pedagogy-volume-1 2

PEDAGOGY AND THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETYVolume 1

2nd International Conference on Advanced and Systematic Research Conference Chairman: Vladimir imovi to take place November 13 15, 2008, in Zadar, Croatia

2nd Scientific research symposium:

Pedagogy and the Knowledge SocietyNovember 13 and 14, 2008

Program Committee: Milan Matijevi, Zagreb, Croatia Marijan Blai, Ljubljana, Slovenia Mijo Cindri, Zagreb, Croatia Vlatka Domovi, Zagreb, Croatia Jasna Krstovi, Rijeka, Croatia Wolfgang Mller-Commichau, Germany Conference secretary: Vinja Raji

Under the sponsorship of Ministry of Science, Education and Sport of the Republic of Croatia

Cip zapis dostupan u raunalnom katalogu Nacionalne i sveuiline kjinice u Zagrebu pod brojem 683497

ISBN 978-953-7210-12-0

PEDAGOGY AND THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETYCollected Papers of 2nd Scientific research symposium:

Pedagogy and the Knowledge SocietyZadar, Croatia, November 13 and 14, 2008

Volume 1

2nd International Conference on Advanced and Systematic ResearchNovember 13 15, 2008

Edited by / Uredili Mijo Cindri Vlatka Domovi Milan Matijevi

Uiteljski fakultet Sveuilite u Zagrebu 2008.

CONTENTS / SADRAJ

Balka, Zerrin, Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 THE CONTEMPORARY STRATEGIES IN CONSTRUCTING EDUCATION IN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY FROM THE TIME OF ATATRK TO NOWADAYS Suvremene strategije izgradnje obrazovanje u drutvu znanja od Ataturkova doba do danas Blai, Marjan, Slovenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 CONTEMPORARY DIDACTICS BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICE Suvremena didaktika izmeu teorije in prakse Bouillet, Dejana, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 KEY COMPETENCES IN THE EDUCATION OF DISABLED CHILDREN Kljune kompetencije u odgoju i obrazovanju djece s tekoama u razvoju Braja, Hasim, Albania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 THE IMPORTANCE OF GLOBAL EDUCATION TOWARDS THE CHALLENGES OF THE NEW MILLENNIUM Vanost globalne edukacije za izazove novog tisuljea Brki, Luka i Olivera Jurkovi Maji, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF USING NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN THE EDUCATION OF ADULTS Prednosti i nedostaci primjene novih tehnologija u obrazovanju odraslih Budimir Ninkovi, Gordana Srbija . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 FROM MORAL VALUES IN SCHOOL AND OUTSIDE THIS INSTITUTION TOWARDS SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE Od moralnih vrednosti u koli i van nje ka drutvu znanja Can Sannav, Sabri and Emre Gvendir, Trkiye . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 THE SGNFCANCE OF SERVCE LEARNNG N EDUCATON Vanost prakse u edukaciji Domovi, Vlatka and Ivana Cindri, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 KEY COMPETENCES REFLECTED IN THE PROGRAM FOR PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER-EDUCATION AND PRIMARY FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION Kljune kompetencije u programu za obrazovanje uitelja i uitelja stranih jezika u primarnom obrazovanju Dopita, Miroslav, Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS INTEREST IN NATURAL SCIENCES Zanimanje uenika srednje kola za prirodne znanosti

Duh, Matja, Jerneja Herzog i Janja Bati, Slovenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 CONSTRUCTIVE PARADIGM IN TEACHING ART IN THE LIGHT OF MOTIVATION AND LEARNING PROBLEMS Konstruktivistika paradigma kao motivacijska i obrazovna problematika u nastavi likovne kulture Gjoci, Pranvera, Albania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 THE INTERACTIVE TEACHING AND STUDENT CENTERED Interaktivno poduavanje i usredotoenost na uenika Grecmanov, Helena, Czech Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 INTEREST OF PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS IN NATURAL SCIENCE DISCIPLINES Zanimanje osnovnokolskih uenika za discipline prirodnih znanosti Jurevi-Lozani, Anka, Croatia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 TO BE DIFFERENT INCLUSIVE PROGRAMS OF EARLY EDUCATION Biti razliit inkluzivni programi ranog odgoja Koludrovi, Morana i Ina Rei Ercegovac, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 MODERN CURRICULUM CHANGES AS NEW SOURCES OF STRESS ON TEACHERS Promjene suvremenog kurikuluma kao novi izvori stresa za uitelje Kralj, Lidija, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 LEARNING AND COLLABORATION IN VIRTUAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT Uenje i suradnja u virtualnom okruenju za uenje Krek, Janez, Janez Vogrinc and Milena Valeni Zuljan, Slovenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 PATRIOTISM AND UPBRINGING IN A MODERN LIBERAL AND DEMOCRATIC PARLIAMENTARY STATE Patriotizam, univerzalnost i partikularnost: neka od temeljnih pitanja odgoja i obrazovanja u javnoj koli Kumnova, Mazllom and Begzad Baliu, Kosovo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 LIFELONG LEARNING A CHALLENGE FOR KOSOVA Cjeloivotno uenje izazov za Kosovo Lermen, Markus, Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 THE USE OF DIGITAL MEDIA IN FURTHER EDUCATION OF TEACHERS Uporaba digitalnih medija u daljnjoj edukaciji uitelja Liusvaara, Leena, Finland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203 HEADTEACHERS ROLE AS AN ORGANIZATIONAL LEADER-PLANNING TOWARDS THE NEEDS OF FUTURE SCHOOLS Uloga ravnatelja kao organizacijskog voe planiranje za potrebe buduih kola Ljubeti, Maja, Dubravka Male i Barbara Kuevi, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211 TRAINING PROSPECTIVE GENERAL TEACHERS FOR WORKING WITH PARENTS Osposobljavanje buduih uitelja razredne nastave za rad s roditeljima

Male, Dubravka, Ksenija Romstein and Tijana Bali, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 FAMILIY PEDAGOGY AND PARTNERSHIP WITH PARENTS IN PRESCHOOL EDUCATION PROGRAMMES Obiteljska pedagogija i suradnja s roditeljima u programima studija predkolskog odgoja Matijevi, Milan, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231 MULTIMEDIA DIDACTICS FOR A KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY Multmedjska ddaktka za drutvo znanja Miljkovi, Dubravka and Majda Rijavec, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241 WHAT MAKES US HAPPY: STRENGTHS OF MIND, STRENGTHS OF HEART OR SELF-CONTROL? to nas ini sretnima: snage uma, snage srca ili samokontrola? Mller-Commichau, Wolfgang, Germany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251 LEARNING TEACHERS TEACHING LEARNERS Uitelji koji ue uenici koji pouavaju Opi, Sinia Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257 STIMULATING ASSERTIVENESS AT LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL CLASSES PUPILS Potcanje asertvnost kod uenka nh razreda osnovne kole Pajulo, Esa, Finland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 SPECIAL EDUCATION IN FINLAND Odgoj i obrazovanje djece s posebnim potrebama u nskoj Petrovi-Soo, Biserka, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281 PERSONAL VALUES IN THE CONTEXT OF LIFELONG LEARNING OF TEACHERS Osobne vrjednost u kontekstu cjelovotnog uenja odgojtelja/utelja Popova-Koskarova, Rozalina, Macedonia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE CONTEMPORARY CURRICULUM IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS Osobitosti modernog osnovnokolskog kurikuluma Poega, eljko i Boris Crnkovi, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 TOWARDS KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY THROUGH LIFELONG LEARNING A COMPARISON OF CROATIAN EDUCATION SYSTEM WITH OTHER COUNTRIES Cjeloivotnim uenjem prema drutvu znanja usporedba sustava obrazovanja u RH sa drugim zemljama svijeta Radovanovi, Diana, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 CLASS MANAGEMENT AND CLASS MEETINGS IN SOME ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS AND PEDAGOGICAL CONCEPTS Upravljanje razrednm odjelom razredn sastanc u nekm alternatvnm pedagokma konceptma

Raji, Vinja, Croatia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323 PRIVATE AND ALTERNATIVE PRIMARY SCHOOLS A RESPONSE FOR THE NEEDS OF THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY Privatne i alternativne osnovne kole odgovor na potrebe drutva znanja Rister, Damir, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333 KEY COMPETENCE LEARNING TO LEARN IN THE CROATIAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CURRICULUM Kljuna kompetencija uiti kako uiti u hrvatskom nastavnom planu i programu za osnovnu kolu ari, Marjeta, Slovenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343 THE ROLE OF WRITTEN REFLECTION IN LEARNING Uloga pisanog promiljanja u uenju krgi, Muhamed, R BiH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY AND LIFELONG LEARNING AS A CHALLENGE TO A MORE EFFICIENT PEDAGOGIC THEORY AND PRACTISE Drutvo znanja cjelovotno uenje kao zazov razvoju djelotvornje pedagoke teorje prakse ura Solea Grijak i Dragan Solea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359 COMMUNICATION AS AN IMPERATIVE OF INFORMATIONAL SOCIETY Komunikacija kao imperativ informacijskog drutva teh, Barbara and Jana Kalin, Slovenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 EXPERIENCE AND CHALLENGES IN CO-OPERATION BETWEEN TEACHERS AND PARENTS IN PROVIDING A LEARNING COMMUNITY Iskustva i izazovi u suradnji uitelja i roditelja za zajednicu uenja Tot, Daria, Mijo Cindri, Vladimir imovi, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385 ESSENTIAL PRESUPPOSITIONS OF TEACHER SELF-EVALUATION: READINESS FOR PARTICIPATION Btna pretpostavka (samo)vrednovanja utelja: spremnost sudonka Valeni, Milena i Jana Kalin, Slovenia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399 THE IMPORTANCE OF QUALITY TEACHING IN A KNOWLEDGE-BASED SOCIETY FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF TEACHER COMPETENCES Znaaj kvalitetnog poduavanja s gledita uiteljevih kompetencija u drutvu znanja Vrankovi, Biljana i Maja Reberak, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411 SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN kolsk razvojn plan mjerljv pokazatelj kvaltete rada kole Vujii, Lidija, Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423 DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH CULTURE OF AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF LIFELONG LEARNING Razvoj stravake kulture odgojno-obrazovne ustanove z perspektve cjelovotnog uenja

