There is no agreed-upon systematic theory upon which open education rests. Nevertheless, in spite of the variation in style and practice that does exist, it is possible to identify certain assumptions and beliefs about children and about learning that generally characterize the position.
An attempt is made to clarify the notion of open education and to contrast it with other orientations by drawing upon recent overseas writing and research. Research comparing ‘open’ and ‘traditional’ classrooms is described, the findings and some criticisms discussed.
Some of the theoretical issues and practical problems associated with curriculum evaluation in general are explored, and the implications for the evaluation of open education programs touched upon.
References
1.
AtkinJ. M.Behavioural objectives in curriculum design: A cautionary note. The Science Teacher, 1968, 35, 5, 27–30.
2.
BarthR. S.Open education: Assumptions about learning and knowledge. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1969, 1, 2, 29–39.
3.
BarthR. S.So you want to change to an open classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 1971, 53, 97–99.
4.
BussisA. M.ChittendenE. A.Analysis of an Approach to Open Education: Interim Report. Princeton, N. J.: Educational Testing Service, 1970.
5.
CronbachL. J.Course improvement through evaluation. Teachers College Record, 1963, 64, 672–683.
6.
DeardenR. F.The Philosophy of Primary Education. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968.
7.
DyerH. S.The discovery and development of educational goals. In Stanley, J. C. (Chairman). Proceedings of the 1966 Invitational Conference on Testing Problems. Princeton, N. J.: Educational Testing Service, 1967, 12–24.
8.
ElofsonT. H.Open Education in the Elementary School: Six Teachers Who Were Expected to Change. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana, 1973.
9.
FeatherstoneJ.Schools Where Children Learn. New York: Liveright, 1971.
10.
GlassG. V. Two generations of evaluation models. A paper presented at a meeting of the Nebraska Personnel and Guidance Association in Lincoln, Nebraska, September, 1968. Reprinted as Chapter 14 in TaylorP. A.CowleyD. M. (Eds.) Readings in Curriculum Evaluation. Dubuque: Wm. C. Brown, 1972, 103–109.
11.
HastingsJ. T.The kith and kin of educational measurers. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1969, 6, 127–130.
12.
HogbenD.Curriculum development and evaluation: The need to look beyond behavioural objectives. Teachers College Record, 1973, 74, 529–536.
13.
JacksonP. W.The Teacher and the Machine. 1967 Horace Mann Lecture. University of Pittsburgh Press, 1968.
14.
ScrivenM.Goal-free evaluation. Unpublished working paper for the National Institute of Education. November 1971.
15.
ScrivenM.The methodology of evaluation. American Educational Research Association Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation, Vol. 1. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1967, 39–83.
16.
SilbermanC. E.Crisis in the Classroom. New York: Vintage Books, 1971.
17.
StakeR. E.Off the critical list. Paper presented at the Twenty-Second Annual Conference of the Minnesota Statewide Testing Programs. Minneapolis, Sept. 21, 1972.
18.
StakeR. E.The countenance of educational evaluation. Teachers College Record, 1967, 68, 523–540.
19.
TraubR. E.WeissJ.FisherC. W.MusellaD.Closure on Openness: Describing and Quantifying Open Education. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Unpublished mimeograph, undated.
20.
WalbergH. J.ThomasS. C.Characteristics of Open Education: Toward an Operational Definition. Newton, Mass.: Training Development Research Associates, 1971.
21.
WalbergH. J.ThomasS. C.Open education: An operational definition and validation in Great Britain and United States. American Educational Research Journal, 1972, 9, 197–208.
