S.J. Preller
UN IV ERSITY DIDACTICS IN FU TURE PERSPECTIVE
1. In tro d u c to ry rem ark
According to the title of this paper three m atters especially com e in to consideration, viz. didactics, the fu tu r e and the university.
For this reason it is neccssary to give a brief o rien tatio n to each o f these. A fter th at an attem p t will be made to view university didactics in future perspective.
2. Didactics
This paper does n o t afford the time for a com plete discussion of the science o f didactics and therefore we shall have to lim it o u r
selves to an overview o f certain essential facts concerning didac
tics.
The concept “ d idactics” can be defined as “the science o f teach
in g ”. As such it entails the theory as well as the practice of teaching. On the one hand it can be regarded as a branch o f ed u cational science (it m ust be kept in m ind th a t during th e course o f its developm ent didactics was defined in various ways, and even today a certain am ount o f difference in opinion exists about the co ncept o f didactics), and on the o th e r hand it is simply used as a synonym for “ teaching” . In actual fact, however, it en c o m passes both the theory and practice o f teaching, including its own reflections on the nature of the phenom enon know n as “ teach ing” , reflections on w hat teaching actually entails and w hat its ultim ate aims are. It also includes the conditions and the p rinci
ples which are regarded as universally valid for effective teaching, also the strategies and m ethods o f teaching, the pupil, the act of learning and all aspects concerning the pupil and learning, the
teacher, the co n te n t and the construction of curricula and sylla
bi, the diverse teaching institutions, teaching aids and techni
ques, discipline, evaluation and remedial teaching. In the execu
tion o f this task didactics makes ample use o f the scientific findings o f the philosophy of education, the psychology of education, sociology o f education, the history o f education and com parative education. O f course, use is also made of the results of the didactician’s ow n investigations and tho ugh t. All the di- d actician’s activities are aimed at the realization of the m ost ef
fective teaching in the class room . Didactics also includes investi
gation o f the m ethod of teaching and therefore it u nderstand ably has a greater scope and task than teaching m ethod as such.
Since didactics is also concerned with teaching, a tte n tio n should briefly be paid to this concept as well. Teaching should be seen as an event, som ething that takes place betw een people and which is directed at the achievem ent of educational aims. For this reason all teaching is education at the same tim e. In every teaching situation there are at least one person who learns (the pupil or the studen t) and another who assists him or her in his or her endeavours to learn (the teacher or the lecturer). Both these persons are active parties in this event which is know n as teach
ing: a dynam ic — and essentially psychological — interaction takes place betw een them . This event of teaching is aim ed at the achievem ent of m uch m ore than the mere transfer o f knowledge, m ethods and techniques from one party to the other. Teaching should m uch rath er be seen as the “ opening-up” of knowledge in o rd er th a t the stu d en t may be in a position to m ake it his own.
On the o th e r hand, teaching should be seen as the “ opening-up”
o f the stu d e n t him self in the sense th a t he becom es activated by teaching to such a degree th at he is able to apply the knowledge, m ethods and techniques which he has m ade his ow n fo r the sake o f the developm ent of new m ethods and techniques and of the exploitation o f new sources o f knowledge.
The abovem entioned interaction is however always and unavoida
bly accom panied by reciprocal influence betw een tu to r and pupil. In didactics, though, one is interested in m uch m ore than ju s t casual, incidental and random influences: in this process o f “ opening-up” o f self and o f knowledge, and also intrinsically interw oven with it, there should always be present an inten tion al, purposeful, planned, continuous and orderly process of form ing, im provem ent, leading tow ards God of the stu d e n t by th e teacher or lecturer. All the lec tu re r’s efforts should be directed tow ards the aim o f rendering the student a m ore com plete person — in o th e r words, at the realization of a pre-established educational ideal. In this event o r process o f “ opening-up” o f the stu d en t and o f the knowledge (i.e. in this event or process of teaching) the lectu rer uses the following as instrum ents: th e c o n te n t, the exam ple o f the teacher, the m ethods and techniques which have to be im plem ented, and the discipline which is em ployed.
From the above exposition it is evident th at the s tu d e n t, the c o n te n t and the lecturer are the cardinal com ponents o f (educa
tional) teaching, th a t all (educational) teaching is intrinsically aim ed at the fu tu re, th a t it is a continuous deed or process (con tin uo u s, th a t is, from the pre-school stage, through the p ri
m ary and secondary stages up to the end o f the tertiary stage, and even past th a t in the form o f life-long, fu rth e r education).
Usually, a distin ction is draw n betw een general and special di
dactics. University didactics m ust be considered a form of spe
cial didactics which has as its field o f investigation all the above
m entio ned m atters and events which take place at a university, or as m ay be seen in even w ider perspective, in tertiary train ing.
3. The future
Reflecting on the future is no m ore flight o f fancy. The p ast, th e present and the future form a con tinu um in which the present
m ay be regarded as the culm ination p o in t o f the whole past. For this reason it is always wise to visualize the future while co n stantly taking in to account the influences which are the d e te r
m ining factors o f th e n ature o f the p resent, and also all the in
fluencing factors which played some or o th er role in the past.
B ut, in spite o f the fact th at the responsible futurologist takes all these precautions and goes about his task in a scientific m anner, and also despite the fact th a t he has m any reservations about his prognosis, his view o f th e future m ay nevertheless be distorted or even cataclysm ically destroyed — by wars, natural disasters, econom ic revolutions, political revolutions, drastic dem ogra
phic and political changes, surprising scientific and technologi
cal discoveries, etc.
While fully taking the abovem entioned reservations in to account, it can be expected th a t current tendencies will be accelerated and th a t the fu tu re will be characterised by m ainly the following features:
* An ex ponential increase o f knowledge with the accom panying problem s o f the m astering, organisation, availability, retentio n and application o f such stores o f knowledge. This increase of knowledge o f course also brings ab o u t wider and deeper know ledge o f the physical, psychological and especially the biochem i
cal and biophysical bases o f m em ory, th o u g h t, m otivation and hered ity .
* Ever-increasing specialisation which stands in direct relation to the tem p o at which science, technique and industry develop.
* Im proved and ever-increasing inter-individual, inter- and in tra national com m unication in every sphere o f life.
* An increasing struggle tow ards in tern atio n al co-operation, harm ony and a w orld-govem m ent, particularly as a result o f an ever-increasing p o p u latio n apd the disp rop ortio n ate d istribution o f wealth and natural resources.
* The accelerated e x p lo ita tio n o f natural resources, accom panied by concerted attem p ts to conserve these resources in o rd er that optim al use can be m ade o f them .
* The increasing grow th of the populations of developing countries, a levelling-off and even decrease in the populations of developed countries and the accom panying problem s of in te r
hum an and international relations.
* The ever-increasing process of urbanisation and the accom pa
nying phenom enon o f m an ’s estrangem ent from the reality created by God.
* The increase in leisure tim e with the accom panying problem s o f utilising such leisure tim e in a g lu tted com m unity.
* Increasing emphasis will be laid on education at all levels, also at the tertiary level.
* The ever-increasing filing-down o f inter-hum an and inter
national differences with the accom panying processes o f demo- cratisation and socialisation which take place in direct relation
ship to the rate of increase in po pu lation and decrease in natural resources.
* The ever-increasing sense of selfsufficiency o f a m an who seeks his own salvation in the achievem ents o f science and the state (governm ent) w ith the result th at m an becom es increasingly estranged from G od and religion.
* The ever-increasing im provem ent in the standard o f living and of living circum stances which, in tu rn , should stim ulate physical, psychological and especially cognitive developm ent.
* An ever-improving and an ever-increasing num ber o f tech no lo
gical appliances, m ethods and techniques aim ed at the im prove
m ent of teaching, and also o f productivity and en tertain m ent.