2nd International Conference Pedagogy and the Knowledge Society November 13 15, 2008, Zadar, Croatia Conference Paper

THE CONTEMPORARY STRATEGIES IN CONSTRUCTING EDUCATION IN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY FROM THE TIME OF ATATRK TO NOWADAYSZerrin BalkaT.. Faculty of Education, [email protected]

Abstract Knowledge society is a development where education is prior with communication technologies, ways of knowledge which carry the society further than a developed one socio-economically and socio-culturally. With the improvement of new basic technologies; knowledge sector, knowledge production, wealth of knowledge and qualied human factors also become signicant for the knowledge society. In todays world most of the knowledge known as new is rapidly changing, becoming old and new developments substitute for them. Thus, it is signicant for the societies, countries and associations to have a healthy organization and to have quality and permanence in the works given. The most fundamental way to keep up with the new and fast developments is possible with a spread over, eective education perceptiveness. In this study, administrative, social, economic, and educational shifts are dealt with by the foundation of Turkish Republic in 29th October 1923 by ATATRK. The shifts are carried out in the light of country realities and modern world progresses; especially educational improvements, which were realized like changes, are done with modern and planned strategies and principles from the time of ATATRK to nowadays. And it is dealt with how these shifts and improvements are in harmony with the modern world. It is also emphasized that the modern approaches continue nowadays and the challenges for them are put forward. Key Words: Atatrk, Education, Modern Strategies, Knowledge Society, Education, Modern Strategies, Knowledge Society, Period of Republic. 9

2nd International Conference PEDAGOGY AND THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY

IntroductonTurkish Education System after the establishment of the Turkish Republic was rebuilt and revised radically by the prolic leader and statesman Atatrk, who could appraise The Information Age and attempted to systematize Turkish society as information society (Kasalak, 2001). Such an attempt, that is the new education policy, has become an important factor for the development and modernisation of Turkey. Because education is one of the triggering forces the rapid developments in a country. During the republic, education which has important roles in both individual and social lives became favourable. In parallel to education, the numbers of schools, teaching materials and teachers got increased. Education policies and strategies during the Turkish Republic are based on the national, democratic, secular, and modern education principles stemmed from Atatrks opinions. In the light of these strategies, in order to educate contributor and considerate individuals, education must follow all educational advances and novelties. In various projects by The Ministry of Education, it is seen that a continuum progress has been purposed in the direction of civilization and scientic developments (etin Glseren, 2003).

The Basic Properties of Information SocietyIt is a universal fact that humanity is being advanced through education. Education is the main means of achievement of individual, environmental and social aims and is necessary for getting peace, liberty, social justice and universal unity. Moreover, education as a triggering force aects social and economic progresses. Education is also a tool for individual targets, responsibility, creativity and ability. Therefore, it is necessary to make individual, national and global alterations in education (Alkan, 2001). In the rapid development process of the information age, educational institutions are the chief institutions which are aected by the developments. The increase in the development speed shortens the degrees of social, individual and organizational reactions (Yiit, 2003). The expectations of human beings for living in a modern society have prompted the rapid developments of technology. In this process, education which can briey dened as an acculturation period has important tasks like a locomotive. Technological development which can be assumed as a product of education has become eective on the development of education and put new insights in the eld of education. Although technology was initially not been regarded as a tool for education, in recent years the tendency in technological developments has aected the novelties in education. The scopes of Education Technology that seeks for answers for the concept how to teach get widened 10

Balka Z.: THE CONTEMPORARY STRATEGIES IN CONSTRUCTING EDUCATION

and modernised. The progress in consequence of the interaction of individualinformation-society concepts and the changes in the quality of these three concepts have modied the concept of individual quality and the functions of social life (Keser, 1991). At the beginning of the 21st century, the social status has been regarded as information age. Though this concept has been discussed by many scientists and classes, it has been accepted as a general framework. In addition to the importance and function of information technologies on education, the main contributor to education is teacher who directs the dimensions of education and contributes eective, functional and productive purposes. The evaluations in this context reveal that the opportunities presented by technologies cannot be implemented eectively without qualied people in the eld of education. In this sense, teacher behaves as mediator between students and information technologies and directs students how to utilize those technologies (Hizal, 1993). The roles of teachers, then, cannot be disregarded while forming the information society of which fundamental feature is learning. The education system in which training individuals is proposed for information society requires schools and teachers as the governors of the system to have distinctive characteristics (Fndk, 1999). Information society can be valued as a community in which information is generated, assessed and used for the diagnosis and solution of problems. In this society, education is learner-centred. The numbers of the students in a class do not exceed 20-25. The responsibilities and tasks of a teacher in information society are: To examine the physical, intellectual, emotional, socio-economic characteristics, families, environments, interests, needs and abilities of students To make students be devoted to school, information and learning; to teach how to learn by themselves To teach students how to use resources for their studies, the ideas of others, to investigate the necessary sources, to take notes, to summarise the input information, to report the collected information To make students gain investigating, examining and reading habits To prepare learning environments in school and classroom for students to study by themselves To guide students; to direct them; and to be excellent models for students To make students be involved in education activities; to enhance them to take roles while planning the activities; to teach them how to nd solutions to the problems, to evaluate education process, to analyse lack points and to increase the quality in education (Tekk, 2002). 11


Education Strategies in Turkeya. The first reform movements during the period of AtatrkThe rst Education Congress was opened by the opening speech of Mustafa Kemal Paa in Ankara during the ministry of Hamdullah Suphi Bey on 16th July, 1921. In his speech, Atatrk declared the instructions of Turkish State for National Education and recommended the planned novelties in education. 180 members participated in the Congress. It went on for one week (Ylmaz, 1988). The agenda of the Congress in which 259 teachers from dierent parts of the Anatolia also participated comprised two main topics: 1) the national curriculum and instruction periods of primary education; 2) the national curriculum and the course of secondary education. In this Congress, the instruction period of the four-year primary education was arranged as 5 years (Sakaolu, 1992). In his speech, Atatrk stated the importance of education with those words: we must apply the biggest part of the profound administrative fullments in education (Atatrkn Sylev Demeleri, Vol. II). After the one-year ministry of Mehmet Vehbi Bey which began on 20th November, 1921, smail Safa Bey whose endeavours cannot be disregarded took over this task on 6th February, 1922. During his ministry, the rst conceptual revolutionary step in the eld of education was initiated. In his opening speech in March, 1922, Atatrk declared that the most fruitful and productive task of the government is national education (nan, 1983). Education during the Republic government of Atatrk got its modern characteristics by changing its old structure named Sbyan Schools. Atatrk declared that pre-school education which is an important education process for children is an obligatory application of industrialization process in modern societies and societies should follow the educational progress in other civilized societies. By declaring such points, Atatrk described the targets of primary education as national ideals. For him, primary education means a case of being individual and nation. It is the task of education to teach Turkish children the required themes, skills, behaviours and habits for being excellent citizens (Emirolu, 1986). Therefore, Atatrk is a leader who provided major opportunities for education as well as an excellent soldier, statesman and diplomat. When the efforts and contributions of Atatrk are examined in general sense, it is seen that Atatrk appraised the notion of education as an educator, outlined and determined the principles of national education and struggled for elucidating the importance of national education (Feyziolu, 1982). Atatrk struggled for describing the principles of the National Education System even during the most critical days of the War of Independence while 12


