臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：國民教育階段學校本位課程發展理論與模式之建構
作者：白雲霞 引用關係
作者(外文)：Yun Hsia Pai
校院名稱：國立政治大學
系所名稱：教育學系
指導教授：黃炳煌
詹志禹
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2001
主題關鍵詞：學校本位課程；彈性循環模式；模式；質化研究；階層線性模式；課程詮釋；課程發展；專業發展；school based curriculu；the Flexible and Cyclic Model of SBCD；model；qualitative research；hierarchical linear model；curriculum interpretation；curriculum development；professional development
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(6) 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:0
  • 點閱點閱:59
本研究旨在（一）剖析學校本位課程發展之理論基礎；（二）分析學校本位課程發展之意義、規準、實施理由、功能、類型、模式等理論內涵；（三）建構學校本位課程發展的理論模式；（四）分析學校本位課程發展模式中各要素的重要性；（五）並根據理論及質化與實證分析之研究修正所建構之學校本位課程發展模式。
因此，本研究採用文獻分析，以釐清學校本位課程發展的理論基礎、理論內涵。其次，採用質化分析─深入訪談，透過對三所國小、二所國中的研究，分析不同類型學校之學校本位課程發展模式及其要素。第三、採用實證分析的方式，考驗學校本位課程發展模式中重要變項對學校本位課程發展認同感與教師對課程發展專業氣氛知覺的情形，來瞭解模式中變項的重要性與個殊性。基此，本研究主要結論可分二部分：
一、與學校本位課程發展彈性循環模式有關的發現
（一）感知問題、專業成長、課程方案規劃之周延性、評鑑與修正、課程領導支持度是預測學校本位課程發展認同感的重要變項。
（二）專業成長、評鑑與修正、問題的克服程度、課程領導的支持、感知問題、課程方案規劃行政人員的參與度、課程方案規劃的周延性是預測教師在課程發展專業氣氛知覺的重要變項。
（三）專業成長是預測教師在學校本位課程發展認同感、課程發展專業氣氛知覺上最重要的變項。
（四）國小教師比國中教師更覺得專業成長對課程發展專業氣氛具影響力
（五）專業成長是持續不斷的活動，並逐步邁向精緻。
（六）學校願景是學校設計本位課程的依據，但有些學校並未在課程發展之始即建立學校願景。
（七）情境分析是學校本位課程發展的重要要素，且在學校本位課程發展歷程中持續不斷為課程方案規畫、實施與評鑑之參考。
（八）評鑑與修正是必要、經常且持續的步驟。
（九）感知問題可分為主動感知與被動感知二部分。
（十）課程方案皆在規劃後方才實施的，且實施課程方案之前需經過傳播、解釋與尋求支持。
（十一） 課程領導者所扮演的角色有規劃者、督促與推動者、激勵者、課程指導與諮詢者、協調者、行政支援者、以身作則者。
（十二） 學校本位課程發展應以彈性循環模式為主，在情境複雜時權宜採用彈性循環變通模式。
二、其他相關的發現─學校本位課程發展之困境
（一）共通面：學校內部存在著：(1)教師心態、動機與價值尚未調整，(2)教師專業對話時間不足，(3)學校行政人員的態度不一，(4)教師課程發展的專業能力待加強。學校外部存在的問題有(1)經費來源有限(2) 社區家長在課程發展上的參與不足，易生誤解。
（二）個殊面：中大型學校的問題在於(1)科層體制龐大、下情上達與交流不易，(2)協同教學排課不易，牽一髮而動全身。偏遠小型學校則為：(1)教師流動率大，課程發展工作傳承不易，(2)每學年的班級數少，難以形成班群。國民中學則面臨著(1)基本學力測驗存在的壓力，令教師對學校本位課程發展產生疑慮，(2)學科分立的傳統阻礙課程統整的可能性。
綜合上述，本研究提出以下之建議：
一、 對學校的建議：1.向社區尋求支援、並充份整合相關的財力、物力與人力資源。2.致力成為專業發展學校、學習型組織，並與相關的師資培育機構充份合作尋求良好的諮詢系統及指導人員。3.應由上下互動產生願景。4.委善規劃專業成長活動。5.帶領社區積極參與課程。6.重視傳播與解釋。7.建立學校內部自我評鑑機制。8.並重外顯與潛在課程的規劃。9.提供誘因。10.鼓勵教師發展個人層級的課程。
二、對教師的建議：(一)以宏觀的角度看學校本位課程發展；(二)致力行動研究，成為「教師即研究者」的角色；(三)規劃自我的生涯發展與專業研修；(四)建立個人的課程與教學檔案作為其知識管理的工具。
三、對教育行政機關的建議：1.調整賦權的方式與速率。2.補助與提供誘因。3.成立課程評鑑中心，建立外部評鑑機制4.增加教師編制，給予教師有發展課程的工作時間5.儘速完成基本學力測驗內容與課程改革的配合
四、對未來研究的建議：（一）進行學校本位課程發展的國際比較研究（二）參與觀察發展的動態歷程研究；（三）尋找學校本位課程發展的其他變項及其關聯性；（四）深入分析學校本位課程發展中課程領導的議題 (五)研究分析協同教學的進行（六）探究以經驗統整的學校本位課程之統整型態與運作
The main purposes of this study were to (1) explore the theoretical foundations contents of School-Based Curriculum Development (SBCD), (2)construct a tentative model of SBCD, (3) analyze the important variables in the constructed model empirically, and (4) revise the model according to case study and the survey results. The research methods employed in this study were interviews and questionnaire survey. First, five school cases involved three elementary schools and two junior high schools were studied to reveal their process of SBCD. Second, in order to understand the importance and the specifics of the variables, the variables in Flexible and Cyclic Model of SBCD were used to predict teachers’ identification with SBCD and the professional climate in the organization.
Based on the findings, several conclusions can be drawn as follows:
