스텐하우스의 교육과정 모형에 대한 한 해석

An Interpretation of L. Stenhouse’s Curriculum Model: Piecemeal Social Engineering and Action-Research

스텐하우스의 교육과정 모형은 타일러의 ‘목표 모형’에 대한 대안으로 등장한 것으로, ‘과정 모형’과 ‘연구 모형’의 결합으로 이루어진다. 그 모형은 교육과정을 ‘과정’으로 파악하며, 곧 수업(혹은 교수-학습 자료의 제작)의 기준을 ‘과정’으로 파악한다. 이러한 과정 모형을 자신의 한 부분으로 파악하는 스텐하우스의 모형 혹은 ‘연구 모형’은 포퍼의 ‘점진적 사회공학’과 레빈의 ‘실행-연구’를 기반으로 하고 있다. 그 모형이 따르는 사고방식은 ‘실제적 순환’의 사고방식이라고 부를 수 있다. 그 사고방식은 ‘목표 모형’의 ‘수단-목적’의 사고방식에 대립된다.

L. Stenhouse’s Curriculum Model appeared as an alternative to R. Tyler’s Curriculum Model. Tyler’s Model has been called the Objectives Model in which the objectives(intended learning outcome) are regarded as standard of teaching (or making of teaching materials). L. Stenhouse’s Curriculum Model is called the Process Model because in that model the processes of teaching are regarded as standard of teaching. L. Stenhouse’s Model has another aspect which manifests itself by the name of the Research Model. In that model, developed curriculum are not regarded as something final or finished but as something to be revised or improved. The Research Model has been influenced by K. Popper’s Piecemeal Social Engineering which denies the existence of utopian ideal standard in the social reform. Developed curriculum must be revised or improved. But by whom? In what places? According to the Research Model, it must be revised by teachers themselves in no other places than the classroom. The Research Model has been influenced by K. Lewin’s Action-Research. Action-Research stresses the practicality of research and performance. L. Stenhouse’s Curriculum Model which is composed of the Process Model and the Research Model, has its own way of thinking. It can be called ‘practical-circular’ way of thinking in contrast to the ‘means-ends’ way of thinking which manifests itself in R. Tyler’s Objectives Model.