he was attempting for the establishment of the Turkish Republic. During the post-war period he insisted on the importance of education and maintained his attempts for the scope of education in order to adjust and regulate the principles in favour of nation (27th, October 1922). He declared his ideas with those words: Our most important and productive tasks are the issues of the National Education. To get victory in these elds is a must. Independence of a nation depends on its education. In order to get that victory, we have to arrange education program as a unique body and idea. For me, this program has two main points: 1) the program should be appropriate for the requirements of our social life; 2) it should be appropriate for the requirements of the age (Palazolu, 1999). For Atatrk, education like other systematic organizations should full all sorts of educational modications and apply contemporary methods by defeating former traditional ideas (nan, 1983). In contemporary education, learner centred education instead of teacher centred one and teaching the subjects from known to unknown are the main objectives (Akn-Bal, 2001). The aim of new social structure with the establishment of the republic is to change the traditional approaches, to secure for contemporary citizenship perception and to form the new social structure through education. In this sense, the basic characteristics of education during the Republic can be outlined as followings: The education institutions were not national before the republic. There were various types of schools and education methods. Those were Mahalle Mektepleri (district schools), Medrese, Tanzimat schools, colleges, and minority schools. Those schools were governed by dierent administrations (Yiit, 1997). In order to take the schools under the control of the government, the Law Union in Education (Tevhidi Tedrisat Kanunu the law number 430) was legislated on 3rd March, 1924 (Kaya, 1984). The signicant features of this law which is under the constitution declaration even today (the article 142 of 1982 constitution) are that education issues are carried out under the control of the state in accordance with the contemporary scientic and education principles in the direction of Atatrks principles and renovations (Versan, 2003), the education system should be democratised and accomplished in secular domain (Yiit, 1997). New trends were arranged in order to support and expand the education reform which began with the law of education union. Those new education eorts triggered the attempts for the modernisation of our country. In addition to education union, with the law of Maarif Tekilat teaching organisation (number 789) which was legislated on 22nd March, 1926, no school was opened without permission of the National Ministry Education, and the education programs in the secondary education institutions which formerly had 13


been under the control of other ministries were arranged by the Ministry of Education. Moreover, vocational schools were also included into the body of the Ministry of Education. Further, a language commission and the Talim Terbiye Committee (education commission) consisting of scientists and experts were taken under the control of the ministry (etin-Glseren, 2003). In the rst years of the Republic, with the arrangements in the eld of education, primary education countered the needs of population, economy and the cultural modications (Kodamanolu, 1963). The Heyeti lmiye Commission (scientic commissions), which was assembled many times (July, 1923, April, 1924, December, 1925, January, 1926), was realized by taking the reports of foreign experts. On the other hand, the numbers of teachers were determined by the decisions at those meetings (Akyz, 2004). After the establishment of the Talim Terbiye Committee in 1926, the organisations of those meetings were held by Milli Eitim ura (National Education Committee) (etin-Glseren, 2003). Since 1924, many foreign educators were invited to Turkey and those educators prepared education reports in order to reect their ideas about the lack points of our education (Akyz, 2004). This period has witnessed many educational reforms not only in our country but also all over the world. One of the most eminent experts was John Dewey. On the other hand, Turkish experts and educators have been sent to other countries so as to gather information about the education policies of other countries (zcan, 1989). Although some claim that the reports by foreign experts have not been ecient on our education system, the implementations point out that all the eorts have become ecient enough to plan the education system in our country. Among the countries all over the world, Japan and Germany have got the most satised supports from foreign educators. Those instances conrm that the experts and bureaucrats should work in coordination for long periods in order to get productive results from those endeavours (Ergn, 1997). Prof. Dr. John Dewey who came to Turkey in July, 1924 made some investigations for guiding education. Dewey, who was invited to Turkey by Maarif Vekillii -education delegation-, reported some noteworthy points about primary education. In his report, Dewey pointed out that in Turkish schools, the objectives should be determined and to achieve those objectives, teaching merely course subject is not satisfactory (Bal, 1991). That is, if the objectives are clearly decided, the education preventions will be eective. Thus, some particular objectives are necessary for primary education. In Turkish National Education, no ambiguity or diculty takes place for determining the objectives. This is because of the position of Turkey as a member that is dynamic, broad-minded, liberated and independent (elenk and et.al., 2000). Dewey reported that the curriculum of primary schools should be prepared regarding the expectations 14


of both students and the local needs in Turkey. Besides, he also focused on the importance of teachers salaries and oered some opportunities with regard to accommodation problems such as renting houses at low cost or providing free housing. Moreover, in the report he suggested that for village schools, teachers should be trained regarding the living conditions in villages (Kalayc, 2004). When Turkish education history is examined, teaching profession has become a distinguished profession with the responsibilities and social tasks within the modernisation project which was initiated with the declaration of the republic. The image of teacher in Turkey as well as all over the world has been acknowledged as the main factor for implementing and realizing the social expectations with regard to education (nal, 2005). As regards this information, it can be concluded that since teachers would educate the generation who would defend and protect the republic, teacher training became very important in this period. Therefore, many teacher training schools, education institutions, village institutions, higher teacher training schools, and many faculties of education were founded. In this context, qualied attempts for training qualied teachers became foremost aim (Snmez, 2004). As another strategy of expanding education and implementing the objectives, Latin alphabet was accepted as a new alphabet in 1928 for increasing the rate of literacy and education level and making Turkish language a common language in education. In order to get rid of the supremacy of foreign languages over Turkish and to expand it in accordance with the requirement of science by enhancing acceptable language usage, Turkish History Institution in 1931 and Turkish Language Institution in 1932 were established (MEB, 2003). - For teaching the new alphabet, prolonged literacy activities were initiated. In the rst years of the Republic, the literacy rate was 10%. With the renovation of alphabet adoption (1928), this rate was 0%. - Course books, dictionaries, all ocial publications were revised and republished. - The scientic terms were changed regarding the Turkish correspondences and education was carried out with those terms (etin-Glseren, 2003) On the other hand, with those strategies, to communicate with other civilized nations was proposed. The years between 1927 and 1928 witnessed hard and intensied struggles for the adoption of new alphabet. Finally, on 28th May, 1928, the Language Committee (Dil Encmeni) was formed by the Ministry of National Education. A comprehensive report was prepared by the committee and presented to Atatrk. On 8th August, 1928, the reform of alphabet was realized with the Sarayburnu speech of Atatrk. This reform was legislated on 1st November, 1928 and implemented on 3rd November, 1928 (Kavcar, 2007).

15


b.

The developments since Atatrk

Education in Turkey has been a key point for progress and civilization. Therefore, since the beginning of the Ottoman Empire and during the Republic, the governments have struggled for the developments in education, at least for the expansion of education in amount. In this sense, signicant amount of investments have been devoted to education regarding the impact of education on social, economic and political advancement of the country (Kaya, 1984). After the foundation of the Republic, in the education arena, the 1920s were recuperating, the 1930s were searching for methods, the 1940s were rapid initiation, the 1950s were recession, the 1960s and 70s were planned advancement, the 1980s were recession, the 1990s were reinitiating years (Baaran, 1999).The 2000s are the years for holding prestigious positions among the world countries (Bilgen, 2003). The assemblies of the Heyeti lmiye (scientic commissions) in the years1923, 1924, 1925, 1926 were organized by the Talim Terbiye Committee under the name of Milli Eitim ura (National Education Meetings). At those meetings organized from 1939 until 1999, many topics on education such as education curriculum, teacher training, education planning, functional organizations were discussed and noteworthy decisions were taken and applied (etinGlseren, 2003). With the National Education Law (numbered 1739) which was legislated in 1973, primary education became 8-year compulsory education but the application was not achieved. This application was put into practice in 1997-1998 instruction years in all parts of the country. This compulsory education aims at preventing quitting school after primary school and boosting the quality of education by making it available to stay at school longer (Akgn, 2003). With this education law the principles of Turkish National Education have been determined as generality and equality, protection of individual and society, direction, education rights, opportunity and service equality, continuity, Atatrks principles, democracy, secularity, scientic struggles, planning, schoolfamily collaboration, education everywhere (etin-Glseren, 2003). The fact that qualied and trained human beings are eective on the development of a country is an appreciated notion (Grkan, 1991). The main objective of present Turkish Education System is to train creative and productive man power for the benets of the society. In order to achieve this, school is the paramount institution that gives opportunities to individuals to behave autonomously and be talented (Yiit & Bayraktar, 2006). A school can realize those behaviours through education. For the achievement of the principles, the policies and decision of education should be realist and objective. Therefore, Turkish National Education System is organized by taking into consideration some points such as the constitution, the other laws for education, government 16


programs, recovery programs, national education meetings, and national programs (Tremen, 2008). In conclusion, when Atatrks declarations and struggles are examined, it is easily recognized that Atatrk presumed the characteristics of education system, the information age, the information society in the 21st century and struggled for those novelties even in 1920s. So, he thought the concepts such as education, school, teacher, information and science as the principal issues of a society. The education attempts for prompting information and generating an information society became the dominant factors on the civilization of our country. The progress of our education system in the history of education is noteworthy as the product of the attempts for achieving qualied standards.

