Courses emphasize that the educated master complete and systematic scientific knowledge, and are often offered in different categories; The curriculum system is organized on the basis of the logic and structure of the corresponding disciplines; Curriculum is outside the learner's personal life, and it is often above the learner, who is mainly the receiver of the curriculum; Teachers are the interpreters and interpreters of the curriculum. From the psychological basis, such courses mainly focus on the cognitive process of learners.
Course is experience.
The course emphasizes and highlights the learner's main role and experience in the course; The course pays attention to starting and designing from the perspective of learners; The course is implemented in the form of learners' practical activities; This course is not unfamiliar to learners, nor is it superior to them. Learners themselves are the organizers and participants of the course. From the psychological basis, such a course is broader than the cognitive process, emphasizing the full participation of learners' personality.
Courses are activities.
Emphasize that learners are the main body of the course and the initiative of learners as the main body; Emphasize the implementation of the course through the intermediary of learners' interests, needs, abilities and experiences; Starting from the integrity of activities, we should emphasize the comprehensiveness and integrity of courses and oppose the too detailed division of subjects; From the point of view that activity is the basis of human psychological development, we attach importance to the level, structure and mode of learning activities, especially the relationship between learners and courses. From the psychological basis, this course also emphasizes comprehensiveness, that is, in addition to the cognitive process, other psychological components of learners must be considered in the implementation of the course.
These three viewpoints reflect people's different understanding of the essence of curriculum and have different meanings to curriculum practice.
On the road of educational modernization, knowledge is first allied with curriculum. On this basis, scientific knowledge, especially natural science knowledge, entered the school curriculum, popularized compulsory education and developed smoothly, and established a set of corresponding education and teaching systems and methods, thus successfully completing the task of cultivating a large number of educated workers needed by society. In a word, this view has played an important role in the process of educational modernization.
However, there are hidden dangers in this view from the beginning: the curriculum focuses on how much knowledge to learn and master, how to make the educated remember the knowledge as soon as possible, and so on. It is almost inevitable that learners' mastery of the quantity and quality of knowledge often becomes the goal pursued by teachers and even the whole education. Today, the social demand for education has become more and more obvious in the pursuit of people's comprehensive quality, not just the quality of the knowledge he has mastered. Therefore, this view of curriculum is becoming more and more inadequate. In fact, the so-called tendency of "valuing others over yourself" has been lurking since the curriculum was defined as knowledge. It is predicted that it is almost impossible to complete the cultivation of talents needed by contemporary society under the condition that this concept remains unchanged.
The view that curriculum is experience is a breakthrough to the above problems. No matter what differences exist in the specific starting point and basis when people define courses by experience, they have noticed a basic fact: the perfection of knowledge itself cannot be directly transformed into the ideal development of learners. Although the course can reach a strict, complete, systematic and authoritative level in knowledge, it is often not helpful to the development of learners because it is divorced from the learners' subjective world and inner experience, and it is even impossible to guarantee that these knowledge can be truly understood and mastered by learners. In the educational practice of almost every country, such problems have been noticed and criticized by people. Therefore, people gradually shift their efforts from pursuing the objective perfection of the curriculum to the subjective function of the curriculum on learners-this is not subjective idealism, and the subjective experience of the educated is often the most objective reality.
Only those things that learners really experience, understand and accept can be called courses, and only when learners actively gain experience can they talk about the full development of their personality. Many people begin to use the concept of "experience" when talking about courses, emphasizing that courses are learners' own experiences and experiences of various natures and forms. Although Dewey's theory and corresponding practice have been widely criticized, the learner-centered and learner-independent learning experience course has become a quite extensive practice in the world. It is generally believed that the role of such courses in the development of the educated can not be achieved by courses that emphasize knowledge blindly.
