https://doi.org/10.59132/vviz/2018/2/23-36
Povzetek
Pod vplivom publikacije OECD (2013) se veliko uporablja pojem inovativna učna okolja, zato se v besedilu usmerjamo tako k pojmu inovativnost kot k štirim elementom inovativnih učnih okolij: učencem, strokovnim delavcem, učni vsebini in virom. Pri učencih poudarjamo celostni, tridelni model, ki izhaja iz leta 1890, ko je Pestalozzi izpostavil tri področja vzgoje. Na Pestalozzijev model spominja teorija ciljev Blooma idr. iz leta 1956, in vsa tri področja sta v pojmu kompetence leta 2006 zaobjela tudi Evropski parlament in Svet Evropske unije. Pri strokovnih delavcih poudarjamo njihov zgled in avtentičnost ter kongruentnost, pri učni snovi pa uporabo inovativnih učnih metod in nekaterih strategij pouka. Pri virih omenjamo le prostor in iz obravnave izpuščamo sodobno informacijsko-komunikacijsko tehnologijo. Čeprav bi vsak od njih zahteval posebno obravnavo, menimo, da je včasih potrebna tudi celostna predstavitev vseh najpomembnejših elementov učnih okolij v povezavi z našo pedagoško teorijo in zgodovino.
Abstract
The Central Elements of Innovative Learning Environments
Due to the influence of the OECDd publication on innovative learning environments (2013), this term has become increasingly popular, which is why this paper focuses on the concept of innovation as well as on the four elements of innovative learning environments: students, educators, content and resources. With regard to students, it highlights the three-part model originating from 1890, when Pestolazzi determined the three spheres of education. Similar to Pestalozzi’s model is the taxonomy of educational objectives from 1956, as developed by Bloom and his associates, and the three spheres have been considered within the 2006 concept of competency as well. In relation to educators, their example, authenticity and congruence are emphasized, while innovative teaching methods and certain classroom strategies are pointed out concerning the content. Regarding the resources, only the question of space is discussed, leaving out the modern information and communications technology. Even though each of these fully merits a separate discussion, the authors believe that an integrated review of all these central elements of the learning environment in relation to our theory and history of pedagogy is sometimes required as well.