Problems of the modern textbook

No. 27 (2021)
Articles

FRAMEWORK APPROACHES TO THE CREATION OF A COMPETENCY-ORIENTED SYSTEM OF TASKS FOR A SCHOOL TEXTBOOK

PDF (Українська)
  • Antonina Hryvko
Antonina Hryvko
Institute of Pedagogy of the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32405/2411-1309-2021-27-64-77

Published 2021-12-24

Keywords

  • textbook,
  • learning outcomes,
  • system of tasks,
  • competency-­based approach,
  • taxonomy of educational goals

How to Cite

Hryvko А. (2021). FRAMEWORK APPROACHES TO THE CREATION OF A COMPETENCY-ORIENTED SYSTEM OF TASKS FOR A SCHOOL TEXTBOOK. Problems of the Modern Textbook, (27), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.32405/2411-1309-2021-27-64-77
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

In the article, based on the analysis of scientific works on the design of educational activities of students by means of school textbooks, the main framework approaches to the creation of a competency-­oriented system of tasks for an educational book are considered.
The following approaches are highlighted: problem-­oriented (tasks mainly provide for independent search activity and group work of students aimed at solving socially significant problems and problem situations using theoretical and practical components of the subject); integrative (“embedding” tasks for the formation of sustainable development skills in the apparatus of the textbook for assimilating knowledge), metacognitive (tasks are aimed at mastering by students learning strategies in the process of mastering subject content: the ability to assess their educational achievements; to understand the educational task and determine the knowledge and skills required for its solution; to judge which educational strategy is advisable to apply in a specific educational situation, and justify it), taxonomic (involves the selection of multi-­level tasks based on the classification of educational goals, which are implemented by the formation of appropriate skills of different complexity as expected learning outcomes), criterion-­oriented (the system of tasks of the textbook corresponds to the criteria of the quality of the educational book adopted by a certain educational system).
The leading ideas underlying each of the selected approaches are highlighted, and problematic issues of the implementation of their conceptual foundations in school textbooks are analyzed in projection on the goals and needs of basic secondary education in Ukraine in accordance with the modern educational paradigm. In particular, it has been determined that the application of the problem-­oriented approach will be productive, provided that the facilitation competence of teachers is formed; taking into account the general target components of the concept of education for sustainable development and the requirements of the State Standard of Basic Secondary Education of Ukraine to compulsory learning outcomes, it is advisable to further study and consider the possibilities of implementing the experience of integrating tasks for the formation of sustainable development skills into modern Ukrainian school textbooks; the implementation of the ideas of the taxonomic approach requires additional research to determine the relevant model for organizing the system of tasks in school textbooks; to ensure the reliability of the system of the textbook tasks in accordance with the criterion-­oriented approach, in particular, unambiguous and accurate criteria for assessing its quality are necessary for the educational materials examination.