The view that curriculum is activity is closely related to the development of activity theory in psychology and philosophy. The achievements of activity theory since this century are obvious to all, especially the activity theories of Piaget's genetic epistemology and the Willer-Leroux School of the former Soviet Union, which have made extremely incisive analysis and demonstration on the interaction between children and the outside world and the construction of their own internal cognitive structure through the internalization process, and revealed the structure, elements and transformation of activities to an unprecedented profound and systematic degree. All these provide a new theoretical basis for curriculum research, which is not only the splicing of individual research on psychological processes such as perception, memory and thinking, but also a detailed explanation and explanation of how many students are trying to figure out and imagine the learning process, and even directly touches on the psychological mechanism of learning activities and their integrated experience and personality changes when interacting with the curriculum. Therefore, the view that curriculum is an activity does have its unique appeal. As a comrade said, "Because of the double transformation of activities, external objective objects (learning materials) can be internalized into subjective experiences through the activities of the subject, and the subjective experiences of the subject (including emotional experiences and psychological effects) can also be externalized into activities, attitudes, actions and skills, which will affect and change the active objects and then affect and change themselves. Therefore, curriculum workers can learn about children through activities, and can also influence their learning experience by controlling activities (learning materials) and influencing activities. " (Note: Feng Xiaoxia: Building Kindergarten Curriculum Based on Activity Theory, Preschool Education Research No.4, 1997. )
Undoubtedly, activity theory will have a far-reaching impact on curriculum theory. However, it seems debatable whether the essence of curriculum should be defined as activity. First of all, activity is the basic way of human existence, and the research object of activity theory is relatively abstract and generalized general human activities-even though Piaget's research contains a large number of cases, what he pursues and gets is a universal conclusion. Therefore, the basic principles and specific viewpoints of activity theory should be mainly a theoretical guidance for curriculum research, rather than a direct explanation. Secondly, corresponding to the universality of activity, the concept of activity is relatively broad, and it is the most basic and superior concept in philosophy and psychology. Of course, it doesn't mean that it can't be used in the course, but it can be expected that there will inevitably be some confusion when using it, which will inevitably cause some inconvenience and even misinterpretation and misunderstanding.
It is worth noting that whether the curriculum is defined as "activity" or "experience", it has its own basis, but it also shows commonality. That is, it also stems from the criticism of the view that curriculum should be attributed to or understood as "knowledge" It also believes that courses should be greater than "knowledge", and it also attaches importance to learners' subjective initiative in participating in courses. I also hope to solve the practical problems in curriculum theory and practice by redefining the essence of curriculum.
Second, from "knowledge" to "experience" is the progress of curriculum practice and theory.
We believe that the different understanding of the essence of curriculum fundamentally reflects the change of curriculum itself, and the development of curriculum from modernization to modernization essentially reflects the change from knowledge ontology to experience ontology. As far as the problems faced by the curriculum reform in China today are concerned, many problems are rooted in the knowledge-based curriculum and corresponding understanding. Therefore, the research and implementation of experiential curriculum is an important theoretical and practical task for the success of reform.
Experience can endow the course with deeper connotation and richer functions.
Defining curriculum as experience is not only a word game or a simple concept replacement, it shows that the development of curriculum and people's corresponding understanding have entered a deeper level.
In Chinese, the word experience has at least three meanings: experience, knowledge and skills gained from practice, and perceptual experience. (Note: See Cihai Dictionary (Volume II), Shanghai People's Publishing House, 1997, p. 1247. The first usage is a verb, and the last two usage are nouns. Of course, nouns are used more frequently and more commonly than verbs. In English, there are also nouns and verbs. Different from Chinese, verbs are as common and frequent as nouns, especially highlighting and emphasizing the significance of personal direct experience process and personal subjective experience process.
Defining courses by experience rather than knowledge has at least the following two advantages.
First of all, the curriculum defined by experience expands the connotation of the curriculum, which can include not only all the contents of the curriculum defined by knowledge, but also more. In the past, we often said that what students learn in class is human historical experience, mainly referring to book knowledge and indirect experience, which can be equated with knowledge. Nowadays, more and more people think that the content of the course is not only that, but the personal experience and direct experience of the learners are the proper meaning in the title of the course. Obviously, it is difficult to define a course by "knowledge", but "experience" can be used. Experience in a broad sense refers to not only natural science and social science knowledge, but also direct experience and indirect experience. It can include personal experience or common experience.