1.Perceiving Problem, professional development, the elaboration in curriculum plan, evaluation and curriculum leadership were the key variables for predicting teachers’ identification with SBCD.
2.Professional development, evaluation, the degree of overcoming problems, curriculum leadership, perceiving problem, the degree of administrators’ involvement in curriculum plan and the elaboration of curriculum plan were the key variables for predicting professional climate in the organization.
3.Professional development is the most important variable for predicting teachers’ identification with SBCD and teachers’ professional climate in SBCD.
4.The predict power of professional development to professional climate in SBCD were larger for teachers in the elementary school than for teachers in junior high school.
5.Professional development is an on-going process and advanced little by little.
6.The vision of school was the corner stone of SBCD, but it was not established at the beginning of SBCD in each school.
7.Situation analysis is an important element of SBCD. It’s always under consideration in planning, implementation or evaluation.
8.Evaluation and revision are indispensable and continuous steps in the process of SBCD.
9.When the program were fully disseminated, explained and supported, the curriculum implementation will be better.
10.The roles of curriculum leader were to be a planner, a pusher, an encourager, a curriculum director/consultant, a coordinator and an administrative supporter.
According to the above findings, the Flexible and Cyclic Model of SBCD was accommodated for some complex situation. Besides, there are some additional findings about the limits of SBCD as follows:
(1)General aspect
i.Inside the school: (1) Teachers’ attitude, motivation and value haven’t been fully adjusted. (2) Time for teachers’ professional dialogues was insufficient. (3) The school administrators weren’t in agreement on attitude. (4) Teachers’ professional competences were not enough for SBCD.
ii.Outside the school: (1) Financial resources in SBCD were inadequate. (2) Parents’ involvement was insufficient in SBCD.
(2)Specific aspect
i.In huge bureaucracy, massages were usually missed or misinterpreted and team teaching was difficult because of traditional class arrangement.
ii.In small size school, teachers can’t stay for a long time and the number of classes in the same grade weren’t big enough to form a teaching team.
iii.In junior high school, the pressure from the Basic Scholastic Ability Test made teachers hesitant and the tradition of subject-centered Curriculum made curriculum integration difficult.
At the end of this study, some suggestions were proposed as follows:
1.AS a school leader, she/he should look for district’s support, get resources together in order, interact with the staff to form the school vision, plan the professional development activities, provide incentives for teachers, and accelerate the school to be a professional development school and learning organization.
2.For Teachers, the curriculum developers, they should take a macroscopic view to identify SBCD, plan their career and professional development and try to be action researchers.
