:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:能力概念及其教育意義之探討
書刊名:教育研究與發展期刊
作者:鄭雅丰 引用關係陳新轉
作者(外文):Cheng, Ya-fengChen, Hsin-chuan
出版日期:2011
卷期:7:2
頁次:頁27-55
主題關鍵詞:能力課程課程改革CompetenceCurriculumCurriculum reform
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(3) 博士論文(4) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:209
  • 點閱點閱:118
鑑於未來課程改革仍然是「能力導向」,關於能力概念的掌握殊屬必要,概念的詮釋與釐清,不論在改革之初與後續的實踐,都是不能忽視的重點工作。透過文獻探討與分析,可以發現能力概念具有建構性與動態性,若拘泥於建立客觀性、標準化定義的思考,勢必陷入無休止的爭論。本文嘗試釐清能力相關用詞的區別與關係,使能力層次概念更清晰,並指出理念型定義的能力概念所涵涉的共同屬性,以及實務型定義的能力概念所突顯的建構性、動態性與多元性。其次,說明能力概念在教育領域中的意義。最後,依據能力概念的探討結果,提出九年一貫課程能力導向目標的實踐觀念如下:(1)必須先理解九年一貫課程初始的能力概念及其屬性;(2)課程轉化應掌握能力概念的層次;(3)教學設計需要由「習得知識」導向「問題解決」;(4)評量方式需要呼應能力指標的「真實性」與「情境化」。研究者希冀透過前述能力相關概念的釐清,提供後續研究者及相關實務工作者之參考,對課程改革理想的實踐亦能有所助益。
In light of the fact that future curriculum reforms will still be “competence-oriented”, understanding the concepts of competence is a must. Interpreting and clarifying ideas about a reform is essential both at the beginning of the reform and in the subsequent implementation of the reform. Through review and analysis of the literature, this paper finds that the concepts of competence are constructive and dynamic, and blind pursuit for an objective and standardized definition of competence will only result in endless arguments. This paper explores the differences and relationships between “competence”- related terms to clarify the hierarchy of competence and also identifies the common properties of conceptual definitions for competence and the properties of practical definitions for competence, such as being constructive, dynamic, and pluralistic. Besides, this paper also explains the implications of the concepts of competence for education. Based on the research findings, this paper proposes suggestions as how to achieve competence-oriented goals of Grade 1-9 Curriculum as follows: (1) the concept of competence initially adopted for design of Grade 1-9 Curriculum and its properties should be explored first; (2) the hierarchy of competence should be stressed and followed in curriculum transformation; (3) the orientation of instructional designs should be shifted from “acquiring knowledge” to “problem-solving”; and (4) assessment should conform to the “true” ideas of competence indicators. By clarifying the concepts of competence, this paper attempts to provide some reference for future researchers and educators and make some contribution to realization of curriculum reforms.
期刊論文
1.李宜玫、王逸慧、林世華(20040900)。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(修訂版)析之。國立臺北師範學院學報. 教育類,17(2),1-34。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.許朝信(20050700)。從美好生活所需能力的觀點論述九年一貫課程中的基本能力。國民教育研究學報,15,99-122。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Kim, M.、Youn, S.、Shin, J.、Park, M.、Kyoung, O. S.、Shin, T.、Chi, J.、Seo, D.、Hong, S.(2007)。A review of human competence in educational research: Levels of K-12, college, adult, and business education。Asia Pacific Education Review,8(3),500-520。  new window
4.Stoof, A.、Martens, R. L.、van Mrrienboer, J. J. G.、Bastiaens, T. J.(2002)。The boundary approach of competence: A constructivist aid for understanding and using the concept of competence。Human Resource Development Review,1(3),345-365。  new window
5.Hoffmann, Terrence(1999)。The meanings of competency。Journal of European Industrial Training,23(6),275-286。  new window
6.張佳琳(20000400)。從能力指標之建構與評量檢視九年一貫課程基本能力之內涵。國民教育,40(4),54-61。  延伸查詢new window
7.王素芸(2001)。「基本能力指標」之發展與概念分析。教育研究資訊,9(1),1-14。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Le Deist, Françoise Delamare、Winterton, J.(2005)。What Is Competence?。Human Resource Development International,8(1),27-46。  new window
9.吳清山、林天佑(1998)。基本能力、基本學力。教育資料與研究,25,75-77。  延伸查詢new window
10.McClelland, D. C.(1998)。Identifying competencies with behavioral-event interviews。Psychological Science,9(5),331-339。  new window
11.王雅玄(20071200)。多元文化素養評量工具及其應用:現況與展望。教育研究與發展期刊,3(4),149-179。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.劉蔚之、彭森明(20080400)。歐盟「關鍵能力」教育方案及其社會文化意涵分析。課程與教學,11(2),51-78。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.Javidan, Mansour(1998)。Core competence: What does it mean in practice?。Long Range Planning,31(1),60-71。  new window
14.McClelland, David C.(1973)。Testing for competence rather than for "intelligence"。American Psychologist,28(1),1-14。  new window
