:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:詮釋學理論在九年一貫社會學習領域能力指標解讀工作上的應用
書刊名:華梵人文學報
作者:陳新轉
作者(外文):Chen, Shin Tsuang
出版日期:2006
卷期:6
頁次:頁77-121
主題關鍵詞:社會學習領域詮釋學能力指標Social studiesHermeneuticsCompetence indicator
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:131
  • 點閱點閱:87
社會學習領域能力指標雖然被賦予規範課程發展與基本學力測驗命題的功能,卻因爲沒有受到應用的重視,導致目前「一網多本」的情況出現兩大問題:一是各版本內審不一致的「差異」,二是各版本內審與能力指標不一致的「落差」。導正這種混亂,必須回歸能力指標才能正本清源,而採取適當的方式加以解讀是公要的工作,那麼如何解讀才能反應能力指標的屬性以及掌握能力指標的內涵?是值得探討的問題。本文從詮釋學理論探討解讀能力指標的七項主要問題:(一)檢討以Bloom教育目標分類架構分析社會學習領域能力指標的觀念。(二)說明應用詮釋學理論解讀社會學習領域能力指標的理由。(三)探討解讀能力指標應該是「回復原意」還是延展、擴充其涵義?(四)探討能力指標解讀工作如何避免「任意解讀」、取得共識?(五)說明解讀能力指標的對象爲何是「文本」(text)而不是「原始撰寫者」的理由?(六)說明應如何期待能力指標解的結果?(七)如何從詮釋學理論建構能力指標解讀方法?本文採取文獻分析法,以社會學習領域爲研究範圍,首先檢討以Bloom教育目標分類架構分析能力指標所產生的問題,其次說明應用設釋理論解讀能力指標之理由,之後根據設釋學理論討論能力指標解讀工作相關問題,最後據設釋學理論提出能力指標解讀原則、方法、格式與結果。
The competence indicators of the 1-9 Grades Social Studies are designed to direct the development of social studies and the basic learning ability test. But the competence indicators don’t be emphasized enough, leading to the fact that two big problems have appeared in the situations of ' several editions from the same rubric' at present: In every edition, there is not only inconsistence, but also the content of editions are not in accordance with competence indicators completely. Not radically reforming this kind of confusion unless return to the competence indicators and to take proper way to interpret it. Therefore, It is important that how to interpret to respond the attribute and under-stand the content of the competence indicators. This topic adopts Hermeneutics theory to discuss seven subject matters of the interpretation work of the competence indicators of the 1 to 9 Social Studies program: 1. The idea which applies the catalogue structure of Bloom's educational objective to interpret the Social studies competence indicators is fit or not. 2. The reasons why apply Hermeneutics to interpret the Social studies competence indicators. 3. The interpretation of the Social studies competence indicators that should copy its original meaning or extend its probable meaning? 4. How to prevent from arbitrary interpretation in order to make the common understanding? 5. The reasons why the interpreting targets are rather the text of the Social studies competence indicators than the primitive writers. 6. What should the interpretation of the Social studies competence indicators be looking forward? 7. How to build and construct interpretation principle, method, form and result according to the Hermeneutics theory? This topic adopts the analytic approach of documents, regarding the studying field in the Social studies competence indicators. First, examine the idea that applies the catalogue structure of Bloom's educational objective to interpret the Social studies competence indicators, secondly state the reasons why apply Hermeneutics to interpret the Social studies competence indicators, later according Hermeneutics theory to discuss that the relevant problem of the interpretation, finally provide interpretation principle, method, form and result of the Social studies competence indicators.