3.For local educational authority /the department of education, they should adjust the modes and speed of empowerment, provide school/teachers with financial resources and incentives, establish a curriculum evaluation center, increase teachers’ number of school and improve the Basic Scholastic Ability Test to match up with SBCD as soon as possible.
4.For future researcher, she/he can study international comparative research or take participate observation, or find and test some other variables in SBCD or explore curriculum leadership in SBCD, or analyze the types in SBCD.
參考書目
一、中文部分
中華民國比較教育學會主編（民85）。教育：傳統、現代化與後現代。台北：師大書苑。
中華民國比較教育學會等主編（民85）。教育改革─從傳統到後現代。台北：師大書苑。
中華民國教材研究發展學會主編（民88）。九年一貫課程研討會論文集─邁向課程新紀元(上、下)。
方兆本（民88）。：走出混沌。新竹：凡異。
王文科（民83）。：課程與教學論。台北：五南。
王秀玲（民85）。台灣地區前期中等教育課程重要論題之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
王秀雲（民88）。學校本位課程設計─柑園國中「南園再見！南園！」案例。教師天地，103期，頁57。
王彥文譯（民83）。：渾沌魔鏡。台北：牛頓出版公司。
王祖琛（民75）。我國台灣地區大學學術報酬結構之研究─大學教師的工作誘因動向、學術報酬認知與期望關係之分析。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
王順平（民88）。：學校本位管理之理論建構與實證研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。new window
吳美瑤（88）。：Niklas Luhmann社會系統理論及其在教育分析上的意義。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
吳清基（民79）。教師與進修。台北：五南。new window
李俊湖（民81）。國小教師專業成長與教學效能之研究。國立台灣師範 大學碩士論文未出版。
李俊湖（民87）。教師專業成長模式研究。國立台灣師範大學博士論文。new window
李雅卿（民88）。學校本位課程─北政自主學習經驗。教師天地，103期，頁53-56。
李雄揮（民86）。教育哲學。台北：師大書苑。
杜威原著（1992）。經驗與教育。台北：五南。
谷瑞敏譯（民88）。Berk L. E. & Winsler, A.（1995）。鷹架兒童的學習。台北：心理。
周佩儀（民85a）後現代社會中的教育省思。師友，353期，頁50-54。
周佩儀（民85b）後現代思潮衝擊下的教育研究。研習資訊，13卷5期，頁42-46。
周佩儀（民86）。後現代思潮衝擊下的教育研究，教育研究集刊，期，43-75頁。
周淑卿（民85）。課程。載於黃光雄編：教育導論。台北：師大書苑。
林秀容（民87）。淺談學校本位的課程與教學。在於中華民國課程與教學學會（主編），學校本位課程與教學創新，頁50-60。台北：揚智。
林秀麗等人譯（民88）。社會學理論的觀點。台北：韋伯文化事業出版社。
林佩璇(民88)。學校本位課程發展的個案研究：台北縣鄉土活動的課程發展。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。new window
林和譯（民81）。混沌。台北：天下文化。
林寶山、康春枝譯（民79）。學校與社會、兒童與課程。台北：五南。
林寶山譯（民78）。民主主義與教育。台北：五南。
柯華葳（民88）。教育的心理學。輯於教育科學國際化或本土化，頁563-583。台北：揚智。
秦葆琦（民78）。板橋模式課程發展。現代教育，4(14)，頁29-39。
秦夢群（民84）。教育行政。台北：五南圖書出版公司。
馬志欽（民85）。二十一紀的熱門科學─渾沌理論。美國資訊科學學會台北學生分會會訊，第9期，頁4-9。
馬信行（民85）。後現代主義對教育的影響。教育研究雙月刊，50期，頁12-13。new window
高宣揚（民78）。解釋學簡論。台北：遠流。
高宣揚（民87）。當代社會理論（下）。台北：五南。
高新建（民87a）。學校本位課程發展的多樣性。輯於中華民國課程與教學學會主編，學校本位課程與教學創新，頁61-79。
高新建（民87b）。學校本位課程發展的立論基礎與理想情境。發表於台北市立師範學院主編，八十七學年度師範學院教育學術研討會論文集，頁305-339。
高新建（民88）。外國推展學校本位課程發展的緣由。教師天地，103，頁 13-20。
高新建、單文經、游家政、蔡清田、王麗雲、張明輝譯（民89）。革新的課程領導。台北市：學富。new window
