초록 열기/닫기 버튼
OECD DeSeCo와 그 후속 프로젝트인 OECD 교육 2030을 통해 제출된 (핵심)역량기반 교육론은 전통적으로 강조되어왔던 이론적 지식의 함양을 넘어, 실천적 지식에 대해서도 적절한 주목을 가하자는 동기에서 비롯된 것이다. 이러한 역량기반 교육론의 지식론 및 인식론의 주요한 이론적 원천으로는 분석철학자 길버트 라일의 명제적 지식과 방법적 지식의 구분, 정치학자 마이클 오크쇼트의 기술적합리주의 비판 및 신념정치와 의심정치의 구분, 그리고 물리화학자이자 과학사, 과학철학자인 마이클 폴라니의 암묵적 지식과 개인적 지식 개념 등을 들 수 있다. 그러나 OECD 역량교육론이 애초에 의도했던 바와 그 실현 사이의 괴리는 일단 OECD 프로젝트의 강령 자체 속에서 발견된다. 그리고 이러한 문제는 역량교육론을 한국 고등교육 체제 속으로 도입, 적용하는 과정과 모습 속에서 더욱 심각하게 드러난다. 이러한 난맥상은 특정 교육 담론을 국가에 의해 강제적으로 도입하고 적용하는 조처를 철폐하고, 역량교육론을 개별 교육 단위에서의 숙고를 통한 자유로운 선택의 주제로 삼음으로써 해소된다.
The (core) competency-based education theory presented through the OECD’s DeSeCo project and its follow-up project (OECD Education 2030), stems from the motivation to pay appropriate attention to practical knowledge beyond cultivating theoretical knowledge that has been traditionally emphasized. The main theoretical sources constituting the epistemology of competency-based education theory can be presented as follows: analytical philosopher Gilbert Ryle's distinction between ‘know-how’ and ‘know-that’, political scientist Michael Oakshott's criticism of technological rationalism and his distinction between the politics of faith and that of skepticism, and physical chemist, historian of science, and philosopher of science Michael Polanyi's concepts of tacit knowledge and personal knowledge. However, discrepancy between what the OECD's competency-based education theory originally intended and its actual realization is first found in the program of the OECD projects itself; and this problem is much more seriously revealed in the process and appearance of introducing and applying competency-based education theory into the Korean higher education system. This self-contradiction that ‘betrays’ the original theoretical request of competency-based education theory is identified in the following areas: the OECD projects’ reduction of competences as ‘know-how’ to the form of propositional knowledge, in the situation in Korea, in the state's status that claims to be a rule maker, in the future discourse based on simple logic of technological determinism, and in the making of propositions and the quantification of competencies. Such problems are resolved by abolishing measures of forcibly introducing and applying a specific educational discourse by the state, and making the competency-based education theory a subject of free choice through deliberation at individual educational units.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
Core Competencies, OECD, Know-how, Know-that, Higher Education, Liberal Arts