* The ever-increasing diversification of occupations: new occupa
tions will be established, some others will be renew ed and still others will eventually cease to exist. All of these changes will be accom panied by increasing emphasis on vocational guidance, vocational training and extended, alm ost life-long, education.
* The ever-increasing search o f m an for d irection in life, a life which shows rapid changes and in which problem s are becom ing ever m ore com prehensive and com plicated and which will place a high prem ium on leadership.
If it is accepted th at the abovem entioned will be features of the future, then university didactics should already in our day be tu n ed to m eet the dem ands o f the future — because the universi
ty is at present busy at its task of preparing people for th at future.
4. The university
The university is no medieval in stitu tio n which has been left unaffected by all the events around it as the centuries passed.
It is a hum an institu tion which is situated in the pulsing life of its narrow er and its wider com m unity, which is reciprocally co n
nected with the latte r in countless ways, which is totally depen
d e n t on its com m unity and, vice versa, which lives with the co m m unity as p art o f the com m unity and, as such, exerts influence on life around it and supplies guidance founded on scientific grounds. Should the university deny these responsibilities, it runs the risk o f being rejected by its own com m unity.
But since the university is p art and parcel of a developing com m un ity , and being itself a developing institutio n, it is involved in a serious struggle (to geth er with its com m unity) to m eet the challenges which com e to the fore from w ithin itself and which are p u t to the university in all spheres o f life. The university poses questions to itself and is also questioned by others, it is correctly used and sometim es abused (at tim es by itself). In the course of its developm ent it was (and still is) extrem ely difficult to define the term “ university” in term s generally acceptable, since the university (th a t which is designated by the collective noun “univ ersity ” ) show ed (and still shows) a great diversity — especially in its outw ard appearance. But concerning its inward being (one could say: its true being) it is quite evident from re
po rts by com m ittees o f investigation in a great num ber of countries and from an abundance o f literature on this subject th a t there exists at least one com m on factor, nam ely that the university is an in stitu tio n d e v o te d to the practive o f science and
to the teaching o f students. However, even this seemingly sim ple definition is operationally in terp reted in a num ber o f ways, m ainly because any such in terp retatio n o f it is religiously a n d /o r philosophically determ ined. F o r this reason it is well nigh im possible to generalise ab o u t the university and it therefore becom es the task o f each individual university to decide for it
self w hat it really is in actual fact and also w hat its aims are.
Only when the didactician knows w hat the university’s true being is and what its aims and functions are, is he in a position to de
sign a didactic p a tte rn o r m odel aim ed at the achievem ent o f the goals o f the university and at the fulfilm ent o f the functions of the university.
5. University didactics in fu tu re perspective
Since university didactics is bo th science and practice both these elem ents will have to feature in the following paragraphs in which university didactics is viewed in future perspective.
5.1 The science o f university didactics view ed in fu tu r e perspec
tive
Firstly a tte n tio n is paid to the past and present —
In the past universities were devoted (by m eans of th eir faculties o f education) to the study o f all aspects o f teaching in schools, and this is very m uch the case in the present day. Only very re cently were they shocked by the realization o f the fact th a t they also had to pay a tte n tio n to all aspects o f their ow n teaching and training o f students — to all aspects o f tertiary training. W ithin a few decades chairs for the study of tertiary teaching were esta
blished at universities all over the w orld, institu tes and bureaux for tertiary teaching were form ed and various courses in tertiary teaching were presented. All these very recent events resulted in a stream o f literatu re which today flows very consistently.