張文軍（民87）。後現代教育。台北：生智。
張淑譽譯（1988）。渾沌：開創新科學。上海：譯文出版社。
張嘉育（民86）。國民中小學學校本位課程發展之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。new window
張嘉育（民88）。學校本位課程發展。台北：師大書苑。
教育部（民87）。國民教育九年一貫課程總綱綱要。台北：教育部。
莫里時著，陳嘉琪、溫霈國譯（1996）。香港學校課程的探討。香港：香港大學出版社。
郭昭佑（民89）。學校本位評鑑。台北：五南。new window
郭實渝（1996）。後現代主義的教育哲學。台北：師大書苑。
郭實渝（民85）。後現代主義的教育哲學。輯於邱兆偉主編：教育哲學。台北：師大書苑。new window
陳木金（民85）。渾沌現象對學校行政的啟示。教育資料與研究，九期，頁69-75。new window
陳碧祥（民87）。理解之詮釋學分析及其教育意義。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。new window
單文經、高新建、蔡清田、高博銓（民90）。校長的課程領導。台北市：學富。
單文經、高新建、蔡清田、高博銓譯（民90）。校長的課程領導。台北:學富。
曾燦金（民85）。美國學校本位管理及其在我國國民小學實施可行性之研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
游家政（民89）。學校課程的統整及其教學。課程與教學，3(1)，頁19-37。new window
黃政傑（民74）。課程改革。台北：漢文。
黃政傑（民80）。課程設計。台北：東華。
黃政傑（民86）。課程評鑑。台北：師大書苑。
黃政傑、張嘉育（民88）。落實學校本位課程發展。教師天地，第103期頁6-12。new window
黃炳煌（民71）。課程理論之基礎。台北：文景。
黃炳煌（民83）。試為我國建一適切可行的課程發展模式。台北：心理。
黃炳煌譯（民70）R. W.Tyler著。課程與教學的基本原理。台北：桂冠。
黃惠珍（民87）。綜合高中學校本位課程發展─一所學校之個案分析。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
黃瑞榮（民85）。從「李歐塔的後現代狀況」看後現代主義對道德教育啟示。高市鐸聲，6卷3期，頁62-66。
黃顯華（2001）:課程改革：台灣和香港的比較分析。淡江大學九十學年「新世紀課程改革與教學革新」國際學術研討會論文。new window
楊洲松（民89）。後代知識論與教育。台北：師大書苑。new window
楊深坑（民86）。溝通理性．生命 情懷與教育過程─哈伯瑪斯的溝通理性與教育。台北：師大書苑。new window
溫明麗（民85）。批判理論的教育哲學。輯於邱兆偉主編：教育哲學。台北。師大書苑。
葉連祺（民88）。中小學學校本位課程發展之意涵和取向。教師天地，103期，頁21─35。
廖立文譯（民80）。當代社會理論。台北；桂冠。
歐用生（民74）。課程發展模式探討。高雄：復文。
歐用生（民75）。課程發展的基本原理。高雄：復文。
歐用生（民85）。教師專業成長。台北：師大書苑。
蔡碧璉（民81）。國民中學教師專業成長與其形象知覺之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文new window
魯貴顯譯，Kneer G. & Nassehi A.原著（民82）。盧曼社會系統理論導引。台北：巨流。
盧政春（民81）。當代社會學系統理論大師─尼可拉斯．盧曼。載於葉啟政主編，當代社會思想巨擘，頁232-269。
盧美貴（民89）。卓越、前瞻、團隊─台北市立師院實小學校本位課程發展。教育資料與研究，33期，頁1-11。new window
謝小芩（1995）。重新思考教師角色，通識教育季刊，2卷4期，89-104。
鍾啟泉（民80）。現代課程理論。台北：五南。
韓景春（民85）。實用主義的教育哲學，輯於邱兆偉主編之教育哲學，頁81-118。台北：師大書苑。
簡毓玲（民89）。走過從前迎向未來─快樂、進步、卓越，國語實小課程發展之簡介。教育資料與研究，33期，頁26-30new window
顏澤賢（1993）。現代系統理論。台北：遠流。
饒見維（民86）。教師專業發展與學校 教育革新。載於高強華主編：學校教育與教育革新。台北市：國立台灣師範大學。
饒見維（民88）。九年一貫課程與教師專業發展之配套實策略。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會主編（民88），九年一貫課程研討會論文集─邁向課程新紀元(下冊)，頁305-322。
顧忠華（1998）。引介盧曼─一位二十一世紀的社會學理論家。載於魯貴顯譯，Kneer G. & Nassehi A. 原著，盧曼社會系統理論導引，頁3-7。台北：巨流。
二、英文部分
Ariav, Tamar. (1985). Collaborative School-Based Curriculum Development: A Case Study. ED257707
Aronowits, S & Giroux H. A. (1991). Postmodern Education：Politics, Culture, and Social Criticism. MN：University of Minnesota Press.
