브루너(J.S.Bruner)의 전·후기 교육과정이론 비교 = The comparison with former·latter curriculum theory of J.S. Bruner

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In this study the curriculum theory of Bruner was classified into 'structure of knowledge' and 'structure of narrative' discussion. And each was called 'former Bruner' and 'latter Bruner' or 'former and latter Bruner's theory'.
During Bruner's theory had been studied mostly about the 'structure of knowledge' discussion, Bruner suggested the 'structure of narrative' discussion. The latter Bruner's theory has a significance as the former Bruner has. Therefore in this study, I reconsidered both the former and latter Bruner's theory and I compared each content of education and each teaching-learning method.
The specific problems of this studies are as follows.
First, What are the epistemologies that Bruner's former and latter theories are based on? What difference will be in the former and latter contents of education according to the epistemology?
Second, How to make it easy to realize the contents of education? What are the methods of teaching and learning to each theory and what's the difference between them?
Third, What is the meaning that the former and latter theories of Bruner give to the curriculum?
The 'structure of knowledge' theory is considered education as an 'objective feature', which is already determined by scholars and teachers. On the other hand, the 'structure of narrative' theory is regarded education as 'cultural epistemology', which is based on the cultural property of human, and it emphasizes the intention of learners.
According to the Bruner's latter theory, human mind cannot exist if it's out of the culture. Therefore, education is always situated in the cultural settings and always depends on the utilization of cultural resources. In a word, the latter Bruner's point of view is the culturalism ; the 'mind and education' is composed of the Human Culture.
The former and latter Bruner's contents of education are stated with these facts.
The 'structure of knowledge' theory regards the learner's cognitive ability as important. Therefore the former Bruner's theory considers intellectual accomplishment and excellence as important. The 'structure of narrative' theory makes it possible to understand the general world of human by expanding the learner's mode of thought. Also the latter theory enables learners to have various points of view which is different from one's own idea.
The former Bruner's content of education developed the learner's academic ability. On the other hand, the latter Bruner's content of education enabled learners to understand the thought of other people by interacting with others. Then we can consider the learner as the cultural being in the latter Bruner's theory.
In relation to the method of teaching-learning, Bruner proposed the 'discovery learning' and 'folk pedagogy'.
The former Bruner's 'discovery learning' summarizes that the task of teaching a subject to a child at any particular age is representing the structure of that subject in terms of learner's language. The key point of this statement is that the teacher translates adequately the contents to teach into the learner's intellectual level.
The latter Bruner's theory suggests that the important thing in the folk pedagogy is the circumstance of classroom where the learner belongs. Folk pedagogy gives emphasis on the cultural aspect of learning. Folk pedagogy is amplified through discussion and collaboration with others who may have other views. It is the interactive aspect that learners communicate continuously their opinions about the subject with learners and teachers.
In short, the former Bruner's 'discovery learning' can be considered the 'prescriptive model of learning' that pays attention to how the learner understands the structure of knowledge more effectively. On the other hand, the latter Bruner's folk pedagogy can be considered the 'prescriptive model of teaching' that concentrates into how the teacher takes lessons in the classroom that belongs to learners more effectively. At this time, the teacher is concerned with understanding what the learner thinks and teachers have always tried to adjust their teaching to the backgrounds, abilities, styles and interests of the learners they teach.
The 'structure of knowledge' theory made education possible to be proceeded more systematically. And then, we regarded the former Bruner's theory as 'discipline centered curriculum'. The 'structure of narrative' theory allowed learners to express their thinking freely and to exchange their own ideas, and it is so made as to reassemble their meaning. This feature realized the 'integrated curriculum' of recognition·definition·action. In this way, Bruner is presumed to comprehend the education in various points of view, and to consider all the academic, social and cultural aspects.
In conclusion, when both of the former and the latter Bruner's theories are kept, curriculum will be advanced and Bruner's theory would be offered to students more effectively.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 = 1
• 1. 연구의 필요성 = 1
• 2. 연구 목적 및 연구 문제 = 5
• 3. 연구 내용 = 6
• Ⅱ. 전·후기 브루너의 교육내용 = 8
• 1. 전·후기 브루너의 지식관 = 8
• 2. 전기 브루너의 지식의 구조 = 18
• 1) 현상과 사물의 내적 구조 = 18
• 2) 교과 및 학문의 구조 = 21
• 3) 교육내용으로서 지식의 구조 = 26
• 3. 후기 브루너의 내러티브 구조 = 28
• 1) 의미 구성 = 31
• 2) 자아 구성 = 36
• 3) 교육내용으로서 내러티브 = 39
• Ⅲ. 전·후기 브루너의 교수-학습방법 = 43
• 1. 전기 브루너의 발견학습 = 43
• 1) 심리적 측면 = 44
• 2) 논리적 측면 = 48
• 3) 지식의 구조와 발견학습의 관계 = 51
• 2. 후기 브루너의 민속적 교수법(folk pedagogy) = 52
• 1) 상호작용적 측면 = 53
• 2) 문화적 측면 = 58
• 3) 내러티브와 민속적 교수법의 관계 = 61
• Ⅳ. 전·후기 브루너 이론 비교 및 비판적 논의 = 64
• 1. 전·후기 교육내용 비교 및 비판적 논의 = 64
• 2. 전·후기 교수-학습방법 비교 및 비판적 논의 = 70
• 3. 브루너 이론의 교육과정적 의미 = 77
• Ⅴ. 결언 및 제언 = 80
• 참 고 문 헌 = 84
• ABSTRACT = 90