280
One notices how ever the tendency to regard tertiary or univer
sity didactics as the rem edy for m ost of the problem s and ailm ents o f the university. One can say th a t the choice of rem e
dy was correct, b u t it m ust be adm itted th at the fact was dis
regarded th a t didactics is nothing m ore than only a single branch o f the to tality indicated as educational science, and th at didactics is always exceedingly dependent for its own developm ent on the o th er branches o f educational science. This will always be the case w ith didactics. With regard to teaching in schools the science o f didactics has grown and developed through the centuries to becom e w hat it is to d ay , and in this process o f developm ent it has constantly m ade ample use of the rich source of knowledge supplied by the philosophy of education, the psychology of ed u cation, the history o f education and — m ore recently — com para
tive education and th e sociology o f education. All this has of course taken place apart from the knowledge which didactics has exploited o f its own accord. Consider for instance the following exam ple: through the centuries th o ught was given to, and re
search con d ucted on the phenom enon o f education, the pupil, the teacher, school and schooling system s, curricula and syllabi, the aims o f teaching and education in schools, discipline in schools, m ethods and techniques o f teaching in schools, etc. With very few exceptions this research was lim ited to events in or at schools, with the unavoidable result th a t very little system atised and verified knowledge was acquired on the tertiary counterparts o f these m atters m entio ned above. One could m ake the state
m en t th a t a building o f science was erected of which the top storey was com pletely lacking or then at least sorely neglected.
This state o f affairs was transferred to the training of teachers at tertiary in stitutio n s, w ith the result th a t teaching at universities and o th er tertiary institutions hardly or never figures in such training. Since this is tan ta m o u n t to a disregard o f the con tinu ity o f edu cation , it should be regarded as a possible cause o f pupils’
■difficulties in the transition from secondary school to university.
While this was the case for a very long period o f tim e, it was ex
p ected of didacticians to establish a com plete system o f univer
sity didactics practically overnight. It was ex pected of them to design a system o f university teaching while sim ultaneously p a y ing a tte n tio n to the efficient training of university lecturers. In o rder to do this they o f necessity had to resort to general didac
tics as a starting p o in t, to the theory o f philosophy o f education, the history o f educatio n, psychology of education, sociology of education and to com parative education — all disciplines o f e d u cational science th a t were up to th a t po in t m ainly con centrated and focused on the child and the school. A part from this, univer
sity didacticians were also forced to seek for the required kn ow ledge in the sh o rtest tim e possible. Looking back today however, it is possible to say th a t com m endable w ork was done in these tw o respects.
A nd now a look at the future —
Since all present indications are th a t ever-increasing dem ands will be m ade o f university didactics (as a science as well as a practice) in fu ture, it is a fact which we have to face th a t this science of di
dactics will have to be developed w ith every means w ithin our reach, and also th at it will have to be established on a very sound foundation o f basic knowledge. The p o in t is, however, th at all this cannot be regarded as the duty of only one person or even of a single academ ic d ep artm ent.
On the co n trary it can be stated th a t if this ideal m ust be achieved it is o f the u tm o st im portance th a t the entire faculties of ed u catio n of universities should regard the m atte r of university teaching as their com bined duty. Philosophy o f educa
tion should apply itself to all aspects of tertiary education in very m uch the same fashion as it does to aspects o f pre-prim ary, prim ary and secondary levels o f teaching. In doing so, it should supply the theoretical or philosophical fo u n dation for tertiary education in the same way as it does for all the o th e r levels of teaching ju s t m entioned. This suggests th at reflection on the m etaphysical, epistem ological, ethical, religious, logical,
psychological, sociological, political, physiological and o th er foundations o f teaching should be extended also to the tertiary level of teaching.
Also the fundam ental questions about teaching on the tertiary level should receive serious atten tio n : questions ab o u t the true being or essence o f the university, the functions of the univer
sity; its educational aims, the nature of the stu d ent, the co n te n t o f what is taught at the university, punishm ent and discipline, and eventually also the system and organisation o f teaching on the tertiary level. In very m uch the same way Psychology o f edu
cation should cover the com plete area of tertiary teaching in the sense th at it extends its study and investigations o f the ph en o m ena o f grow th, developm ent and the act of learning also to uni
versity level, i.e. extends its investigations and research also to the student. H istory o f education again should grant the univer
sity and the diverse aspects of tertiary education their rightful place in its inquiries into the course of the developm ent of educa
tion and teaching as the centuries w ent past. Comparative educa
tion should also include university education in its task o f co m paring educational system s, while Sociology o f education should, am ong o th er things, devote atten tio n to the problem s of the u n i
versity w ith regard to the com m unity in which it is situated.
Finally, it m ust be expected of general didactics to include the university in its reflections on basic principles and designs which may guarantee effective teaching at tertiary level.
It is no t intended to insinuate by w hat has ju st been stated that nothing at all has been done up to the present m om ent in the areas m entioned pertaining to university teaching. The intention o f w hat is stated in the previous paragraph is far rath e r to stress the fact th a t the university and university teaching should be granted their rightful place in the investigations o f the various disciplines o f educational science. Furtherm ore, it should be stated th at a specialist need no t necessarily be ap p ointed in each o f the abovem entioned academic departm ents to apply all his
energies to tertiary education, o r even th a t a special lecturer should be appointed in each dep artm ent to pay all his a tte n tio n to the tertiary level o f teaching. The fact th at m ust however be underlined is th at the scope o f each of the disciplines o f educa
tional science should be extend ed in order to include also the tertiary level o f teaching insom uch as this is n o t already being done. Once this is being done, we can rest assured th at university teaching will figure in a properly balanced m anner in all research, publications and in lecturing program m es. Also tertiary education will assume its natural place in the process of train ing o f lecturers (and teachers) and one can expect the acquisi
tion o f a teaching diplom a by lecturers to assume m ore m eaning and sense.
Should these suggestions be followed, it is m ore th an likely th at a specialised course know n as “ Tertiary teaching” will com e in to existence alongside o f those already included in the curricula for teaching diplom as and degrees. The same applies for the B.Ed.
degree and the m aster’s and d o c to r’s degrees following th ere after. A n o th er very probable result of this innovation will be the fact th at research will be stim ulated along the whole line of u n i
versity teaching which again will result in the supply of essential knowledge w ith which to reinforce the foundations and building o f the science o f university didactics to which reference was m ade earlier on in this paper.
I f universities w orked along these lines it will be possible to sup
ply scientists in future who are w orthy o f the title o f university didactician and in addition a generation o f lecturers and teachers m ay be supplied who have m ade a study o f teaching as a totality . These persons will be able to make a valuable c o n trib u tio n to wards the alleviation o f transition problem s betw een school and university.
Since how ever university didactics is to be regarded as a special branch o f didactics, it m ay be wise to create a specific d e p a rt
m ent of, and to app o int special lecturers for, the handling of university didactics. Also, however, it should be ensured that these lecturers are in a position to devote their full atten tio n to their special task.
5.2 University didactics as a practice in fu tu r e perspective
University didactics m ay be regarded as the focal p o in t, the clearing house of all th e knowledge amassed by the diverse branches o f educational science (of course also including itself).
It m ust in the m eantim e also be k ept in m ind th a t the science o f education does n o t amass knowledge purely for the sake of the possession o f the knowledge itself. On the co n trary , know ledge is sought for the sake o f the functionalisation o f such knowledge in the fulfilm ent o f o n e ’s calling in life. T he calling o f the university didactician includes am ong o th er things th a t he should utilize his knowledge of education in his ow n m eth ods of practising science, in the training and teaching o f stu d en ts en
tru sted to him and eventually also in his attem p ts at drafting didactic strategies and designs for university teaching. His task also calls o n the didactician to be able to identify didactical p ro blems in th e tertiary teaching situatio n and to design didactic m odels w ith which these problem s can be rem edied o r solved, to evaluate existing didactical practices, m odels and designs by m eans o f established norm s and principles, and lastly to give tho u ght in a reform atory m anner to his ow n way o f practising science and o f teaching o r lecturing.