Aronstein, L. W., DeBenedictis, K. L. (1988). The principal as leader of curriculum change: Astudy of exemplary school administrators. Quincy: Massachusetts State Department of Education.
Beane, J. A., Toepher, C. F., & Alessi, S. J. (1986). Curriculum planning and development. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Beeson G.W.& Gunstone R. F. (1975). The teachers’ role in curriculum decisions. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 21(1), p5-19.
Ben-Peretz, M.; Dor, Ben Zion.(1986). Thirty Years of School Based Curriculum Development: A Case Study. ED274096.
Bezzina M. (1991). Being free and feeling free: primary teachers’ perceptions of participation in curriculum development. ED368693.
Bezzina, M. (1989). Does Our Reach Exceed Our Grasp? A Case Study of School Based Curriculum Development. ED366109.
Bezzina, M., Koop, T.(1991). Educational Reform in NSW: Mismatched Freedoms . ED366106.
Biggs, J. Towards a Model of School-Based Curriculum Development and Assessment Using the SOLO Taxonomy. Australian Journal of Education, 33(2) p151-163.
Brady, L. (1985a). Status in school-based curriculum development. Journal of Educational Administration, 23(2), p219-228.
Brady, L. (1985b). The supportiveness of the principal in school-based curriculum development. Journal of Curruiculum Studies, 17, p.95-97.
Brady, L. (1987a). Curriculum Development(2nd ed).Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Brady, L. (1987b). Explaining School-Based Curriculum Satisfaction: A Case Study. Journal of Curriculum Studies,19(4). p375-378.
Brady, L. (1995). School based curriculum development and the national curriculum: can they coexist, Curriculum and Teaching,10(1), p.47-54.
Braithwaite R. J.(1994). The governance of curriculum in australia, 1981-1991. Journal of Curriculum Strudies, 26(5), p.541-552.
Campbell, R. J., (1985). Developing the primary school curriculum. London: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Carlin, P. et al.（1976）. The school-based curriculum. Curriculum and Research Bulletin XI（1）, March, p9-15.
Cleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Penguin College.
Cohen, D. (1985). School-based curriculum decision making. In J. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (eds), The international encyclopedia of education research and studies (1st ed). Oxford: Pergamon.
Connelly F. M., Ben-Peretz M. (1995). Teachers’ roles in the using and doing of research and cruuiculum development. Curriculum studies, 12(2). P95-107.
Craig,A.（1980）. Teacher perceptions of curriculum autonomy.（ERIC Document NO.ED 190498）
Cuff E. C., Sharrock W. W. & Francis D. W. (1998). Perspectives in sociology. London ; New York : Routledge.
Dewey, J. (1915). The school and society (rev. ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Doll, W. E. (1993). A post-modern perspective on curriculum. N.Y.: Teachers.
Eggleston J. (1979). School-based curriculum development. In England and Wales. In OECD, School-based curriculum development, Paris: OECD.
Eggleston J. (1980). School-based curriculum development in Britain. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Elliott, J. (1990). Teachers as researchers: Implications for supervision and for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(1), pp.208-298.
Fitzgerald, R.T.（1973）. Analysis of context, structure and process in relation to reformist demands in education. Australian Journal of Education 17,1,March,34-49.
Fullan, M., Pomfret, A.(1977). Research on curriculum and instrution implementation, Review of Educational Research, 47(1), p335-397.