Secondly, and more importantly, using experience to define a course can make the course acquire functions that can't be obtained when it is defined as knowledge, that is, the course should let learners experience it personally-in both Chinese and English, experience refers to personal experience, which can reflect the course including the active process of learners' possession and acquisition of knowledge. The expansion of this function reflects the leap of people's understanding of curriculum, changes the relationship between learners and curriculum, and their position and role in the process of learning curriculum, highlighting the interaction between curriculum and learners.
The transformation from "knowledge" to "experience" is realized in the process of curriculum modernization.
As mentioned above, the change of curriculum definition from knowledge to experience reflects the change of curriculum from modernization to modernization, which is the progress of curriculum itself. Although there are few relevant monographs in various books on curriculum theory, we can still experience subtle changes and progress from the evolution of concepts used by people and the corresponding explanations.
In fact, long before Spencer, Rousseau often used the concept of experience to express his views on the curriculum or teaching content in Emile. However, for a long time after Rousseau's death, although many of his thoughts were valued by people, this was an exception. It should be admitted that this is not accidental, because the proposition that curriculum is knowledge at that time can better reflect the requirements of history for education.
It was not until Dewey's time that the doubt and criticism of the rationality of curriculum as a knowledge proposition became a reality, because at this time, the modern curriculum based on knowledge has made great contributions and is relatively mature, and it also inevitably shows its limitations. Obviously, Dewey consciously used experience and tried to use it instead of knowledge to define the curriculum. In his various works, all the places involving teaching contents and courses adopt the expression of experience. People's general view and evaluation is that the narrowness of personal experience limits students' learning benefits and destroys the logical system of scientific knowledge, but ignores Dewey's other profound meaning. It can be considered that Dewey is establishing a view of the essence of the new curriculum, and the experience he advocates has both nouns and verbs, especially the meaning of verbs. Dewey's fundamental purpose is to express the curriculum with experience instead of knowledge, and to incorporate the process of learner autonomy into the essence of the curriculum. Because of this, the "children's center" he strongly advocated really became possible, "learning by doing" really became necessary, and "education is the continuous transformation of experience" really became meaningful.
Another phenomenon, which is often ignored by people, is actually meaningful. The use of the word experience has not disappeared with the decline of progressive education and Dewey's criticism, but has become increasingly standardized and universal. At present, a large number of educators and curriculum theorists who are contemporary with Dewey through translation, sooner or later, often use "experience" to explain and define the curriculum. This phenomenon is not so much a coincidence as a conscious choice with the imprint of the times.
F Babbitt, who once enjoyed the title of the father of curriculum theory, said in his book Curriculum: "Curriculum will be a series of experiences, which is necessary for children and young people to achieve those goals." (Note: f.bobbit.currency,
19 18.)
Ralph W. Taylor, who is regarded as the founder of modern curriculum theory, frequently uses experience instead of knowledge in his classic Basic Principles of Curriculum and Teaching, and once made a very clear explanation from the verb meaning of experience: "The term' learning experience' does not mean the content involved in a learning course, nor does it mean the various activities that teachers engage in. "Learning experience" refers to the interaction between the learner and the external conditions in the environment he reacts to. Learning happens through students' active behavior, and students' learning depends on what they do, not what the teacher does. " (Note: L.W. Taylor: Basic Principles of Curriculum and Teaching, People's Education Press, 1994, p. 49. )
We believe that from knowledge to experience, in the history of curriculum practice and curriculum theory, it is an important change, completing a historical task and realizing a revolution. The curriculum is no longer ahead of the students, but outside the students' knowledge system, but integrated with the students' learning process, and the two are integrated. Probably, it is not the most accurate and reasonable to summarize the course with experience, but it is indeed a great progress compared with the knowledge that defines the course. It reflects people's deeper grasp of the essence of curriculum, and makes the relationship between curriculum and learners change from one-way to two-way. Learners are no longer just followers of courses, but also owners, occupiers and participants of courses. If establishing the position of scientific knowledge in curriculum is an important task and symbol of curriculum modernization, then letting knowledge give way to experience and redefining the relationship between curriculum and educatees is the further development of curriculum, and curriculum is the progress embodied in the proposition of experience and the important foundation of curriculum modernization. In fact, the curriculum practice in most developed countries today clearly shows the color of this empirical ontology.