References1. AKGN, N., (2003) Trk Eitim Sisteminin Yaps, Eitim Sisteminin zellikleri, retmenlik Mesleine Giri, Pegem A Yaynclk, Ankara 2003. 2. AKIN, M., BAL, D. A., (2002) Atatrkn Eitimci Kiilii ve Eitim-retim Boyutlu Dnceleri, Atatrk niversitesi Eitim Fakltesi Yaynlar, Cilt: 4, Erzincan 2002. 3. AKYZ, Y., (2004) Trk Eitim Tarihi (M.. 1000 M.S. 2004), Pegem A Yaynclk, Ankara 2004. 4. ALKAN, C., (2001) Trk Milli Eitim Sisteminin 2000li Yllarda Yeniden Yaplanmasnn Temel Esaslar Eitimde Yansmalar, VI. H.H. Tekk Eitim Aratrma Gelitirme Merkezi, Ankara 2001. 5. ATAKLI, A., (2004) Eitimin Tarihi Temelleri lk Gnden Baretmenlie, Asil Yaynclk, Ankara 2004. 6. ATATRKN Sylev ve Demeleri, Cilt: I-III, 4nc Bask, Trk Tarihi Kurumu Yaynlar, Ankara 1989. 7. BAL, H., (1991) 1924 Raporunun Trk Eitimine Etkileri ve J. Deweyin Eitim Felsefesi, Kor Yaynlar, stanbul 1991. 8. BAARAN, E., (1999) Eitime Giri, Bilim Yaynclk, 4nc Bask, Ankara 1999. 9. BLGEN, H.N., (2003) Eitim, ada Eitim Dergisi, Yl: 28, Say: 300, Ankara 2003. 10. ELENK, S., TERTEMZ, N., KALAYCI, N., (2000) lkretim Programlar ve Gelimeler (Program lke ve Teknikleri Asndan Deerlendirilmesi), Nobel Yaynlar, Ankara 2000. 11. ETN, K., GLSEREN, ., (2003) Cumhuriyet Dnemi Eitim Stratejileri, Milli Eitim Dergisi, Gz Say 160, Ankara 2003. 12. EMROLU, M., (1986) Eitimle lgili A Konumas, ada Eitim, Aylk Eitim retim Dergisi, Yl: 11, Ankara 1986. 13. ERGN, M., (1997) Atatrk Devri Trk Eitimi, Trkiyenin Sanal Eitim Bilimleri Ktphanesi, Afyon Kocatepe niversitesi, Afyon 1997. 14. FEYZOLU, T., (2982) Atatrkn ada Bilime, Eitime ve retmene Verdii nem, Erciyes niversitesi, Atatrk Kltr ve Eitim Semineri, Kayseri 1982. 15. FINDIKI, ., (2001) Bilgi Toplumunda Eriyen Deerler ve Eitim Eitimde Yansmalar VI. H.H. Tekk Eitim Aratrma Gelitirme Merkezi, Ankara 2001.

17

2nd International Conference PEDAGOGY AND THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY 16. GRKAN, T., (1991) lkokul retmenlerinin retmenlik Mesleine liken Tutumlar ile Benlik Kavramlar Arasndaki liki, zmir Birinci Eitim Kongresi, Dokuz Eyll niversitesi Buca Eitim Fakltesi, zmir 1991. 17. NAN, M. R., (1983) Atatrkn Eitimci Kiilii Cumhuriyet Dneminde Eitim, Milli Eitim Yaynlar, stanbul 1983. 18. KALAYCI, N., (2004) Cumhuriyet Dneminde lkretim (Hkmet Programlar ve Uygulamalar), stanbul 2004. 19. KASALAK, K., (2001) Milli Eitimi Yeniden Yaplandrma almalar, Sleyman Demirel niversitesi Yaynlar, Isparta 2001. 20. KAVCAR, C., (2007) Yaz Devrimi ve Trkenin Yaamas lkretmen Eitimci Dergisi, Say: 6, Kk Yaynclk, Ankara 2007. 21. KAYA, Y.K., (1984) nsan Yetitirme Dzenimiz; Politika-Eitim-Kalknma-Eitimde Model Aray, Hacettepe niversitesi Yaynlar, Ankara 1984. 22. KESER, H., (1991) Eitimde Nitelik Gelitirmede Bilgisayar Destekli Eitim ve Ders Yazlmlarn Rol, Eitimde Araylar Sempozyumu I, zel Kltr Okullar Eitim-AratrmaGelitirme Merkezi, stanbul 1991. 23. KODAMANOLU, M. N., (1963) Trkiyede Eitim (1923-1960), Siyasal Bilgiler Fakltesi Maliye Enstits Yaynlar, Ankara 1963. 24. M.E.B., (2002-2003) Milli Eitim, Saysal Veriler, Milli Eitim Bakanl, Aratrma Planlama ve Kurulu Bakanl, Ankara 2003. 25. Milli Eitim Bakanl (M.E.B.), (2003) Milli Eitim Saysal Veriler, Milli Eitim Bakanl Aratrma ve Planlama ve Koordinasyon Kurulu Bakanl Yaynlar, Ankara 2003. 26. ZCAN, A., (1989) Atatrkn Eitim Gr, Marmara niversitesi Atatrk Eitim Fakltesi Eitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Say: 1, stanbul 1989. 27. PALAZOLU, A.B., (1999) Atatrkn Eitimle lgili Dnceleri, Milli Eitim Bakanl Eitim Aralar ve Donatm Dairesi Bakanl Yaynlar, Ankara 1999. 28. SAKAOLU, N., (1992) Cumhuriyet Dnemi Eitim Tarihi, letiim Yaynlar, stanbul 1992. 29. SNMEZ, V., (2004) Eitimin Tarihsel Temelleri retmenlik Mesleine Giri, An Yaynclk, Ankara 2004. 30. SZER, E., (1996) Trk Eitim Sisteminde Deime ve Yenileme, Eitim ve Bilim Dergisi, Say: 101, Ankara 1996. 31. TEKIIK, H.H., (2002) Bilgi a ve Bizde Eitim Uygulamalar, ada Eitim Dergisi, Say: 290, Ankara 2002. 32. TEKIIK, H.H., (2003) Milli Eitimde Yenilenme Zorunluluu, ada Eitim Dergisi, Yl: 28, Say: 294, Ankara 2003. 33. TREMEN, F., (2008) Trk Eitim Sisteminin Amalar, Temel lkeleri ve Genel Yaps, Trk Eitim Sistemi ve Okul Ynetimi, Pegem A Yaynlar, Ankara 2008. 34. NAL, I., L., (2005) retmen mgesinde Neoliberal Dnm Eitim-Bilim-Toplum Dergisi, Cilt: 3, Say: 11, Ankara 2005. 35. VERSAN, V., (2003) Atatrk lkeleri Inda Eitim Birlii, Belgelerle Trk Tarihi Dergisi, Dn-Bugn-Yarn, stanbul 2003. 36. YILMAZ, H., (1988) Heyet-i lmiyeler (1923-1924-1925-1926), Yksek Lisans Tezi. 37. YT, B., BAKRAKDAR, M., (2006) Okul-evre likileri, Pegem A Yaynlar, Ankara 2006. 38. YT, B., (1997) Atatrkn Eitim Anlay Yamur Kltr ve Edebiyat Dergisi, Yl: 1, Say: 1, Manisa 1997. 39. YT, B., (2003) Felsefe ve retmenlik, retmenlik Mesleine Giri, reti, Pegem A Yaynlar, Ankara 2003.

18


SUVREMENE STRATEGIJE OBRAZOVANJA U DRUTVU ZNANJA OD VREMENA ATATRKA DO DANASZerrin BALKASaetak Drutvo znanja je razvoj u kojem se daje prvenstvo obrazovanju uz komunikacijske tehnologije, naine znanja koja nose drutvo dalje nego ono koje je razvijeno u drutveno-ekonomskom i drutveno-kulturalnom smislu. Sektor znanja, proizvodnja znanja, bogatstvo znanja i kvalicirani ljudski faktori su s razvojem novih osnovnih tehnologija takoer postali vani za drutvo znanja. U dananjem svijetu se veina znanja koje smatramo novim brzo mijenja, postaje staro te ga zamjenjuju novi tokovi razvoja. Stoga je vano da drutva, drave i udruge imaju zdravu organizaciju te kvalitetu i trajnost u danim radovima. Dranje koraka s novim i brzim razvojima je mogue uz irenje uinkovite senzibilnosti o edukaciji. Ovo istraivanje se bavi administrativnim, drutvenim, ekonomskim i edukacijskim promjenama koje je 29. listopada 1923. godine provela zaklada Republike Turske. Promjene su provedene u svjetlu dravne stvarnosti i suvremenih svjetskih napredaka, osobito edukacijskih poboljanja, ostvarenih u obliku promjena koje su provoene modernim i planiranim strategijama i principima, od vremena Atatrka do danas. Takoer se prouavaju naini na koje su ove promjene i poboljanja usklaene sa suvremenim svijetom te se naglaava kako se moderni pristupi nastavljaju te se predlau novi izazovi. Kljune rijei: Atatrk, obrazovanje, moderne strategije, drutvo znanja, doba Republike.

19


CONTEMPORARY DIDACTICS BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICEMarjan BlaiUniversity of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Ljubljana, [email protected]

Summary Globalization processes are forecasting changes in the areas of human development. One such change is in the area of learning and teaching in schools, which is heavily dependent within the area of didactics. This is a testing stone for understanding the current state of theory and practice in this eld. The pedagogic disciplines will change within these processes and consequently, inuence these processes to accelerate. Based on analysis, the author nds that in European didactic thought there is no trace of new theoretical sources. However, there are numerous new initiatives that have not been empirically researched. General didactics frequently discusses didactic models, concepts, and paradigms that have not been accepted directly in the practical eld, because they were too abstractly designed and quite distant from the problems of concrete classroom instructional practice. The distance between theory and practice undoubtedly determines the relation between the level of didactic theory development and didactic research studies. The results of such development and ndings increase teachers competencies. An important area that stems from the relationship between didactic theory and concrete practice directs our attention into correspondence between general and special didactics. More specically, these are understood dierently in the central European cultural arena. Keywords: learning, teaching, educational goals, theory, practice, general and special didactics

IntroductionUnquestionably, one of the most important factors of societal development is a school that preserves the function of transferring knowledge to a younger population to prepare them for the pathway of life. As such, we need to ask, what 21


kind of school this should be, its goal orientations, teaching content, organization, teaching relationships, and didactic-methodological approach. When designing answers to such questions, we delve into future predictions of continuous societal development as a whole as well as its constitutive parts and functions. In education we consider three time dimensions: the past, the present, and the future. The futuristic component is imminent and always present in education. This is situated somewhere between the borders of reality and possibility on one side of the continuum and desirable and anticipated on the other side. It is this orientation towards the future, anticipated but desired and planned that is characteristic of education but also for humankind and society. At the beginning of the third millennium we come into contact with new societal conditions and challenges. The term globalization is most denitely one of the most used terms in connection with economics and its disciplines, political science, sociology, culture, educational theory, and other social sciences. Certain authors discuss globalization as a cause and eect that are continuously in motion and interweaved. Others understand it as a new paradigm with which social events can be explained. Economic globalization and the information revolution predict radical changes in the nature of the learning process. Schools will lose their function of being rational transmitters of systematic knowledge as universal and standardized educational systems will be progressively substituted with virtual learning networks. Most denitely, this will have an inuence in the area of socialization. National goals in education could be limited mostly on fullling the economic needs with the conditions of global competition. Transnational organizations accept numerous documents that communicate their educational visions to society. They are clear educational goals that in a way represent the basis in determining learning content, didactic strategies, and didactic-methodological instruments (Delors, 1996).

New Avenues?Whenever discussing the pedagogic sciences, which are strongly embedded within the ows of globalization, we would be amiss not to think about the development of its disciplines, especially didactics. On the basis of school pedagogic research within the past years, there have been continuous occurrences of new suggestions and ideas that would enrich and change the theory of pedagogy along with the practice of pedagogy. However, there has been scant research in the area of general didactics. Even contradictory discussions and assertions on the validity and range of didactical models, concepts, and even paradigms that jarred this discipline in the 1980s have stagnated. Almost 400 years have passed since Didactica magna (The Great Learning of Tutoring) was published and to this day we do not have an adequately de22

Blai M.: CONTEMPORARY DIDACTICS BETWEEN THEORY AND PRACTICE

veloped all encompassing theory on education, even though Comenius established a valid foundation for its development. He determined several pedagogical ndings by using the principles of deduction in philosophy. Among others is his well known application of Bacons theory of knowledge on the theory of classroom instruction and the learning process. An important resource for these didactical investigations was his teaching experiences. He was one of the few pedagogic theoreticians in his time that had pedagogic experience, learning from the practice of others and through such experiences received inspiration for pedagogical thought. He determined that ndings that were derived only from empirical ndings limited the level of pedagogical reality. Complete induction has to be deductively rationalized (Comenius, 1995, p 16). We can observe the current state of developments in didactics if we listen to numerous experts in the area of methodology and gnoseology (theory of knowledge) who assert that the basic changing forces in scientic development are the needs that come from experience. Certain authors nd that practical experience in education, as one of the most frequent activities, has always expressed the need for changes; however didactics has never reacted to them appropriately. The current state of development in general didactics are labelled as a phenomenon of stagnation. New ideas and initiatives are needed as in any scientic eld. However, we nd that general didactics does exist and it is not stagnant. Interests of both theoreticians and practioners are permanently directed towards analyzing problems and concepts in this area as well as determining into which direction it will develop. To more precisely shed light on the development or stagnation of didactics, we would need to devise appropriate historical-pedagogical research studies. From the past, we know that didactical questions regarding general principles of instruction were asked only under the conditions of favourability and whether they included reformatory pedagogic eorts for the specic time period. There is no need to ask new and general questions as long as we are content with the current situation and results. Within such conditions there is no greater interest in didactics. When there are occurrences of criticisms towards schools and the current educational system, there is a search for new paradigms and new avenues within education as well as the onset of revising the current teaching methods, strategies, and concepts. Under such conditions, research efforts are strengthened and interests are turned towards didactics where they seek advice, promises and assurances of possible new dimensions of learning and teaching (Logvinov, 2008, p. 170). Despite permanent critics of the traditional school and the transmission model of instruction, there is an incontestable goal of every school for students to learn; as such the fundamental purpose of a school is still the transfer of knowledge from one generation to another (Plut, 2005, p. 19). At this juncture we could ask what and how much to teach. This question is not answered 23


by the lauded transaction model of a cognitive-constructivist orientation that gradually is reshaping the teaching practices of our schools. At this moment, we can determine that there is not a new detection of a fundamental new direction in general didactics, or a call to newly rethink didactical instruments, or even reshape the contemporary or postmodernist anthropological paradigm. The latter sets the basis for factors in didactics without which continuous school development will not be eective, especially in primary schools. At this point, it is important to highlight problem oriented lessons, heuristic concepts, as well as dierentiated and individualized learning. However, many theoreticians point out that there are numerous new eorts that we should pay more attention to. On one side it is about preparing and structuring complex learning activities (e.g. learning content, projects, key themes, and problems). On the other hand, it is about being directed to the pupil and the developmental tasks that they should accomplish in their educational process. There is also an interest for the unplanned, but important learning situations. Last, but not least, there are demands and longitudinal experiments to more precisely redene complex societal conditions that are based on knowledge and systematic connections among society, individuals, the world, and cultural contents. We cannot say that the aforementioned should be considered a new basis, but they do represent new initiatives in this eld. In any case, general didactics has to change their pedagogical and research practices. We tell our students how they should understand school and instruction, how to plan for classes, shape and assess it. However, we do not ask ourselves what is really going on within our schools and classes, about the new generations, and what they believe is important for them and their world. Didactical construction, which is used in our discipline, should rely more tightly on research. An expectation of didactics is not to solve global, but individual problems of classroom instruction. An attempt to redirect didactical research at the end of the 19th century named experimental didactics was connected with examining individual problems and questions. This was contradictory with societys expectations and for this reason experimental didactics was not a turning point in the development of general didactics into the direction of being more scientic at a higher level (Logvinov, 2008). An opportunity for the development and advancement of didactics as a science, most denitely is connected with the renaissance of experimental didactics. More specically, with solving those individual questions and creating such answers that would provide for a real collection of scientic facts and creation of an educational theory that would, without a doubt, inuence the practice. Most certainly, didactics has many new theoretical resources in developing didactical theories. Encouragement is coming from the social sciences, 24


especially from philosophy and psychology, but also from successful and well planned instructional practices that make possible the implementation of numerous theoretical initiatives. We have to be patient when determining new developmental paths in didactics. Models and concepts that were formed throughout the centuries cannot be reshaped, changed, or even thrown away in such a short time. Namely, didacticians should search for and consider new research understandings. Most notably, there is a need for more intensive correspondence and dialogue with the current pedagogical practice.

If and How are Theory and Practice Connected?Much has been written on the relationship between theory and practice within social sciences; but, this relationship has never been adequately solved. For this discussion, the relationship between the theory of didactics and practice is particularly delicate. In this context, we are interested in how general didactics is connected with practice, where theory and practice intersect and where they will reconnect. One fundamental question that is dicult to answer is how to connect practice with theory and theory with practice so that both would have an advantage from such a relationship as well as for both of them to develop quickly and organically. The relationship between theory and practice attempts to be resolved in dierent ways: sometimes by becoming distant, more frequently by rapprochement or even by pooling and interweaving. It is in such a manner with which theory and practice gain their true meaning. Because this process is complementarily dynamic we can frequently trace the viewpoint that a scientically found didactic theory be a foundation in accepting various decisions in educational practice. Moreover, in the spirit of the cult of science, decisions are deduced from existing scientic knowledge within pedagogy as well as from other sciences that study the phenomena of education. However, even with the aforementioned, we truly do not know the actual state of the relationship between theory and practice. Whenever there are discussions regarding scientic theory or knowledge activities, there tends to be a discussion or connection to practice. This should not be understood as only a pragmatic practical activity, but as a sensitive-materialistic and thought activity at various levels and areas of ones conscious activity. From a developmental perspective, practice is the predecessor to theory. Many contradictions and unsolved questions require an explanation and for this reason practice is becoming the resource to further understandings in scientic theory. Still, we have to emphasize that scientic theory also is created independently of concrete practice (Curzon, 2007). 25