Gay, G. (1985). Curriculum development, In Husen & Postlethwaite(1985), The international Encyclopedia of education, Oxford: Pergaman.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1994). Developing a quality curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development(ASCD).
Glattorn, A. A. (1987). Curriculum leadership. Scott, Foresman and Company.
Glattorn, A. A. (2000). The principal as curriculum leader: shaping what is taught & tested (2nd ed .). Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.
Greene M. (1984). Excellence, meanings and multiplicity. Teacher-College-Record, 86(2), p.283-297.
Griffiths, D. E. Hart, A. W., & Blair, B. G. (1991). Still another approch to administration: Chaos theory. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(3), pp. 430-451.
Grioux, H. A. (1992). Border crossing. N. Y.: Routledge.
Gross, N. et al. (1971). Implementing Organizational Innovations. N.Y.: Basic.
Guter H. (1995). Jurassic management: Chaos and management development in educational institutions. Journal of Educational Administration, 33(4), pp. 5-20.
Habermas, J. (1970). Towards a theory of communicative competence. Inquiry, 13, pp.360-375.
Hannay, L. M., Seller, W.(1991). The Curriculum Leadership Role in Facilitating Curriculum Deliberation. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision; 6(4). p340-357.
Hargreaves, A.（1982）. The Rhetoric of school-centred innovation. Journal of Curriculum Studies,14（3）,251-266.
Harris, A., Lawn, M., & Prescott, W. (eds)(1978). Curriculum innovation. London: Croom Helm.
Harrison, M. (1981). School-based curriculum decision making: A personal viewpoint. Curriculum Perspective, 2(1), p.47-52.
Hayles, N. K. (1990). Chaos bound: Orderly disorder in contempo-rary literature and science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Hollins E. R. (1996). Culture in school learning. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Johnson, B.(1993). Teacher-As-Researcher. ED355205.
Jung B.(1997). Understanding interests at work in site-based curriculum decision making. International Journal of Educational Reform, 6(3),p297-307.
Karr, J. A.(1994). An Introspective Approach to School-Based Curriculum Planning. . ED372360.
Keiny, S., Weiss, T.(1986). A Case Study of a School-Based Curriculum Development as a Model for INSET. Journal of Education for Teaching; 12(2), p155-162.
Kennedy, K. J. (1992). School-based curriculum development as a policy option for the 1990s. an Australian perspective. Journal of curriculum and supervision, 7(2), p.180-195.
King, A. S.(1993). Introduction. In King, A. S. & Reiss, M. J. (eds.). The multicultural dimension of the national curriculum. London: The Falmer Press.
Kirk, D.(1988). Ideology and school-centered innovational case study and a critique. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20(5), p449-464.
Lyotard, J. F. (1984). Postmodern condition: a report on knowledge, MN: University of Minnesota.
Marsh, C. J. & Willis G. (1999). Curriculum: alternative approaches, ongoing issues (2nd ed.). New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.
Marsh, C. J. (1997). Key concepts for understanding curriculum. London: The Falmer Press.
Marsh, C., Day C. Hannay, L., & McCutcheon, G. (1990). Reconceptualizing School-based curriculum development. London: The Falmer press.
Martin-Kniep, G. O. & Uhrmacher, P. B. (1992). Teachers as curriculum developments. Journal Curriculum Studies, 24(3), p261-271.
Mayo, K. (1995). Teachers as innovators: A case study of teacher change through site-based curriculum development. Unpublished ED. D Dissertation. East Texas State University.
Morris, V. C. (1966). Existentialism in education: what it means. N.Y.: Harper & Row.
Munn, P. (1985). Teachers'''''''' Perceptions of School-Based Curriculum Development: Some Evidence from Multi-Disciplinary Courses. Scottish Educational Review, 17(2), p82-91.
Nevo, D. (1995). School-based evaluation: A dialogue for school improvement. Tel Aviv, Israel: Masada.
OECD (1979). School-based curriculum development. Paris: OECD.
Olson J. K. (1980). Teacher constructs and curriculum change. Curriculum Studies, 12(2), p1-11.
Pink, W. T. (1992). A school - within- a — school for at-risk youth- staff development and program success. In W.T. Pink & A. A. Hyde (Eds.), Effective Staff Development for School Change. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Pub. Corporation.
