Crítica curricular neosistémica en programas de Contaduría Pública del Caribe Colombiano
Cargando...
Fecha
2022
Autores
Brito Cuadrado, Omar Alonso
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Ediciones Universidad Simón Bolívar
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales
Resumen
La presente investigación partió del análisis crítico sistémico de los programas de contaduría ofrecidos en lo internacional, nacional y regional-local. Para ello se revisó el currículo del Programa de Contaduría Público de la Universidad de La Guajira (PCPUG) en la auscultación del énfasis curricular, las políticas de formación y modelos de gestión académica. De lo anterior nace la siguiente pregunta de investigación: cómo intervenir la desarticulación del currículo técnico positivista sistémico de un Programa de Contaduría Pública, con el objetivo de producir conocimiento desde la crítica curricular neosistémica con la participación de estudiantes, docentes, administrativos y empresarios.
Respuesta encontrada en el análisis crítico sistémico del conocimiento curricular de la segunda modernidad, epistemología que permitió escoger la diferencia por el Comité Curricular del Programa, como expectativa de la transformación deseada del currículo, representada en el código binario disciplinariedad-factor-de-desarticulación-curricular-del-PCPUG/transdisciplinariedad-factor-de-integración-curricular-del-PCPUG, soportada en siete categorías neosistémicas o códigos binarios para la superación, tanto del dominio de la disciplinariedad desarticuladora del plan de estudios, como para superar la condición heterónoma e insular del currículo tradicional del programa que penetra también la didáctica. Este reto demandó, la aplicación de una tecnología educativa no lineal del currículo universitario y, el
método de observación de segundo orden, en términos de investigación acción autopoietica (IAA).
La selección de la diferencia del código binario, enunciado antes, permitió escoger dos problemas y dos competencias por parte del Comité Curricular del Programa para la articulación curricular, con base en la transversalidad curricular neosistémica como condición previa de un plan de estudios neosistémico.
Desde la connotación del primer bucle de la IAA autorreferencial en autoobservación y autodescripción, factor de diagnóstico en la nueva dialéctica del currículo neosistémico, basado en observar lo probable como improbable (currículo asistémico o, prevalencia de la desarticulación de las disciplinas) y lo improbable como probable (currículo neosistémico o, radicalización de la integración de las disciplinas, con transparencia), le subyace una nueva generación de sistemas sociales radicalizados en la autonomía del conocimiento en currículo universitario.
Esta nueva generación de conocimiento curricular se precisó, en el requerimiento de un análisis crítico del plan de estudios asistémico y desarticulado de los procesos misionales del programa de contaduría pública en la asunción de un objeto de transformación a través de un nuevo aprendizaje por los cuatro campos de formación del plan de estudios (campo de ciencias básicas; campo de investigación; campo de formación profesional; y campo socio-humanístico) sujetos a su respectiva coevolución, en el tránsito de la disciplinariedad a la transdisciplinariedad, en el corto, mediano y largo plazo.
Es la coevolución de la transdisciplinariedad conllevó a entenderse como la principal experiencia a generar en el Programa de Contaduría Pública, significada en constructos de una nueva generación de conocimiento en transversalidad curricular neosistémica (TCN), mediante nuevos aprendizajes de integración en currículo, aprendizaje institucional que precisa de producción de conocimiento en nuevas estrategias curriculares; configuración de una nueva estructura curricular; reestructuración de la internacionalización del programa; generación de
investigación en currículo neosistémico; y, desarrollo de la transdisciplinariedad como fuente de articulación y emprendimiento. Se trata de una reformulación neosistémica que en TCN implica la reconfiguración de campos de conocimiento del plan de estudios en subsistemas sociales de conocimiento emplazados a establecer complementariedad entre currículo y didáctica, transdisciplinar neosistémica, a efectos de nueva praxis en la cotidianidad de la ejecución de la enseñanza, aprendizaje y evaluación que permea, a la vez, todas las prácticas y, en consecuencia, las tres funciones primarias del programa, la investigación, la docencia y la extensión o proyección social.
The current research started from the critical systemic analysis from the accounting programs offered on an international, national, and regional-local level. For that purpose, the public accounting program curriculum (in Spanish, Programa de Contaduría Pública de la Universidad de La Guajira ‘PCPUG’) of the University of the La Guajira was checked in the auscultation of the curricular emphasis, formation politics, and academic management models. From the previous, the following research question was developed: how to intervene in the dislocation of the systemic positive technical curriculum of the public accounting program, with an objective to produce knowledge from the critical new-systemic curriculum with student, teacher, administrative and businessmen participation. The response was found during the critical systemic analysis of the curricular knowledge of the second modernity. It was an epistemology that permitted the program’s curricular committee to select a difference that would attain to the expected and desired transformation of the curriculum, which would be represented in the binary code called disciplinary-factor-of-disarticulation-curricular-del-PCPUG / transdisciplinarity-factor-de-integration-curricular-del-PCPUG (in Spanish disciplinariedad-factor-de-desarticulación-curricular-del-PCPUG/transdisciplinariedad-factor-de-integración-curricular-del-PCPUG). The previous was to overcome both the dominance of the disarticulated disciplinarity of the study plan and the heteronomous and insular condition of the traditional curriculum of the program that intervenes also with didactics. This challenge required for researchers to be trained in the theory of social systems, in the application of a non-linear educational technology of the university’s curriculum, and in the second-order observation method in terms of autopoietic action research (in Spanish, Investigación Acción autopoietica ‘IAA’). As previously mentioned, the selection of the difference of the binary code permitted the program’s curricular committee to choose two problems and two competencies for curricular articulation. The selection was based on the new-systemic curricular transversality as a precondition of a new systemic study. From the connotation of the self-referencial IAA’s first loop, there is an underlying development of new generation social systems, established in the autonomy of knowledge within the university’s curriculum. The connotation of the first loop considered self-observation and self-description (a diagnostic factor in the new dialectic of the neo-systemic curriculum), based on observing the probable as improbable (non-systemic curriculum or, prevalence of the disarticulation of disciplines), and the improbable as probable (new-systemic curriculum or, the radicalization of the integration of disciplines, with transparency). This new generation of curricular knowledge was specified, in the requirement of a critical analysis of the non-systemic and disjointed from the missionary processes of the public accounting program. To do so, the object of transformation was assumed to go through a new learning process through the four fields forming the study plan (field of basic sciences; field of research; field of professional training; and socio-humanistic field). These fields are subject to their respective co-evolution, in the transition from disciplinarity to transdisciplinarity, in the short, medium and long term. It is the co-evolution of transdisciplinarity that led to understanding itself as the main experience to include in the Public Accounting Program. The co-evaluation was based on constructs of a new generation of knowledge in neosystemic curricular transversality (TCN), through new experiences in curriculum integration, and institutional learning. Institutional learning requeirs the production of knowledge in new curricular strategies; configuration of a new curricular structure; restructuring of the internationalization of the program; generation of research in new-systemic curriculum; and, development of transdisciplinarity as a source of articulation and entrepreneurship. It is a neosystemic reformulation that, in TCN, implies the reconfiguration of fields of knowledge of the curriculum in social subsystems of knowledge. These subsystems are set to establish complementarity between curriculum and didactics, and transdisciplinary neosystemic as an effect of a new praxis in the daily life execution of the teaching, learning, and evaluation; praxis that pararlelly permeates all practices and, consequently, the three primary functions of the program, research, teaching and extension, or social projection.
The current research started from the critical systemic analysis from the accounting programs offered on an international, national, and regional-local level. For that purpose, the public accounting program curriculum (in Spanish, Programa de Contaduría Pública de la Universidad de La Guajira ‘PCPUG’) of the University of the La Guajira was checked in the auscultation of the curricular emphasis, formation politics, and academic management models. From the previous, the following research question was developed: how to intervene in the dislocation of the systemic positive technical curriculum of the public accounting program, with an objective to produce knowledge from the critical new-systemic curriculum with student, teacher, administrative and businessmen participation. The response was found during the critical systemic analysis of the curricular knowledge of the second modernity. It was an epistemology that permitted the program’s curricular committee to select a difference that would attain to the expected and desired transformation of the curriculum, which would be represented in the binary code called disciplinary-factor-of-disarticulation-curricular-del-PCPUG / transdisciplinarity-factor-de-integration-curricular-del-PCPUG (in Spanish disciplinariedad-factor-de-desarticulación-curricular-del-PCPUG/transdisciplinariedad-factor-de-integración-curricular-del-PCPUG). The previous was to overcome both the dominance of the disarticulated disciplinarity of the study plan and the heteronomous and insular condition of the traditional curriculum of the program that intervenes also with didactics. This challenge required for researchers to be trained in the theory of social systems, in the application of a non-linear educational technology of the university’s curriculum, and in the second-order observation method in terms of autopoietic action research (in Spanish, Investigación Acción autopoietica ‘IAA’). As previously mentioned, the selection of the difference of the binary code permitted the program’s curricular committee to choose two problems and two competencies for curricular articulation. The selection was based on the new-systemic curricular transversality as a precondition of a new systemic study. From the connotation of the self-referencial IAA’s first loop, there is an underlying development of new generation social systems, established in the autonomy of knowledge within the university’s curriculum. The connotation of the first loop considered self-observation and self-description (a diagnostic factor in the new dialectic of the neo-systemic curriculum), based on observing the probable as improbable (non-systemic curriculum or, prevalence of the disarticulation of disciplines), and the improbable as probable (new-systemic curriculum or, the radicalization of the integration of disciplines, with transparency). This new generation of curricular knowledge was specified, in the requirement of a critical analysis of the non-systemic and disjointed from the missionary processes of the public accounting program. To do so, the object of transformation was assumed to go through a new learning process through the four fields forming the study plan (field of basic sciences; field of research; field of professional training; and socio-humanistic field). These fields are subject to their respective co-evolution, in the transition from disciplinarity to transdisciplinarity, in the short, medium and long term. It is the co-evolution of transdisciplinarity that led to understanding itself as the main experience to include in the Public Accounting Program. The co-evaluation was based on constructs of a new generation of knowledge in neosystemic curricular transversality (TCN), through new experiences in curriculum integration, and institutional learning. Institutional learning requeirs the production of knowledge in new curricular strategies; configuration of a new curricular structure; restructuring of the internationalization of the program; generation of research in new-systemic curriculum; and, development of transdisciplinarity as a source of articulation and entrepreneurship. It is a neosystemic reformulation that, in TCN, implies the reconfiguration of fields of knowledge of the curriculum in social subsystems of knowledge. These subsystems are set to establish complementarity between curriculum and didactics, and transdisciplinary neosystemic as an effect of a new praxis in the daily life execution of the teaching, learning, and evaluation; praxis that pararlelly permeates all practices and, consequently, the three primary functions of the program, research, teaching and extension, or social projection.
Descripción
Palabras clave
Autorreferencialidad, Investigación acción autopoietica, Código binario o diferencias, Transversalidad curricular, Self-referentiality, Autopoietic action research, Binary code or differences, Curricular transversality
