The OECD’s new discourse of curriculum reform

Student agency, competency, colonization, and translation

Bibliographic Data

ID11952174
AuthorsSang Eun Lee (0000-0003-4720-9955, Gyeongguk National University, corresponding author), Isabel S Lee (0000-0002-2062-2523, Gyeongguk National University), Sangeun Lee (0009-0001-1082-4885, Andong National University)
Year2024
Volume58
Issue2-3
Pages321-342
Publication date2024-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Philosophy of Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0309-8249 • E-ISSN: 1467-9752
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/jopedu/qhae030
OpenAlexW4394805742
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited22

The Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) global governance of education has been gradually increasing. Its field of interest is currently expanding from educational evaluation through the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) to curriculum reform through the Education 2030 project. Here, it is interesting to note that the nature of the terms the OECD has been creating reveals a ‘humanistic turn’. This shows up well in the frequent occurrence of terms such as ‘well-being’, ‘attitudes and values’, ‘inclusiveness’, ‘responsibility’, and ‘sustainability’ in the ongoing Education 2030 project. Perhaps this new humanistic discourse increases the likelihood of the smooth adoption of the OECD’s proposed curriculum redesign in more countries. If the OECD’s new discourse captures and transforms contemporary people’s ways of thought and practice about education, then this is related to the problem of colonialism in our era. It is also worth noting that language plays a vital role in colonization. In particular, the need for translation between different languages serves as a useful means for colonization. Conversely, it is also seen as having a potential decolonizing power. In this context, I would like to examine the new language the OECD has adopted, specifically regarding student experience and the nature of knowing. Next, I shall attempt to criticize the underlying educational assumptions in the OECD’s pronouncements. Following this, I shall explore how the OECD’s new discourse has been translated in South Korea, taking this as an example of wider experience in the East Asian context and possibly elsewhere. Finally, I shall conclude by considering the direction of curriculum decolonization in terms of translation

Agency (philosophy · Colonialism · Context (archaeology · Corporate governance · Curriculum · Economics · Humanism · Management · Pedagogy · Political science · Social science · Sociology · Sustainability · Global Education and Multiculturalism · Global Educational Policies and Reforms · Global Educational Reforms and Inequalities · Law

Tools

Open DOI