PDF (Українська)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Державний стандарт базової середньої освіти (2020). Постанова КМУ № 898 від 30.09.2020. Київ. https://www.kmu.gov.ua/npas/pro-deyaki-­pitannya-derzhavnih-­standartiv-povnoyi-­zagalnoyi-serednoyi-­osviti-i300920–898.
  2. Проблеми сучасного підручника (2021). Зб. наук. праць, Вип. 26, К.: Педагогічна думка.
  3. Топузов, О. М. (1998). Інтелектуальний розвиток учнів у проблемному навчанні. Рідна мова, 7–12, 6–8.
  4. Топузов, О. М. (2012). Роль і місце підручника в реалізації компетентнісного підходу до навчання. Проблеми сучасного підручника, Вип. 12, 241–247.
  5. Топузов, О. М. (2015). Становлення проблемного навчання в педагогічній науці. Рідна школа, 1, 57–60.
  6. Топузов, О. (2007). Проблемна ситуація в теорії проблемного навчання. Шлях освіти, 1, 12–16.
  7. Топузов, О., Калініна, Л. (2017). Організаційні механізми управління закладами освіти: методології та теоретичні засади. Український педагогічний журнал, 4, 34–44.
  8. Топузов О.М., Малихін О. В., Опалюк Т. Л. (2018). Педагогічна майстерність: розвиток професійно-­педагогічної адаптивності та соціальної рефлексії майбутнього вчителя: навч. посібник, Київ: Педагогічна думка.
  9. Alzu’bi, M. A. (2014). The Extend of Adaptation Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Domain In English Questions Included in General Secondary Exams. Advances in Language and Literary Studies. Vol. 5, No. 2. 67–72. DOI:10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.2p.67.
  10. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
  11. Behnke, Y. (2018). Textbook Effects and Efficacy. The Palgrave Handbook of Textbook Studies. Palgrave Macmillan US. 383–396. DOI: 10.1057/978–1–137–53142–1_28.
  12. Biggs, J., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York.
  13. Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook 1, Cognitive Domain; New York: Addison-­Wesley Longman LTD.
  14. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32.
  15. Coleman, V. (2017). On the reliability of applying educational taxonomies. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication, Issue 24, 30–37.
  16. DeSeCo (2005). Executive Summary. https://www.deseco.ch/bfs/deseco/en/index/02.html
  17. Dogan, D., & Zekiye, M.T. (2015). Are the Skills Really Integrated in Coursebooks? A Sample Case — Yes You Can A1.2. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(12), 1599–1632.
  18. Ham, A.K., Heinze, A. (2018). Does the textbook matter? Longitudinal effects of textbook choice on primary school students’ achievement in mathematics. Studies in Educational Evaluation. Vol. 59. 133–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.005.
  19. Glasser, H. (2007). Minding the gap: the role of social learning in linking our stated desire for a more sustainable world to our everyday actions and policies. Social learning towards a sustainable world: principles, perspectives, and praxis. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 35–61.
  20. Kember, D. (1999). Determining the level of reflective thinking from students’ written journals using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1), 18–30. DOI:10.1080/026013799293928.
  21. Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2006). The New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Corwin press.
  22. Olimat, M. (2015). Analyzing Action Pack Textbooks’ Questions according to Revised Bloom Taxonomy. Journal of Education and Practice. Vol.6, No. 28, 152–159.
  23. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2016). Global competency for an inclusive world. Available at: www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/Global-­competency-for-an-inclusive-­world.pdf
  24. Pierce, W. (2003). Metacognition: study strategies, monitoring, and motivation. A greatly expanded text version of a workshop presented at Prince George’s Community College. http://academic.pgcc.edu/~wpeirce/MCCCTR/metacognition.htm
  25. Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. l. (2001). Defining, Developing and using Curriculum Indicators. CPRE Research Reports. http://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/69
  26. Pudas, A.-K. (2013). Investigating Possibilities to Develop Textbooks to Implement Global Education in Basic Education Instruction. IARTEM e-­Journal, 5(2), 1–22.
  27. Reich, K. (2007). Interactive Constructivism in Education, Education and Culture: Vol. 23: Iss. 1, Article 3. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/eandc/vol23/iss1/art3
  28. Schuman, S. (2005). The IAF handbook of group facilitation: best practices from the leading organization in facilitation.
  29. Stanny, C. J. (2016). Reevaluating Bloom’s Taxonomy: What Measurable Verbs Can and Cannot Say about Student Learning. Education Sciences. 6(4):37. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6040037
  30. Tilbury, D. (2011) Education for sustainable development: an expert review of processes and learning, Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001914/191442e.pdf
  31. UNESCO (2004) Education for all global monitoring report 2005. Education for all: the quality imperative, Paris: UNESCO
  32. UNESCO (2017). Education for the sustainable development goals. Learning objectives, Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002474/247444e.pdf
  33. UNESCO (2017а). Textbooks for sustainable development — a guide to embedding. New Delhi: Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development, UNESCO.
  34. Weinert, F. E. (2001). Vergleichende Leistungsmessung in Schulen — eine umstrittene Selbstverständlichkeit. Weinert, F.E. (ed.) Leistungsmessungen in Schulen, Weinheim and Basel: Beltz, 17–31.
  35. Zaiturrahmi et al. (2017). Analysis of instructional questions in an English textbook for senior high schools. English Education Journal (EEJ). 8(4), October. 536–552.