We have to avoid one-sidedness and naming the relationship between practice and theory as interdependent. When we talk about practice and theory, we should not think about just one relation, for example, the meaning of theory to practice. This frequently happens to theory, which understandably leans towards reactions from practice. Just as important to the scientist is the reverse dimension. More specically, this means the value of practice as a resource and verier for the development in the eld of didactics. This reverse dimension has not been fully broken down and is incomplete which denitely hinders a more rapid development of didactical thoughts, especially their applicability. In didactics, a pedagogical scientic discipline, that under investigation researches both practical-experiential as well as theoretical science, we can examine the relationship of practice in education and theoretical thoughts of such phenomena (occurrences) in education. Education as a process and phenomena of humanizing persons as individual entities and social creatures is as old as humankind. As such, the educational practice and experiences of this process has been shaped throughout the history of our civilization as a practical activity and simultaneously as a subject of thought and examination. Understandings and investigations of the phenomena of education, including the areas of learning, teaching, and instruction as an organized process of learning, has brought various didactical theories in the area of classroom instruction and learning. Let me summarize a well-known thought of a German professor of theology and pedagogy Schleiermacher, who wrote that from the time of antiquity he educated without any pedagogical theories and with much success. He believed that practice in and of itself has a specic dignity that is independent of theory (Wiater, 2000). Of course, we have to add here that Comenius referred to those educational practices that were results of considerations as well as having a sense and generality of those experiences into a more integral form of practice. Whenever we consider educational occurrences in didactics, we nd that they appear at the level of didactic practice. There have been empirically obtained and tested notions of individual occurrences as well as levels of practice that have been more or less shaped on the basis of various didactical theories. Various didactical theories that are based on dierent paradigms attempt to explain as wholly as possible the educational appearances (phenomena) within the eld of didactics. Despite occurrences of various theories, there is still no consistent theory of didactics that would fully explain specic occurrences in the practice of education (Jank & Meyer, 2005). Anglo-Saxon contemporary theory of didactics is based on various psychological theories that understand classroom instruction and learning as a dynamic process. Meanwhile, Central Europeans didactical tendencies attempt to combine the elements of classical didactics and newer endeavours that establish a higher quality and wholesome approach as well as better understandings of the learning process. Under such conditions, when the discipline of didactics is becoming increasingly more multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdis26


ciplinary, questions arise on the type of relationship to instate towards various theories of didactics that assist teachers in making sense and in developing the practice of didactics. And furthermore, which theory of didactics should be recommended to student-teachers (i.e. pre-service) to be more successful in their pedagogical work. This question is important because of theoretical dierences. Some theories are contradictory in their relationship and others are precluded. Neither individually nor in its entirety do they provide the answers of complex learning practices that include numerous known and undiscovered qualiers. For that reason, none of the theories are able to completely explain situations that appear in the educational and classroom instruction practice (Mayer, 1994). This of course does not mean that teachers should not acquire various theories of didactics as well as concepts of instruction and learning that have been built upon such theories. On the contrary, this knowledge is important so that teachers understand and explain the context of the learning process practice. With the assistance of theoretical didactic knowledge we can examine various questions of didactic practice; however this knowledge is not satisfactory for the didactic methodological practice. Theoretical knowledge allows movement within a specic theoretical context and in this sense it can represent a critical distance against existent didactical practices. One of the most important indicators of eciency is the quality of teachers work in any educational system. This is the reason that the system of educating teachers in all countries, especially in the Member States of the European Union, are under continuous pressure and undergo critical discourse from a wide-range of audiences. Several pedagogic analysts warn that eorts in the direction of improving the education of teachers are progressing too slowly. Under the term contemporary concept of education, we have an adequate connection among general, professional, pedagogic-psychological and specic-didactical contents as well as connecting theory with practice. Teacher education has to nd equilibrium between academic presentations of theoretical content and practical teaching with training and model imitations. In searching for such equilibrium, didactics holds an important role as being an integrative element for pedagogic and psychological knowledge as well as a bridge to special didactics and various forms of practical work (Beckmann, 2004). Professionalization discussions often warn that pedagogic reective knowledge, especially general didactics knowledge that students receive at teacher training institutes, does not have a particular signicance for practical work namely because knowledge and activity ability are two separate categories. Of course, we do not approve such a position. But, there are some didactic sceptics announcing that teachers knowledge of classroom instruction (i.e. didactic theory) does not have any connections with later practical work and their specic abilities. Ability, in this context, is dened as whatever is gained with ill-examined possession of someone elses schemes of function. There is scant research regarding the ratio between didactical knowledge and practical 27


work; however the little research that exists on the topic of teachers work conrms that connections exist between a teachers didactic knowledge and their practical applications. H.D. Dann (1989) proved in his research study that those teachers that are successful at their work establish a complete and complex subjective theory and when confronted in a conictive situation are more in concert with their knowledge than less successful teachers. This conrms the position that experienced teachers connect with their professional (theoretical) knowledge and that their work has a strong reective component. We agree that within general didactics we need to inquire more about what type of reective knowledge (theoretical knowledge) is needed and benecial to the education of teachers. We would more clearly be able to answer this question if studies of students instructional practices were to become a foundation for a studys organization. Students majoring in education should be clearly shown that it is possible to solve practical problems with theoretical knowledge rather than without it. If we are seeking new avenues then this new path would bring us to the point where general didactics would be designed as an empirical science that would be applicable to practice. Theory and practice always meet when theory develops causatively (collecting and describing individual cases and assessing from the perspective of theory) and experimentally. It seems that the link between theory and practice is studied too narrowly if practice were to be equated only with teachers training. Every premise is considered incomplete that cannot make a balanced connection to the basic factors of classroom instruction with teachers, pupils, and learning content, placing them in a framework of classroom instructional theories. Hence, for example, supporters of the belief that didactics is considered an art in teaching and that the last word is the teachers shaping power and her methods of arts. In such cases, theory remains only a guiding element that reverts to the initial phases of didactic development, when didactic and practical teachings were categorized in the area of art and not within scientic criteria. Such stances do not open new avenues for general didactics. Most didactic thoughts on the art of teaching are based on the premise that teachers in classroom instructions have a key position and they are independently able to control problems in practice or that such abilities are developed with experience. For the theory of didactics that is geared towards the practice, this means that the teacher should not be overlooked and that the viewpoint should not be directed towards them and their happenings, but together with them and their activities. One fundamental task is teaching. Teachers are addressees and partners and not objects of didactical theory and didactical research. Such an approach negates direct connections with didactical theory with developing classroom instruction in practice. The practice of general didactics is rst its research. An important achievement would be if we used teachers experiences within the research process as an important resource for examining 28


this phenomenon. We would do this in such a way that would make it possible for teachers to think about their experiences, express and note them as well as confront themselves with the theory.

The relationship between general and special didacticsDiscussions regarding the relationship between general and special didactics are not being conducted quite frequently. We would like to know what and how much each has to do with another. Regarding the relationship between general and special didactics, W. Ploeger in his extensive retrospective (Ploeger, 1994) determined that in the seventies and eighties in comparison with other time periods, dialogue between the two disciplines died away. One of the reasons could be that general didactics, when analyzing structural characteristics, organizational problems, learning goals, interactional patterns and eects of media, neglected the central meaning of content in such a way that some labelled general didactics as knitting without wool. In this instance, wool is understood as concrete learning content and activities. It is within this area where general and special didactics meet each other. Besides the aforementioned, we are able to see evidence of several problems in substrata disciplines, where general and special didactics are dependent on one another. Namely, this is about the relationship between practical experience and scientic knowledge, problematic criteria for choosing learning content, and mostly in realizing interdisciplinary tendencies. In any case, we could show the direction of development of general and special didactics: general didactics has to become more concrete, the profession more general. For quite some time, the relationship of general didactics to special didactics has been, surprisingly, undecided. Special didactics at teacher training institutes frequently behave as if general didactics does not exist or that they do not miss it. We warn against such behaviours because we do not agree with it. However, there is another group of special didacticians that take a short cut and borrow from general didactics the theoretical elements and directly apply them to their subject. For the development of special didactics, assistance is needed within the parent disciplines as well as within pedagogical sciences, especially within general didactics. Practice shows that assistance from substrata sciences is quite varied; however the area of social sciences it is more abundant. A complete examination of pedagogical occurrences directs us towards close cooperation with threshold, interdisciplinary, and auxiliary scientic disciplines. Today, when pedagogy is opening up to new ows of thought and theories, which we frequently categorize as alternative, didactics and special didactics cannot avoid this trend (Spousta, 1993, p. 211). The current thought that di29


dactics represents the foundations for special didactics is not sucient enough, because the relationship between the both are not only existential, but functional as well. They are also dicult to divide because of their mutual interweaving and changeability. Before we categorize our understandings of special didactics we have to point out vaguely dened terminology, even bordering towards disorder. In this scientic area we nd terms such as methods, special methods, special didactics, subject didactics, and even the methodology of education. We are presuming that terminology dierences is namely due to an unequal understanding of the research eld, especially the relation between pedagogic didactic and subject-scientic. Special didactics is understood as a discipline that studies and determines specic relationships, processes, problems, and conditions of mutual learning operations related to the learning subject pupil teacher, while considering all elements of understanding classroom instruction. We could say that special didactics appears in an intermediary function between the profession and didactics and as such, in an original and in its own imminent way develops various generalizations and concrete applicable recommendations. For now, this function is listed under the parent discipline and at other times within didactics. Whenever discussing educational requirements for teachers we tend to stop when discussing the relationship between the substrata and pedagogic content. We have to emphasize that a scientically funded substratal theoretical education is a fundamental factor in achieving quality and scientic work by teachers. No didactical and methodological knowledge can replace ones low level of professionalism. It is an adequate professional level that provides the teacher to fully enforce their pedagogic and didactical abilities. One of the most important factors in achieving greater professionalization of teacher education is content and didactic-methodological interpretations as well as application of learning content. This is possible only with a strong support from a developed special didactics discipline and understanding the general principles of learning and teaching. Of course, the viewpoint on how to bring closer certain understandings of developmental uniqueness of thought processes, understanding, valuing, pupils experiences, interpreting these experiences through the prism of a pupils developmental level, is often neglected from a pedagogical standpoint. Other fundamental areas that provide the needed emphasis to teachers professional training and shaping of their pedagogic personality are the sciences of pedagogy and psychology. Action research has shown that todays teacher is proportionally well trained in the content, but has many gaps within the areas of common-didactical and special didactical knowledge. This brings us to the conclusion that special didactics are one-sidedly subordinate to the scientic disciplines and that the links within pedagogy, didactics, and psychology are very week. 30


