Fisiología celular

Outcomes-Based Education was postulated by William Spady, an American sociologist turned educator, in 1967 when he started lecturing at Harvard University. Around 1986, Spady started to think about outcomes and student success in ways that were distinctly different from the ways in which his colleagues were conceptualising them. Rather than thinking of student success in terms of improved test scores, Spady started to advocate the

idea that success should be measured in terms of outcomes - that is, what learners could demonstrate after their educational experiences were over (after they had finished school) rather than by an accumulation of things that could be demonstrated during their educational experiences. This future-focussed complex life-performance approach became the defining feature of Spady’s approach to what he called “transformational outcomes- based education.”

Transformational OBE was based on four principles which according to Spady, if ‘applied consistently, systematically, creatively and simultaneously’ (Spady, 1996, p.1) would ensure that all learners were equipped with the knowledge, competence and qualities necessary for successful fulfilment of their various life roles. These principles became known as (Spady, 1996, p.1): clarity of focus, designing down, high expectations and

expanded opportunity. The child learns the skill in a hands-on way rather than an

instructive performance-oriented way. This allows movement from simple to difficult in the child’s learning.

Spady sees clarity of focus to mean that educators must establish a clear picture of the learning objectives they want learners to be able to demonstrate; make this their top priority in planning, teaching and assessment; share this outcome with learners; and maintain alignment between outcomes, teaching and assessment.

Designing down is to establish significant broad outcomes first, and then derive from them

the enabling outcomes that will provide the foundation for achievement of the broader outcomes from general to specific.

The principle of high expectations according to Spady has two components: raising the level of performance of learners that is considered acceptable and giving all learners access to challenging high-level learning.

The concept of expanded opportunity and support for learning success implies an idea that time (hours of instruction, time tables, and the school calendar) should be used to organise and co-ordinate learning opportunities, but they should not define and limit learning. It also emphasizes the importance of teachers using different methods of instruction to accommodate learners’ different modalities of learning.

When these principles are followed, Outcomes-based education means clearly focussing and organising everything in an educational system around what is essential for all learners to be able to do successfully at the end of their learning experiences.

It is quite clear from the above definition of Outcomes Based Education that the approach focuses on the learner and the results that he/she produces. Thus the two major principles of Outcomes- based Education are learner-centred approach to teaching and continuous assessment. These key principles are discussed in the next section.

2.2.4.4.1 Learner-centred approach to teaching

A learner-centred approach refers to ‘activities and efforts of teaching and learning that allows for learners’ meaningful involvement in a lesson and at the same time are geared towards scaffolding and mediating the learners to meaningfully construct knowledge’ (Du Plessis, et al, 2007, p. 42).

Mediation and scaffolding becomes the new roles that teachers should practise as they use learner-centred approach in Outcomes Based Education delivery.

Scaffolding refers to ‘providing temporary, adjustable support and framework for learning’ (ibid), while mediation means that ‘something comes in between the learner and his/her learning to assist interpret and understand things they learn about’ (ibid). The learner-centred approach resembles a constructivist perspective on learning which assumes that learners must construct knowledge in their own mind; teachers cannot

simply give learners knowledge. What the teacher can do is to facilitate this process of knowledge construction by making information meaningful and relevant to students and creating opportunities for students to discover and apply ideas themselves (ibid). Constructivist theories imply that a far more active role is played by learners in their own learning. In order to facilitate discovery and comprehension of difficult concepts, and the solving of problems, extensive use is made of cooperative learning, with learners working in pairs and/or groups to assist each other through interaction, communication of ideas and providing immediate feedback to each other.

The above consideration of learner-centred approach which has been adopted in PCAR can present some serious challenges for teachers implementing the curriculum. This is mostly because it requires a paradigm shift from the old content-based curriculum practice, where the teacher was the centre of knowledge that could be transmitted to learners. In the content-based curriculum, learners were expected to acquire the transmitted knowledge which was basically rules and facts and being able to recall them. Learners had to master sufficiently the selected things for their subjects. Rote teaching and learning formed the basis of the content-based curriculum. In this type of learning, teachers were the sources of knowledge to learners but this is not the case with the new curriculum. We might assume that achieving the outcomes of the new curriculum might be a challenge for teachers as it requires a paradigm shift in curriculum practices. Practices of the content-based curriculum might persist during teaching in the Outcomes Based Education curriculum, and this might have an impact on the desired outcomes of this new curriculum. Continuous assessment which is another feature of the PCAR Outcomes Based curriculum is discussed next.