Special Issue: Transformation of the Theory of Learning
Fundamental Problems of Curriculum Policy: Competencies and Courses of Study Revision in 2017
2017 Volume 84 Issue 4 Pages 421-433
Details
2017 Volume 84 Issue 4 Pages 421-433
The Courses of Study were revised in March 2017, aiming to promote “competencies” and “generic skills” and calling for curriculum management and outcome measurement. In this paper, I focus on the concept that “competencies” is the primary factor in the 2017 revision of the Courses of Study, in order to reveal fundamental problems through the analysis of the deliberation process. I hold that “generic ability” is founded on building structural knowledge. From this point of view, I argue for the necessity of a “theory of knowledge” and liberal arts education.
Chapter I: From the 1990s on, the theory of competency has been adopted for performance based evaluation in Japanese industry. After 2000, it was introduced into personnel evaluations of civil servants and teachers. I clarify that competency is a core concept of policy.
Chapter II: I consider the introduction of competency theory into the university education curriculum. The Central Education Council proposed an original concept of the undergraduate curriculum and “generic skills” intended to create “21st-century citizens.” These skills are explained as “versatile fundamental capabilities”. Elsewhere, professional graduate schools have adopted competency theory, and have been advancing the core curriculum based on analysis of competencies for each occupation.
Chapter III: I analyze the minutes of the Curriculum Council curriculum planning committee, and reveal that the Courses of Study revisions are reforms based on the rubric of competency theory until now. The basic theory of the curriculum policy is based on OECD competency theory. However, “generic capability” theory is mixed into this revision. In truth, competency is a separate capability distinct from “generic capability,” as competency is the ability to accomplish specific work in a given area, rather than generalized capacity. Therefore I analyze each capability separately.
Chapter IV: I consider the essence of the subject and the relation between the knowledge system and competency. A Curriculum Council special committee explained that students will be able to assimilate knowledge rapidly if they can learn the essence and the structure of the subjects. This is a competency-oriented attitude focused on high achievement and productivity enhancement, but poses a problem from the viewpoint of “21st-century citizens”. An important point is that students have opportunities to restructure their own knowledge systems.
Chapter V: I conclude that the root of “generic capability” is building structural knowledge and that both “theory of knowledge” and “liberal arts” education are necessary. Planning an educational curriculum in a near future dominated by artificial intelligence, I would propose a “liberal arts” education including structural knowledge of humanities, society, and nature in the high school common core curriculum. In addition, I propose the inclusion of “generic skills” to restructure knowledge constantly in the core curriculum.