Examining the history of teacher education shows us that the carriers of professional pedagogic courses at teacher training institutes were practitioners with many years of experience in primary schools. They were training teacher candidates with pedagogic tasks that they themselves have carried out. Today, it is too common that university teachers are preparing their students for work that they themselves have never conducted (Lavrnja, 1990, p. 79). In future detailed reports on personnel, it would be pertinent to take into account this factor. Taking into account the area of research, special didactics (the subject of investigation is an educational process of a specic school subject) is explicitly a pedagogical discipline. As far as the manner of investigation, it is interdisciplinary or in specic situations even a transdisciplinary scientic area that accepts and uses principles and achievements from other sciences. Mutually they are connected by dierent scientic areas with goals to achieve a unied knowledge system that reects all of its rich diversity. Because their own understandings are realized in the framework of their own scientic subject it is a totally autonomous discipline. In this connection, explicitly evolving is the principle of complementarity of individual disciplines. The principle of mutual connectedness of various disciplines and establishing logical connections among areas that were at the beginning divided or were developed parallelly, is becoming a required standard under conditions of increased specialized knowledge in all areas of social development. Emphasizing interdisciplinarity shows the openness of special didactics that synthesizes and integrates the results of its parent substrata discipline with pedagogic psychological as well as other disciplines. It reasons its own system, norms, rules that do not exist in its parent discipline or in related areas. Special didactics as a way of training, as is the practice of training in a specic area as reective theory, includes scientic as well as intelligent components, skills, arts, and readiness that have a distinctive individual, personal, and non-repetitive character. When developing the internal structure of special didactics, we have to derive from the so called special didactical eld that in educational theory and practice, special didactics is shaped at the cross-section of basic factors of classroom instruction: meaning the pupil, learning content, and factors of transferring learning content. The eld of special didactics represents the cross-sectional area of interpersonal relationship and the links to these factors. As each of the mentioned factors are examined by a specic scientic discipline, in the eld of special didactics these sciences connect in an interdisciplinary approach towards new quality that is represented by the level of special didactics development of a certain subject. In some places, special didactics began to develop at teacher training institutes even as a non-academic discipline, albeit they have been able to achieve an enviable professional level. Many parent scientic areas have tried to take own31


ership of special didactics, looking into the content of the subjects shows that it includes only transmission of pure knowledge and/or even some methodological knowledge that do not have direct repercussions on the learning process. The area of special didactics needs to be developed from the degree of presenting and transmitting tested and in practice conrmed instructions for further work to the direction of interdisciplinary research eorts that would enable the scientic shaping of independent scientic disciplines with clearly outlined research context and keeping track of its parent branch. From the above stated we can determine that the relationship between didactics and special didactics has a few interesting characteristics of which the following need to be highlighted: a common research eld as well as mutual performance and functioning. As didactics cannot develop without considering the concrete (a role of special didactics), so to are the latter prevented from essential reection from their subject, if they neglect the general (a role especially of general didactics). Didactics cannot develop without considering the concrete (a role of special didactics). The latter are prevented from fundamental reections of their subject matter whenever they neglect the general (a role mainly of general didactics). Fruitful contacts between both disciplines are possible only when acknowledging the scientic equality of both areas as well as with conscious knowledge that general didactics can only develop in cooperation and scientic confrontation with special didactics. Of course the reverse is true, as well. Confrontations with generally accepted didactic reections should become a xed principle of special didactics (Strmcnik, 2001, p. 43).

ConclusionThere is no need to prove that science is an important factor in societal development. This nding also is applicable in the area of education. For this reason we need to train pre-service teachers to scientically discuss their area of work or in other words to be capable of researching the learning or instructional process. It is the scientic principle of instructional processes that gives the teacher the theoretical foundations for his scientic activity. In addition, within this framework it also provides for an adequate transfer of didactic innovations back into the learning process and with this opportunity altering the current state. I sometimes think that solving the problems around the relations between theory and practice should be resolved by returning back in studying some historical thoughts. Let us remember Kant who wrote that theory without practice is blind, but practice without theory is empty. Or, a frequently used thought by 32


Lewin, who said there is nothing so practical as a good theory. Because we began with Comenius we also shall conclude with his thoughts. Central European didactic tradition gives us a good basis for developing didactic thoughts. His didactical framework, omnes, omnia, omnio (to teach everyone, everything, completely) strongly exceeds the triadic relation among teachers, students, and the learning content. Here lies the secret for many of todays problems such as the problem of equal opportunities, accelerated development of knowledge, choice of learning content, and all the way to multiculturalism and plurality of worldly views.

ReferencesAltrichter, H., Posch, P. (1994). Lehrer erforschen ihren Unterricht. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Becker, G. (2002). The age of human capital. Chicago: University of Chicago. Beckmann, U. et al. (2004). Ein neues Bild von Lehrerberuf? Basel: Beltz Verlag. Blai, M., J. Starc: O povezanosti splone in posebne didaktike, Didactica slovenica, t. 56/1999, str. 266-272. Comenius, J.A. (1995). Didactica magna. Novo mesto: Pedagoka obzorja. Curzon, L.B. (2007). Teaching in further education. London: Continuum. Dann, H.D. (1989). Was geht im Kopf des Lehrers vor? Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht. 36, 2, str.81-90. Delors, J. (1996). Uenje: skriti zaklad. Ljubljana: Ministrstvo za olstvo in port. Jank, W., Meyer, H. (2005). Didaktische Modelle. Frankfurt/Main: Cornelsen Scriptor. Klingberg,. L.: Zur Entwicklung und zum gegenwaertigen Verhaeltnis von Didaktik und Fachdidaktik, V: Meyer, M.: Allgemeine Didaktik, Fachdidaktik und Fachunterricht, Beltz Verlag, Weinheim, 1994. Lauder, H. et al. (2006), Education, globalization and social change. Oxford: University press. Lavrnja I.: Izobraevanje uiteljev v prihodnosti, Pedagoka obzorja, Novo Mesto, 1990. Logvinov, I.J. (2008). Priroda didaktike nauke. Pedagogija, t. 2, str. 165-172. Meyer, J.W. (2005).Weltkultur: Wie die westlichen Prizipien die Welt durchdringen. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Meyer, M.A. (1994). Allgemeine Didaktik, Fachdidaktik und Fachunterricht, Weinheim/Basel. Ploeger, W. (1994). Zur Entwicklung und zum gegenwaertigen Verhaeltnis von Didaktik und Fachdidaktik, v: Allgemeine Didaktik, Fachdidaktik und Fachunterricht, Weinheim/Basel. Plut Pregelj, L. (2005). Sodobna ola ostaja ola: kaj se je spremenilo. Sodobna pedagogika, t. 1, str. 16-31. Spousta V.: Pedagogika in specialna didaktika v strokovnem izobraevanju uiteljev, Sodobna pedagogika, t. 3-4/1993. Steindorf G.: Grundbegriffe des Lehrens und Lernens, Verlag J. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn/ Obb., 1995. Stadtfeld, P., Dieckmann, B. (2005). Allgemeine Didaktik im Wandel. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.

33

2nd International Conference PEDAGOGY AND THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY Strmnik, F. (2001). Didaktika. Osrednje teoretine teme. Ljubljana: Znanstveni intitut Filozofske fakultete. Strmnik, F. (2005). Temeljni pedagokodidaktini trendi dananje in prihodnje ole. Sodobna pedagogika, t. 4, str. 158-170. Usher, R., Edwards, R. (1994). Postmodernism and education: Different voices, different worlds. London: Routledge. Wiater, W. (2000). Unterrichten und lernen in der Schule. Donauwoerth: Auer Verlag.