Pratt, D. (1980). Curriculum: Design & Development. N.Y.: Prentice Hall.
Prigogine, I. & Stengers (1984). Order out of chaos: Man’s new dialogue with nature. New York: Bantam Books.
Prudeaux D. (1993). School-based curriculum development: partial paradoxical and piecemeal. Journal of curriculum studies. 25(2), p.169-178.
Rennie, L. J. & Treagust, D. F. (1994). Whole-school curriculum innovations in a centralized education system: Technology schools in Western Australia. Curriculum perspective, 14(3), p.19-24.
Rennie, Leonie J.; Treagust, David F.(1993). Factors Affecting the Successful Implementation of Whole-School Curriculum Innovations. . ED361853.
Sabar, N. (1983). Towards school-based curriculum development: Training school curriculum co-ordinator. Journal of curriculum studies, 15( 4), p.431-434.
Sabar, N.(1991). School-based curriculum development. In Lawey, A. (ed), The Internatioanl Encyclopedia of Curriculum. p.367-371.
Saber, N. (1985). School-Based Curriculum Development: Reflections from an International Seminar. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 17(4), p452-454.
Saylor, J. G., Alexander, W. M., & Lewis, A. J. (1981). Curriculum planning for better teaching and learning (4th ed.). N.Y.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Schubert W. H. (1986). Curriculum : perspective, paradigm, and possibility. New York ; London : Macmillan Pub. Co. : Collier Macmillan Publishers.
Shoham, E.. Teacher Autonomy in School-Based Curricula in Israel: Its Significance for Teacher Education. Westminster Studies in Education, 18, p35-45.
Silverman, H. J. (ed.)(1990). Postmodernism: Philosophy and arts. N.Y. & London: Routledge.
Skilbeck, M.(1984). School-based curriculum development. London: Harper & Row, Publishers.
Skilbeck, M.(1988). Reading in school-based curriculum development. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Skilbeck,M.（1976）. School-based curriculum development, In.W. Prescott and R. Bolam (eds.). Supporting curriculum development. Walton Hall , Milton Keynes：The Open University Press , Unit 26.
Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. N.Y.: Garland.
Smith, B. O., Stanley, W. O., & Shores, J. H. (1957). Fundamentals of curriculum development (Rev. ed.). N. Y.: World Book Company.
Stenhouse, L.（1975）. An introduction to curriculum research and development. London：Heinemann.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1969). Evaluation as enlightenment for decision making. In W. H. Beatty (Ed.), Improving educational assessment and an inventory for measures of affective behavior. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Sturman, A. (1990). Curriculum Decision-making at the School Level. School-base Decision-making and Management. Chapman J.D. ed. London: The Falmer Press.
Taylor, C. A. (1984). Planning Gifted Education: Opportunity for School-Based Curriculum Development. ED292221.
Torrancel, H. (1982). School-based examining in England: A focus for school-based curriculum development and accountability. ED219448.
Tyler R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
Vattimo, G. (1988). The end of modernity. Batimore: The John Hopkins Universiy Press.
Vygotsky, L. S.(1978). Ming in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Walton, J. & Welton, J. (eds) (1976). Rational curriculum planning: Four case studies. London: Ward Lock Educational.
Wasley, P. A.(1991). Teachers who lead. New York: Teachers College Press.
Webb R. & Vulliamy G. (1995). The changing role of t the primary school curriculum co-ordinator. The Curriculum Journal, 6(1), p29-45.
Wideen, M. F. (1987). Perspectives on staff development. In M. F. Wideen (ed.), Staff Development for the School Improvement. N. Y.: The Falmer Press.
Widen, A. (1987). System and stucture: Essay in communication and exchange. London: Harper & Row.
Young, J, H.（1985）. Particpation in curriculum development：An inquiry into the responses of teacher？Curriculum Inquiry, 15（4）,p.387-414.
Young, J.H. (1979). Teacher participation in curriculum decision making: an organizational dilemma. Curriculum Inquiry, 9(2), p.113-127.
Zais R. S. (1976). Curriculum : principles and foundations. New York : Crowell.
 
 
 
 
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

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：616（臺灣：602，外國：14） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1563831 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67376391
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上