From this brief o rien tatio n given in the foregoing pages on di
dactics as a science and as practice, the university as a tertiary in stitu tio n and on w hat can be expected in the future we now have to consider the future task o f university didactics. This em braces especially the following:
1. Increasing a tte n tio n will inevitably have to be paid to all aspects o f the training o f lecturers in the years to com e. The aim should be to require of every lecturer n o t only to be expert-
ly trained in his own special subject in which he will lecture, but also to be adequately schooled in educational science. It should, in view o f this dem and be fair practice to expect of every univer
sity lecturer to be in possession o f a teaching diplom a, m uch in the same way as it is currently expected of every school teacher.
Such a diplom a will then be regarded as evidence o f the fact th at all the disciplines o f educational science have been included in the curriculum and th a t university didactics was taken as a spe
cial subject. A part from this, measures will have to be taken to ensure th a t continuous in-service training takes place in o rder to keep lecturers inform ed n ot only o f the latest tendencies, m eth o d s and techniques of university teaching b u t also of developm ents in the organisation and adm inistration o f the uni
versity.
2. Since it m ust be accepted as a fact th a t a university’s view of itself, o f its essential being and its ow n functions are determ ining factors for the didactical strategies em ployed, it follows logically th a t every university should continually do research on these m atters concerning itself. It is essential to gain com plete clarity o n these m atters in order to be in a position to design a didactical p a tte rn which is aim ed at the realisation o f previously circum scribed goals and functions. It is the task of the whole university to particip ate in this study o f its own essential being and its own functions and n o t only the task of those scientists who specialise in university didactics.
3. The university should continually give th o u gh t to its own po licy o f education and teaching o f stu d e n ts and should com e
to com plete clarity on this m a tte r from tim e to tim e. This policy o f ed ucation should culm inate in the form ulation o f the educa
tional aims o f the university, bccause it is only when this has been done th at a didactic approach can be designed with which to achieve such previously form ulated goals.
4. Because of the fact th at universities have recently throw n their doors wide open to a heterogeneous stu d en t p o p ulatio n , and will
in all probability keep their doors open, it has becom e necessary for university didactics to provide for differentiated teaching to a very m uch greater ex te n t than is presently the case. In order to be able to m eet the great diversity of interests, needs and abilities o f students it has becom e essential th a t curricula, syllabi and di
dactical designs should be differentiated.
5. In view of what has been stated in the previous paragraph and in view of the greater dem ands of an ever-growing store of know ledge, it has becom e o f param ount im portance to pay constant atte n tio n to a didactically sound program m e of curriculum and syllabus construction. Each and every curriculum and syllabus should be constru cted and, o f course, constantly revised accord
ing to criteria which have been proved didactically sound. Now, in order to be in a position to do this clear aims should be fo rm u
lated in no uncertain term s for every single curriculum , syllabus and even sub-sections of syllabi. Once this has been done the subject-m atter or co n ten t of the various syllabi can be selected with the aim o f achieving the goals previously form ulated, and only then can the business start of arranging the subject-m atter o f syllabi according to established didactical principles.
6. The ever-increasing dem ands of life as a whole and o f occupa
tions in life in particular, and of an ever-increasing mass of avail
able knowledge, renders it all the m ore necessary for university didactics to apply its energies to the “ opening-up” of the p o te n tialities o f every stu d ent, and to the stim ulation and develop
m ent o f those things in him th at possess perm anent value for life.