34


SUVREMENA DIDAKTIKA IZMEU TEORIJE IN PRAKSEMarjan BlaiSaetak Globalizacijski procesi najavljuju promjene na svim podrujima ovjekovog djelovanja. Jedno meu njima je kolsko uenje i pouavanje, koje je u velikoj mjeri ovisno i povezano s didaktikim podrujem, koje je kamen temeljac za razumijevanja dananjeg stanja teorije i prakse na tom podruju. Unutar tih procesa trebale bi se mijenjati i pedagoke discipline, koje bi te procese posljedino ubrzavale. Autor na osnovi analize konstatira da u europskoj didaktikoj misli nema novih teoretskih ishodita, ali se pojavljuju brojne druge pobude koje nisu empirijski istraene. Opi didaktiari esto raspravljaju o didaktikim modelima, konceptima i paradigmama koji nisu prihvaeni u neposrednoj praksi, jer su oblikovani apstraktno i previe udaljeni od problema konktretne nastavne prakse. Ralaciju izmeu teorije i prakse nesumnjivo odreuje odnos izmeu stupnja razvoja didaktike teorije i didaktikih istraivanja koja s rezultatima poveavaju kompetenciju uitelja. Vano podruje koje proizilazi iz odnosa didaktike teorije i konkretne prakse usmjerava na pogled u korespondenciju izmeu ope i specijalne didaktike, koja je u srednjeeuropskom kulturnom prostoru razliito shvaena. Kljune rijei: uenje, pouavanje, ciljevi obrazovanja, teorija, praksa, opa i specijalna didaktika

35


KLJUNE KOMPETENCIJE U ODGOJU I OBRAZOVANJU DJECE S TEKOAMA U RAZVOJUDejana BouilletUiteljski fakultet, Sveuilite u Zagrebu [email protected]

Saetak Rad je usmjeren na prikaz i analizu suvremenih spoznaja o bitnim sastavnicama obrazovanja uitelja i odgojitelja za rad s djecom s tekoama u razvoju. Posebna je pozornost posveena analizi profesionalnih kompetencija neophodnih za uspjeno voenje odgojno-obrazovnog procesa u uvjetima inkluzivnog odgoja i obrazovanja. Uz teze temeljene na analizi stajalita razliitih autora preteno objavljenih u The Journal of Special Education i British Journal of Special Education u radu su prikazani rezultati manjeg istraivanja o komunikacijskim aspektima specijalne pedagogije. Ono je pokazalo da odgojitelji rijetko praticiraju komponente komunikacije koje se smatraju bitnim sastavnicama tzv. specijalne pedagogije. Zakljuno se razmatra potreba usavravanja obrazovanja uitelja i odgojitelja za inkluzivni odgoj i obrazovanje koja podrazumijeva vie praktinog rada, suradnju s edukacijsko-rehabilitacijskim ustanovama, izbornu nastavu i specijalistike programe u sklopu cjeloivotnog obrazovanja. Kljune rijei: specijalna pedagogija, profesionalne kompetencije uitelja i odgojitelja, posebne odgojno-obrazovne potrebe

Uvodna razmatranjaDanas je u veini zemalja studiranje specijalne pedagogije sastavni dio visokokolskog obrazovanja uitelja i odgojitelja. Posljedica je to nekoliko okolnosti. Ponajprije, zajednice su sve svjesnije injenice da se djeca tekoama u razvoju (TUR), pui li im se prilika za odgovarajue obrazovanje, mogu razviti u zadovoljne i produktivne graane, ime se znatno umanjuje mogunost njihove socijalne iskljuenosti i ovisnosti o socijalnim davanjima. Nadalje, posta37


je sve oiglednije da e velika veina odgojitelja i uitelja biti u situaciji da u odgojnim skupinama i/ili razrednim odjelima radi s djecom koju karakterizira neka razina TUR-a, budui da je inkluzija opi cilj edukacijske rehabilitacije svih suvremenih drutava (Wamae i Kangethe-Kamau, 2004). S time se u vezi u mnogim zemljama provode reforme obrazovanja uitelja i odgojitelja, u namjeri jaanja njihovih kompetencija za rad s djecom s TUR-om (Jones i dr., 2006). Spomenute su promjene popraene i brojnim zakonskim aktima koje deniraju inkluziju, modele njezine provedbe i standarde odgoja i obrazovanja te djece, pri emu se u pravilu trai specian skup kompetencija za rad s pojedinim kategorijama djece s TUR-om. Pri tom su djeca s TUR-om samo jedan segment populacije s posebnim obrazovnim potrebama. Takve potrebe, naime, imaju i djeca s manje uoljivim i loije deniranim posebnim potrebama (tekoe u uenju, ponaajne, socijalne i emocionalne tekoe) te djeca koja razliite tekoe u obrazovanju manifestiraju uslijed darovitosti, kulturolokih razlika i drugih socijalnih imbenika. Istodobno, postoje djeca s tekoama u razvoju koja nemaju posebne obrazovne potrebe, bilo usijed karaktera tekoe, bilo uslijed zadovoljavajue prilagodbe okruenja toj tekoi (Keil i dr., 2006). Bit odgojno-obrazovne inkluzije svodi se na osiguravanje najrazliitijih oblika i sadraja edukacijsko-rehabilitacijske prakse koja se temelji na naelu pozitivne diskriminacije i osiguravanju jednakih obrazovnih ansi za svu djecu. Dva su osnovna preduvjeta oivotovorenja tih naela: postojanje ideolokog koncenzusa na svim drutvenim razinama o potrebi i vanosti odgojnoobrazovne inkluzije kao sastavanog dijela socijalne integracije djece s TUR-om te osiguravanje odgovarajuih izvora podrke svim sudionicima toga procesa. Jasno je, radi se o procesu koji znatno nadilazi mogunosti samih odgojnoobrazovnih institucija, ali je on bez njih nezamisliv jer podrazumijeva specinu teorijsku i praktinu paradigmu koja osigurava ukljuivanje svih osoba u nekom drutvu, pri emu su razliitosti pravilo, a ne izuzetak (Jones i dr., 2006). Razvoj kompetencija odgojitelja i uitelja za odgoj i obrazovanje djece s TUR-om u veini je zamalja vrlo aktualno pitanje koje jo uvijek nema univerzalne odgovore. Ipak, istraivanja i praksa upuuju na nedvojbeni zakljuak o potrebi znatnih promjena u obrazovnom kurikulumu tih strunjaka, budui da su odgojitelji i uitelji koji se osjeaju kompetentima za tu profesionalnu ulogu prava rijetkost (Vaughn i Linan-Thompson, 2003; Forlin i Hopewell, 2006; Barber i Turner, 2007; Cook i dr., 2007). Istodobno, istraivanja esto potvruju da djeca s TUR-om ne primaju adekvatne odgojno-obrazovne poticaje (Cook i Schirmer, 2005; Vaughn i Linan-Thompson, 2005; Jones i dr., 2006; Blanton i dr., 2006; Boe i dr., 2007). Meu autorima takoer postoji slaganje o uskoj povezanosti pozitivnih stavova uitelja i odgojitelja o odgojno-obrazovnoj integraciji s korpusom znanja i kompetencija u podruju specijalne pedagogije (Wamae i Kangethe-Kamau, 2004; Golder i dr., 2005). U takvim okolnostima postaje aktualno pitanje deniranja imbenika koji ine skup kompetencija kvalitetnih uitelja i odgojitelja. Pritom se koristi multidimenzionalni pristup, 38

Bouillet D.: KLJUNE KOMPETENCIJE U ODGOJU I OBRAZOVANJU DJECE S TEKOAMA

uz naglaavanje dvije komponente kvalitete odgojno-obrazovnog rada s djecom s TUR. To su (a) kvaliteta poduavanja koja podrazumijeva da odgojitelji i uitelji udovoljavaju profesionalnim oekivanjima te (b) uinkovito i uspjeno poduavanje koje podrazumijeva visoku razinu uspjenosti djece s TUR-om u svladavanju odgojno-obrazovnih sadraja (Blanton i dr., 2006). Nedvojbeno je da potreba za kvalitetnijim obrazovanjem odgojitelja i uitelja u specijalnoj pedagogiji postoji i u Hrvatskoj. Radi se o podruju kojem domai autori jo uvijek ne poklanjaju potrebnu pozornost, a bez kojega je rasprava o doprinosu pedagogijske znanosti razvoju drutva znanja nuno necjelovita. Iz tih je razloga ovaj rad posveen prikazu kljunih profesionalnih kompetencija u odgoju i obrazovanju djece s TUR-om te raspravi o moguim modelima edukacije koji pridonose njihovom osiguravanju. U radu se prikazuju i preliminarni rezultati manjeg istraivanja o komponentama komunikacije odgojitelja s djecom s TUR-om u hrvatskim djejim vrtiima.

Posebnosti odgoja i obrazovanja djece s TUR-om prema konzultiranoj literaturiMeu autorima uglavnom postoji slaganje u pogledu skupa kompetencija koje osiguravaju kvalitetan odgoj i obrazovanje djece s TUR-om (Cook i Schirmer, 2003; Vaughn i Linan-Thompson, 2003; Wamae i Kangethe-Kamau, 2004; Brownell idr., 2005; Forlin i Hopewell, 2006; Jones i dr., 2006; Blanton i dr., 2006; Barber i Turner, 2007; Boe i dr., 2007). Meu njima je mnogo kompetencija koje su vane za kvalitetan odgoj i obrazovanje sve djece, bez obzira na njihove razvojne i zdravstvene specinosti. To su: razumijevanje socijalnog i emocionalnog razvoja djece razumijevanje individualnih razlika u procesu uenja djece poznavanje tehnika kvalitetnog voenja odgojne skupine/razrednog odjela komunikacijske vjetine (u odnosu s djecom, roditeljima, drugim strunjacima i kolegama) poznavanje uinkovitih tehnika poduavanja (ukljuujui individualne instrukcije i iskustveno uenje) Kao kompetencije specine za odgoj i obrazovanje djece s TUR-om autori istiu: poznavanje specinosti pojedinih TUR-a sposobnost identikacije TUR-a poznavanje didaktiko-metodikog pristupa i planiranja prilagoenog kurikuluma 39


poznavanje dostupnih didaktiko metodikih metoda, sredstava i pomagala (ukljuujui informatiku tehnologiju) poznavanje savjetodavnih tehnika rada praktino iskust

pedagogy-volume-1 2

Documents