3. The practical significance of the concept of "curriculum is experience" to the development of China's curriculum theory.
Since the modernization of education in the late Qing Dynasty and the early Republic of China, China education has been accepting and implementing the knowledge-based curriculum. Accordingly, the curriculum is mainly expressed and explained through knowledge. After the founding of New China, there was no independent curriculum theory for a long time. The related ideas and theories mainly came from the teaching content in the pedagogy system of Kailov in the former Soviet Union, which was basically based on the concept that curriculum is knowledge. "The so-called education and teaching content is understood as the end of the chain of knowledge, skills and skilled skills ..." "The knowledge about the world, that is, the knowledge accumulated by human beings and systematized in various sciences, is particularly extensive. No one, even if he spends his whole life learning this knowledge, can fully learn it. Therefore, the task is to choose the basic things from the whole scientific knowledge, which is necessary for every educated person, no matter what his occupation is. " (Noe: Kailov: Pedagogy, People's Education Press, 1953, p. 93. Although educators in China have criticized and reflected on the Kailov system many times, the essence of the curriculum has basically not been touched. It can be said that on the one hand, the research on curriculum theory has been extremely lacking for a long time; On the other hand, the essence of curriculum is that the concept of knowledge is deeply rooted in people's hearts. Up to now, many articles have been written on the premise of "curriculum is knowledge" for the consideration of curriculum structure, curriculum form, the success or failure of schools and teachers in the process of curriculum implementation, the evaluation of teaching methods and means, and even the idea of curriculum reform.
Taking knowledge as the essence of curriculum is a milestone in the history of education in China, which ended the history of feudal education taking politicized ethical dogma as the curriculum, and made science, especially natural science knowledge, officially enter schools at all levels in China for the first time, and played an important role in the past century. Today, under the new historical conditions of social and educational development, China's curriculum theory should further understand the essence of curriculum and move from knowledge to experience. The specific significance lies in:
1) is helpful to understand more clearly the gains and losses of the current basic education curriculum system in China. As the current curriculum and a series of related systems, methods and means are all based on the concept of "curriculum is knowledge", if this concept remains unchanged, it will inevitably lead to "but toward which corner of the mountain" and it is not easy to treat one's gains and losses objectively and calmly. Similarly, when introducing and drawing lessons from other countries' curriculum theories and experiences, we often can't find each other's accurate positioning, thus lacking pertinence. Therefore, it is extremely necessary to think outside the box from a broader perspective and a larger background. With the help of "course is experience", this task can be accomplished effectively.
2) The view that curriculum is experience is helpful to the modernization of curriculum in China. Based on the curriculum view of experience ontology, we can regard the demand for learners' all-round development of personality, improvement of ability, development of wisdom and consideration of individual differences as an inevitable connection with the curriculum. Because of real possession and acquisition, all this is no longer dispensable, but inevitable. From the point of view that curriculum is experience, it is bound to require a new understanding of a set of educational and teaching concepts, forms and methods based on knowledge ontology, and a new evaluation of the current educational and teaching evaluation system, so as to promote the rationalization of curriculum.
In a word, curriculum is the viewpoint of experience, which will bring about profound changes in curriculum theory, and knowledge will no longer be the only result of curriculum concern, but only one of the results. Curriculum will pay more attention to students' development, which is the only way for curriculum modernization and the urgent task for China's education reform.