15.Weick, Karl E.、Roberts, Karlene H.(1993)。Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks。Administrative Science Quarterly,38(3),357-381。  new window
16.蔡清田(20080700)。DeSeCo能力三維論對我國十二年一貫課程改革的啟示。課程與教學,11(3),1-16。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.蔡清田(20101200)。課程改革中的「素養」(competence)與「能力」(ability)。教育研究月刊,200,93-104。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.蔡清田(20110300)。課程改革中的「素養」(competence)與「知能」(literacy)之差異。教育研究月刊,203,84-96。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.McLagan, P. A.(1997)。Competencies: the next generation。Training and Development Journal,51(5),40-48。  new window
20.朱建民(2011)。公民素養的省思。通識在線,32,6-7。  延伸查詢new window
21.林秀娟(2011)。簡介「現代公民核心能力養成」中程個案計畫。通識在線,32,9-11。  延伸查詢new window
22.陳新轉(2006)。詮釋學理論在九年一貫社學習領域能力指標解讀工作上之應用。華梵人文學報,6,77-122。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.Barrett, G. V.、Depinet, R. L.(1991)。Areconsideration of testing for competence rather for intelligence。American Psychologist,46,1012-1024。  new window
24.Boreham, N.(2004)。A theory of collective competence: Challenging the Neo-Liberal individualization of performance at work。British Journal of Educational Studies,52(1),5-17。  new window
25.Perfettop, G. A.、Bransford, J. D.、Franks, J. J.(1983)。Constraints on access in a problem solving context。Memory and Cognition,11,24-31。  new window
會議論文
1.林吟霞(2010)。國語文教科書閱讀指導內容對應九年一貫課程綱要閱讀能力指標之研究。  延伸查詢new window
2.黃政傑(2010)。環環相扣、創發改革--課程轉化概念應用與後設分析。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.洪裕宏(2008)。界定與選擇國民核心素養:概念參考架構與理論基礎研究 (計畫編號:NSC95-2511-S-010-001)。臺北市:陽明大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.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
3.林清江、蔡清田(1997)。國民中小學課程發展共同原則之研究。國立中正大學教育學程中心。  延伸查詢new window
4.林世華、盧雪梅、陳學志(2004)。國民中小學九年一貫課程發展學習成就評量指標與方法研究報告。  延伸查詢new window
5.陳新轉(2006)。從知識學習到能力獲得--九年一貫社會學習領域『致能教學法』研究報告。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.陳新轉(2004)。九年一貫社會學習領域課程發展:從課程綱要與能力指標出發。臺北市:心理。  延伸查詢new window
2.教育部(2008)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
3.Rychen, Dominique Simone、Salganik, Laura Hersh(2001)。Defining and selecting key competencies。Hogrefe & Huber。  new window
4.Berger, Peter、Luckmann, Thomas(1967)。The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in Sociology Knowledge。Garden City, NY:Anchor Books。  new window
5.Rychen, Dominique Simone、Salganik, Laura Hersh(2003)。Key competencies for a successful life and a well-functioning society。Hogrefe & Huber Publishers。  new window
6.Good, C. V.(1959)。Dictionary of Education。New York, NY:McGraw Hill。  new window
7.行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。台北:行政院教育改革審議委員會。  延伸查詢new window
8.周珮儀(19990000)。從社會批判到後現代:季胡課程理論之研究。臺北市:師大書苑。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.黃炳煌(1987)。教育問題透視。臺北:文景。  延伸查詢new window
10.吳明清(2001)。教育向前跑(續):教育改革的思想與實踐。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
11.Mead, G. H.(1967)。Mind, self and social: from the standpoint of a social behaviorist。Chicago, IL。  new window
12.Sawardekar, N.(2002)。Assessment centres: Identifying potential and developing competency。Thousand Oaks, CA。  new window
13.Winterton, J.、Delamare-Le Deist, F.、Stringfellow, E.(2005)。Prototype typology of knowledge, skills and competences。Thessaloniki。  new window
14.方德隆(2004)。「基本能力、統整課程」:課程改革政策的理想與實際。國民中小學九年一貫課程:理論基礎(二)。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
15.黃政傑(1996)。教改理念。教育改革的展望。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
16.陳新轉(2010)。致能教學模式之建構。社會領域教材教法。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
17.游家政(2004)。九年一貫「課程綱要」的發展背景與理念。國民中小學九年一貫課程理論基礎(一)。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
18.Wolf, A.(1989)。Can competence and knowledge mix?。Competency based education and training。London, UK。  new window
圖書論文
1.王麗雲(2006)。M. W. Apple : 批判教育社會學先驅。教育社會學 : 人物與思想。臺北:高等教育。  延伸查詢new window
2.林進材(2000)。從課程改革論教師層面的課程實施--以九年一貫課程為例。九年一貫課程:從理論、政策到執行。高雄市:復文圖書出版社。  延伸查詢new window
3.蘇永明(2000)。九年一貫課程的哲學分析--以「實用能力」的概念為核心。九年一貫課程:從理論、政策到執行。高雄:復文。  延伸查詢new window
4.楊國賜(1995)。從比較教育的觀點論各國教育改革的方向與策略。教育改革的展望。臺北:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
5.Mansfield, B.(1989)。Competence and standards。Competency based education and training。London:Falmer Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE