83 KB277 KB80 KB200620202012Klemenčič, Evaletnik:23številka:5/6str. 37-61, 136-137ISSN:1581-6036COBISSID:2531927URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-1ZF42NZFslSlovensko društvo raziskovalcev šolskega poljaŠolsko poljeknowledgerealismrealistic theories of knowledgerealizemRussell, Bertrandteorija znanjavzgoja in izobraževanjeznanjeRealistične teorije znanja|Today, much of the debate on the national school curriculum follows to some fundamental division which appeared in epistemological theories, splitting the realistic conception and antirealistic conception of knowledge. In this article, I have tried to show the similarities and differences of the various realisms. Realism is based on the idea that there is human cognition independent of reality to which human knowledge is faithfully (as appropriate) reflected. A culturally specific perspective, in watching the reality may not be relevant component of knowledge, which is in ideal conditions, culturally non-specific. In the field of education, this can become the idea of single or universal human knowledge argued in favor of at least partial global unification of curricula in those areas where the subject learning is not human culture itselves. The opposite is true for antirealistic theories of knowledge, which in the latter see especially specific products from each society and culture, with the system of concepts and ideas being the inevitable role of mediation between the learning subject and the cognitive object. After transferring to the field of education antirealistic, theories of knowledge become arguments in favour of the thesis that the curriculum content on a global level cannot possibly be uniform, as derived from the sociocultural systems of terms and concepts related to the specific perspective, which is a constitutive element of knowledge. However, in this article I have focused on the first part of the split, that being realism and realistic theories of knowledgeDanes velik del razprav o nacionalnih šolskih kurikulih sledi nekemu temeljnemu razcepu, ki se je pojavil v epistemoloških teorijah, razcepu na realistično in protirealistično pojmovanje znanja. V članku sem skušala prikazati podobnosti in razlike med različnimi realističnimi teorijami znanja. Realizem temelji na ideji, da obstaja od človekovega spoznavanja neodvisna realnost, ki naj bi jo človeško znanje kar se da verno (ustrezno) odrazilo. Kulturno specifične perspektive v gledanju na stvarnostne morejo biti relevantna sestavina znanja, ki je v idealnih pogojih kulturno nespecifično. Na področju izobraževanja lahko postane ideja o enotnem in univerzalnem človeškem znanju argument v prid vsaj delnemu globalnemu poenotenju kurikularnih vsebin na tistih področjih, na katerih predmet učenja niso same človeške kulture. Nasprotno velja za protirealistične teorije znanja, ki v slednjem vidijo predvsem specifični produkt posamezne družbe in kulture, hkrati pa sistem pojmov in predstav, ki ima vlogo neizogibne mediacije med spoznavajočim subjektom in spoznavnim objektom. Po prenosu na področje izobraževanja postanejo protirealistične teorije argument v prid teze, da kurikularnih vsebin na globalni ravni nikakor ni mogoče poenotiti, saj so izpeljane iz sociokulturnih sistemov pojmov in predstav, vezanih na specifične perspektive, ki so konstitutivna sestavina znanja. Vendar sem se v članku osredotočila na to prvo, tj. na realistične teorije znanjaTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaSlovensko društvo raziskovalcev šolskega polja