期刊論文
1.盧雪梅(20040400)。從技術面談九年一貫課程能力指標建構:美國學習標準建構的啟示。教育研究資訊,12(2),3-34。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.葉連祺、林淑萍(20030100)。布魯姆認知領域教育目標分類修訂版之探討。教育研究月刊,105,94-106。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.李宜玫、王逸慧、林世華(2004)。社會學習領域分段能力指標之解讀—由Bloom教育目標分類系統(增訂版)析之。國立臺北師範學院學報,17卷2期,1-34。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Ricoeur, P.(1973)。The task of hermeneutics。Philosophy Today,12 (2/4),112-128。  new window
會議論文
1.黃素貞(2003)。台北市九年一貫課程國中階段社會領域運作實務。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.楊思偉(1999)。國民中小學九年一貫課程基本能力實踐策略。臺北市:國立台灣師範大學教育研究中心。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Gadamer, H.G.、Translated by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G.. Marshall(1995)。Truth and method。New York:Bookman Books Ltd。  new window
2.National Council on Education Standard and Testing(1992)。Raising standards for American education: A report to congress, the secretary of education, the national education goals panel, and the American people。Washington, DC:U. S. Government Printing Office。  new window
3.哈伯瑪斯、里克爾、海德格等、洪漢鼎(2002)。詮釋學經典文選。臺北:桂冠圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
4.洪漢鼎(2002)。詮釋學經典文選。臺北:桂冠圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
5.Risser, James(1997)。Hermeneutics and the Voice of the Other: Re-reading Gadamer's Philosophical Hermeneutics。State University of New York Press。  new window
6.教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
7.赫胥、王才勇(1991)。解釋的有效性。北京:生活、讀書、新知 三聯書店。  延伸查詢new window
8.王岳川(1999)。現象學與解釋學文論。山東教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.蔡美麗(1990)。胡賽爾。臺北:東大圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
10.Bloom, B. S.、Engelhart, M. D.、Furst, E. J.、Hill, W. H.、Krathwohl, D. R.(1956)。Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook 1, Cognitive domain。New York:Longman。  new window
11.Gadamer, H. G.、洪漢鼎(1993)。真理與方法--哲學詮釋學的基本特徵。上海:臺北市:上海譯文出版社:時報文化。  延伸查詢new window
12.張汝倫(1996)。意義的探究--當代西方釋義學--一個哲思的;一個方法論的探索。台南:復漢。  延伸查詢new window
13.施良方(1997)。課程理論:課程的基礎、原理與問題。麗文文化事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
14.曾慶豹(1998)。哈伯瑪斯。臺北市:生智。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.Ricoeur, Paul(1976)。Interpretation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning。Fort Worth, Texas:The Texas Christian University Press。  new window
16.Habermas, Jürgen、McCarthy, Thomas(1979)。Communication and the Evolution of Society。Beacon Press。  new window
17.陳欣白(2003)。對話與溝通。揚智。  延伸查詢new window
18.Heidegger, Martin、Macquarrie, John、Robinson, Edward S.(1962)。Being and Time。Harper & Row。  new window
19.Anderson, Lorin W.、Krathwohl, David R.、Airasian, Peter W.、Cruikshank, Kathleen A.、Mayer, Richard E.、Pintrich, Paul R.、Wittrock, Merlin C.、Raths, James(2001)。A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives。Addison Wesley Longman。  new window
20.黃炳煌(1999)。邁向二十一世紀的臺灣社會科課程改革。邁向課程新紀元。台北。  延伸查詢new window
21.Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill、Kraehtwohl,(1956)。The taxonomy of educational objectives: The cognitive domain。  new window
22.Husserl, E.(1927)。現象學。面對實事本身──現象學經典文選。北京。  延伸查詢new window
23.National Council for the Social Studies(1994)。Curriculum standard for Social Studies: Expectation for excellence。Washington, DC。  new window
24.Palmer, R. E(原作者)、嚴平(譯)(1969)。Hermeneutics (詮釋學)。台北。  延伸查詢new window
25.Ricoeur, P.(1981)。Hermeneutics and human science。Cambridge。  new window
圖書論文
1.方永泉(2004)。詮釋學理論與教育研究的關係:以呂格爾的詮釋學理論為例。教育研究方法論:觀點與方法。台北市:心理。  延伸查詢new window
2.沈清松(1988)。解釋、理解、批判--銓釋學方法的原理及其應用。當代西方哲學與方法論。臺北:東大。  延伸查詢new window
3.詹志禹(2002)。主題軸。社會學習領域課程設計與教學策略。臺北:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
4.溫明麗(2004)。詮釋典範與教育研究。教育研究方法論--觀點與方法。臺北:心理。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE