new concept but a critical review of the current ones and of the practices of rote learning, collecting and memorizing information, skills development without reflection and its false neutrality. However, doing things at a deeper level cannot alone transform a superficial and boring education into a ‘transformative’ one. It cannot just be a matter of recognizing or indicating the level at which transformation starts. Education that is transformative must not only go into things more deeply, but also do things differently.
That said, it cannot simply be a matter of teaching different things. Adding new fields of education, such as education for sustainable development or global citizenship education, does not make an education ‘transformative’. After all, anything can be taught in a repetitive, demotivating or shallow way.
We must be mindful then not to use ‘transformative education’ as a kind of label we add to the education fields, topics and ideas that we wish to strengthen or imbue with more profundity, ambition or achievement, such as: generating more engaged, motivated, knowledgeable and skilled learners. Shouldn’t all forms of education do this? Isn’t this what education is for?
We need to look to different theoretical understandings of how to better conceptualize transformative education. Jack Mezirow and others subscribe to an understanding of ‘transformative learning’ that focuses on the type of learning that occurs when new information or insights clash with existing systems of knowledge, beliefs and values (the so-called ‘disorienting dilemma’). In other words, the critical assessment of epistemic, sociocultural and other assumptions inspires new learning and brings about qualitatively different changes.
Can education be based on a similar approach? If crises (whether the pandemic or another) lay bare the weaknesses of our education systems, take us out of our comfort zones and challenge many of our basic assumptions about how learning takes place, is this not a kind of disorienting dilemma?
The education crises that we continue to face as a result of COVID-19 have revealed some unpleasant truths about popular educational paradigms and forced a critical review of the common discourse surrounding education (questioning, for example, the dominance of skills building, the emphasis on measurement and quantification, and outcome-based approaches). A transformative learning approach would require us to focus on the root of the problems facing education instead of only solving current issues, to look for the causes and structures behind inequalities instead of merely mitigating their consequences, and to develop critical autonomy and not only resiliencies. In other words, to ask the right questions instead of chasing answers to the wrong ones.
Katarina Popović is Secretary General of the International Council for Adult Education
You Might Also Like

- Posted on
✍️ 這輩子 只有這麼一次

- Posted on
🏠聯合國教科文組織開羅辦事處與聯合國終身學習研究所啟動婦女、家庭與社區項目

- Posted on
【訪視分享 Part 2】宜蘭縣-教育部112年度學習型城市輔導訪視紀錄

- Posted on
【訪視分享】苗栗縣-教育部112年度學習型城市輔導訪視紀錄

- Posted on
🍀終身學習如何開啟Sianny Christianto的事業

- Posted on
🧿終身學習 山村讀書聲聲聲入心

- Posted on
📖新一期國際教育評論(IRE):「一條河流貫穿我們」

- Posted on