Mainly for this reason the emphasis in the process o f teaching should be shifted: away from the goal of merely transferring know ledge to the stu d en t, a process in which the lecturer is forced to supply knowledge to the stu den t by means of lectures and literature, tow ards the process of “opening-up” o f k n o w ledge, a process in which the stu d en t is accom panied, aided, orien tated , stim ulated and m otivated by the lecturer. In the latter process the stu d en t is allowed the freedom to do research, to sclect relevant knowledge, to arrange such knowledge, to re
fleet on it, to apply it and also to w ork creatively in his search for, his application and arrangem ent of knowledge. In this m a t
ter emphasis should also be placed on the dem and th a t the stu dent be equipped with w hat we could call a scientific a ttitude, an a ttitu d e which the stu d en t will take along with him into life and into his eventual occu pation , and which will again sustain him in the trials of life and o f his occupation in years to com e. This a ttitu d e may be regarded also as his guarantee of being able to exploit sources of knowledge on his ow n, to d e
velop new m eth o d s and techniques and to be a true leader, a person who has the com petence to decide on policy on scienti
fic grounds. It stands to reason, therefore, th a t the student should be equipped during his period of study at the university for his eventual task o f effectively assuming a place in the full, challenging and com plicated life o f the future.
7. W hat has ju st been stated in the previous paragraph also suggests th at judicious use should be made o f existing teaching aids and m ethods, and th at new aids and m ethods should be de
veloped, all of these being basically directed to the facilitation of the process o f “ opening-up” of knowledge for the stu d en t on the one hand, and “ opening-up” of the stu d e n t’s ow n self on the o th er. This should be done far rath er than only concentrating on
the transfer o f skill and knowledge to the stu d ent.
8. A tten tio n should also continuously be given to the design and careful choice o f the m ost reliable, valid, accurate and econom ic m ethods o f evaluating the progress of students, to ways and m eans o f determ ining a s tu d e n t’s progress tow ards the a tta in m ent o f those goals applicable to the specific stu d en t in question.
The didactician should also prove his prowess in constantly evaluating those m ethods o f evaluation currently in use in order to achieve a b e tte r standard o f evaluation at universities.
Universities will be wise if they im m ediately apply their energies to the tasks exp o un d ed in this paper since dem ands on the
university will undoubtedly increase. If the university — with university didactics as its instrum ent — should follow the pattern outlined in the foregoing pages, it can be expected to m ake sub
stantial progress in its efforts to face the challenges o f the future.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BINGLE, H J J . 1976. A radical new order? In: IAC Christian Higher E ducation — the contem porary challenge. IBC, Potchefstroom .
COETZEE, J.C . & VAN ROOY, D J . 1949. Beginsels en m etodes van die h o ër onder- wys. J .L . van Schaik Bpk., Pretoria.
l.B.C. 1969. Die atoom eeu in u lig (th e articles o f H J J . Bingle and S J . Preller on pp. 254-268 en 296-309) IBC, Potchefstroom .
I.B.C. 1976. Gesprek m et die toekom s — futurologiese verkenninge. IBC, Pot
chefstroom .
KERTESZ, S.D. 1971. The task o f universities in a changing w orld. University o f N otre Dame Press, London.
KRUYTBOSCH, C.E. & MESSINGER, S.L. (ed.) 1970. The state o f the university.
Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, California.
LAWLOR, J . (ed.) 1968. The new university. Routledge & Kegan Paul, L ondon.
N.Z.C.E.R. 1970. Trends and issues in higher education. New Zealand Council for Higher E ducation, Wellington.
PAUW, J .R . 1969. Die taak van die didaktikus aan ’n universiteit. RAU, Jo h an n es
burg.
PR ELLER , S J . 1975. Die didaktiek in die «kool van die 21ste eeu. In : COVSA. Die skool van die 21ste eeu. COVSA, Potchefstroom .
PR ELLER , S J . 1971. Inleiding to t die tersiêre didaktiek. PU vir CHO. P otchef
stroom .
S.A.V.B.O. 1973. Tersiêre onderw ys. Publikasiereeks nr. 7. SAVBO, Pretoria.
TA LJA A RD , J.A .L . 1969. Die universiteit. In: Koers 37(6), J u n e 1969.
T R ITES, D.G. (ed.) 1975. New directions for higher education, no. 9. Planning the future o f the undergraduate college. Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco.
VAN DER STOEP, F. & O.A. 1973. D idactic orientation. McGraw-Hill Book Co., Johannesburg.