  36. Alzu’bi, M. A. (2014). The Extend of Adaptation Bloom’s Taxonomy of Cognitive Domain In English Questions Included in General Secondary Exams. Advances in Language and Literary Studies. Vol. 5, No. 2. 67–72. DOI:10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.2p.67.
  37. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
  38. Behnke, Y. (2018). Textbook Effects and Efficacy. The Palgrave Handbook of Textbook Studies. Palgrave Macmillan US. 383–396. DOI: 10.1057/978–1–137–53142–1_28.
  39. Biggs, J., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO Taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York.
  40. Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook 1, Cognitive Domain; New York: Addison-­Wesley Longman LTD.
  41. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32.
  42. Coleman, V. (2017). On the reliability of applying educational taxonomies. Research Matters: A Cambridge Assessment publication. Issue 24. 30–37.
  43. DeSeCo (2005). Executive Summary. https://www.deseco.ch/bfs/deseco/en/index/02.html
  44. Dogan, D., & Zekiye, M.T. (2015). Are the Skills Really Integrated in Coursebooks? A Sample Case — Yes You Can A1.2. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(12), 1599–1632.
  45. Glasser, H. (2007). Minding the gap: the role of social learning in linking our stated desire for a more sustainable world to our everyday actions and policies. Social learning towards a sustainable world: principles, perspectives, and praxis. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers, 35–61.
  46. Ham, A.K., Heinze, A. (2018). Does the textbook matter? Longitudinal effects of textbook choice on primary school students’ achievement in mathematics. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 59. 133–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.005.
  47. Kember, D. (1999). Determining the level of reflective thinking from students’ written journals using a coding scheme based on the work of Mezirow. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(1), 18–30. DOI:10.1080/026013799293928.
  48. Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2006). The New Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Corwin press.
  49. Olimat, M. (2015). Analyzing Action Pack Textbooks’ Questions according to Revised Bloom Taxonomy. Journal of Education and Practice. Vol.6, No. 28. 152–159.
  50. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)(2016) Global competency for an inclusive world. Available at: www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/Global-­competency-for-an-inclusive-­world.pdf
  51. Pierce, W. Metacognition: study strategies, monitoring, and motivation. A greatly expanded text version of a workshop presented at Prince George’s Community College. 2003. http://academic.pgcc.edu/~wpeirce/MCCCTR/metacognition.htm
  52. Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. l. (2001). Defining, Developing and using Curriculum Indicators. CPRE Research Reports. http://repository.upenn.edu/cpre_researchreports/69
  53. Problems of the modern textbook (2021). Coll. science works, Vol. 26, K .: Pedahohichna dumka.
  54. Pudas, A.-K. (2013). Investigating Possibilities to Develop Textbooks to Implement Global Education in Basic Education Instruction. IARTEM e-­Journal, 5(2), 1–22.
  55. Reich, K. (2007). Interactive Constructivism in Education, Education and Culture: Vol. 23: Iss. 1, Article 3. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/eandc/vol23/iss1/art3
  56. Schuman, S. (2005). The IAF handbook of group facilitation: best practices from the leading organization in facilitation.
  57. Stanny, C. J. (2016). Reevaluating Bloom’s Taxonomy: What Measurable Verbs Can and Cannot Say about Student Learning. Education Sciences. 6(4):37. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci6040037
  58. State standard of basic secondary education (2020). Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers № 898 of 30.09.2020. Kyiv. Available at: https://www.kmu.gov.ua/npas/pro-deyaki-­pitannya-derzhavnih-­standartiv-povnoyi-­zagalnoyi-serednoyi-­osviti-i300920–898.
  59. Tilbury, D. (2011) Education for sustainable development: an expert review of processes and learning, Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001914/191442e.pdf
  60. Topuzov, O.M., Malykhin, O.V., Opaliuk, T.L. (2018). Pedagogical skills: the development of professional and pedagogical adaptability and social reflection of the future teacher, Kyiv: Pedahohichna dumka.
  61. Topuzov, О. (2007). Problem situation in the theory of problem-­based learning. Shliakh osvity (The path of education), 1, 12–16.
  62. Topuzov, О. М. (1998). Intellectual development of students in problem-­based learning. Ridna mova (Native language), 7–12, 6–8.
  63. Topuzov, О. М. (2012). The role and place of the textbook in the implementation of the competence approach to learning. Problemy suchasnoho pidruchnyka, 12, 241–247.
  64. Topuzov, О. М. (2015). Formation of problem-­based learning in pedagogical science. Ridna shkola (Native school), 1, 57–60.
  65. Topuzov, О., Kalinina, L. (2017). Organizational mechanisms of educational institutions management: methodologies and theoretical principles. Ukrainskyi pedahohichnyi zhurnal (Ukraininan Pedagogical Journal), 4, 34–44.
  66. UNESCO (2004) Education for all global monitoring report 2005. Education for all: the quality imperative, Paris: UNESCO
  67. UNESCO (2017). Education for the sustainable development goals. Learning objectives, Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002474/247444e.pdf
  68. UNESCO (2017а). Textbooks for sustainable development — a guide to embedding. New Delhi: Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development, UNESCO
  69. Weinert, F. E. (2001). Vergleichende Leistungsmessung in Schulen — eine umstrittene Selbstverständlichkeit. Weinert, F.E. (ed.) Leistungsmessungen in Schulen, Weinheim and Basel: Beltz, 17–31.
  70. Zaiturrahmi et al. (2017). Analysis of instructional questions in an English textbook for senior high schools. English Education Journal (EEJ). 8(4), October. 536–552.