:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:一位國小教師教學實踐的歷程:以批判民族誌為方法的教學革新
作者:徐偉民 引用關係
作者(外文):Shyu Wei-Min
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:方德隆
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2004
主題關鍵詞:國小教學實踐批判民族誌教學革新elementary schoolteaching praxiscritical ethnographyteaching 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(5) 博士論文(6) 專書(0) 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:49
摘 要
這是一篇關於我在小琉球的小學進行教學實踐的研究故事。過去的研究經驗與成長,使我走向實踐導向的研究派典,並決定以班級導師的身分,到小琉球進行為期一年的田野研究。我採用了批判民族誌的方法,一方面想了解學生以往的學習處境,以及家長的教養態度;另一方面也思考突破教學現場限制的教學方案,並進行教學設計與實踐,企圖創造一個充分賦權給學生的學習環境。
在學生的學習處境方面,由於受到家長、老師和學校重視學業成績的影響,學生長期處於高度控制與受支配的學習環境。學習的過程缺乏主動的參與和思考,學習的焦點也集中在教科書的內容。這不但讓部分學生感受到學習的壓力與束縛,同時也違背了學科與學習的本質。為了改變學生受支配的學習處境,我一方面透過對話來和學生溝通學習的觀念與態度,以喚起他們的批判意識;另一方面在國語文和數學兩領域的教學設計與實施,來賦予學生在學習過程中,有更多參與學習以及自我選擇的機會。在國語文領域,我推動閱讀計畫、日記寫作、及語詞遊戲等措施,希望培養學生聽、說、讀、寫完整的語文能力,也希望讓學生感受主動選擇與參與學習的樂趣;在數學領域,我以數學故事為媒介,來增加學生主動思考與討論的意願,並讓學生在溝通解題的過程中,培養學生對數學學習的興趣與敏感性。從學生課堂上外在行為的表現,以及對於教學改變後的內在感受來看,我的教學方案的確協助他們擺脫了以往受支配的學習處境,並讓他們感受到自由與快樂的學習氣氛。
在家長的教養態度方面,由於小琉球地區特殊的經濟型態與家庭結構,使得大多數學生的家長存有「重視成績表現」、「不參與孩子學習過程」、以及「教育等於管理」等態度,大都把教育視為是一種工具,一種獲取較好的職業與擺脫捕魚宿命的工具。家長重視成績的態度以及彼此間互相比較的心態,使部分的學生對學習與考試產生很大的壓力,尤其是成績好的學生。他們雖然在學習過程中獲得主動學習的樂趣,但受限於家長對於成績的要求,使他們仍然無法擺脫成績所帶來的壓力。對他們來說,學習不是一件快樂的事,而成績才是學習最終的目標。
家庭教育的不足、社區教育資源的缺乏、以及過去學習經驗的影響,都使得班上學生面臨許多的教育限制。想要突破這些限制,老師的教學便扮演著關鍵的角色。雖然我進行一個符合學科與教育本質的教學革新,但是卻和家長的教育期望衝突,也和學生的學習習慣牴觸,這些都會限制我實施教學革新的成效,也會挑戰了我進行教學實踐的決心。所幸,我一方面透過具體的教學實施,讓學生感受到主動學習的樂趣,另一方面透過家庭訪問,和家長進行教育觀念的溝通。雙管齊下的結果,使我的教學革新能順利的實施,讓我可以突破學生所面臨家庭與過去學習經驗的限制,提供學生一個更符合學科和學習本質的學習經驗。
從這一年在小琉球進行教學實踐的歷程中,引發了我對於研究方法與教學兩個層面進一步的思考。在方法的層面上,包括了:批判民族誌研究中賦權與介入的議題、賦權方案的重要、具體實施的流程、以及評判研究的標準等;在教學的層面上,包括了:故事在數學教學中扮演的角色與功能、數學教育的爭議、賦權的教學改革對不同學生的影響、老師如何在自己對教育的堅持和家長對教育的期望間做協調與折衷等。希望藉由我在小琉球教學實踐的研究故事,可以讓意圖採用批判民族誌方法的研究者,或是想在偏遠或離島地區實施教育改革的決策者,有個參考的依據。
Abstract
The field study described my teaching process in an elementary school in Little Okinawa. I chose praxis-oriented paradigm as my research approach and adopted critical ethnography as my research method. The purpose of this study has two aspects: (1) I would like to understand the learning situations which students had been exposed to and the educational attitudes of the parents. (2) I would like to create a learning environment allowing students’ active thinking and participation in my class by designing teaching projects of Chinese and mathematics. I wish students could gain new concepts about learning from different learning experiences.
Students had been set in a learning situation, which is highly influenced and dominated by the parents, teachers and school administrators who value academic achievement performance such as high scores on subject exams. The processes of students learning are lack of active participation and thinking. Learning contents are focused on textbooks. In order to change the students’ learning situations dominated by the elements mentioned above, I communicated with students about learning concepts and attitudes through dialogues, which awake their critical consciousness. On the other hand, I had designed and practiced the teaching plans of Chinese and mathematics to involve students with more participations and self-choice opportunities in their learning. In Chinese field, I carried out some strategies such as a reading plan, diary writings and word activities and games, which promote students’ complete capabilities of four skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing. In mathematics, I used a story as a media to invite students to involve in active thinking and increase their willingness for discussion. It appears that students get rid of the learning situation used to be dominated. They seem to enjoy the processes of learning after the change of my teaching models different from those traditional ones while we judge on the measures of the external performance of students in class and self-report of their learning.
Under the special socio-economical structure in Little Okinawa, most parents value academic achievement performance, are absent from the processes of their children’s learning and they regard education as discipline in terms of their educational attitude. They regard education as a tool, which helps their children gain a better job and break the destiny of fishing. Parents value students’ scores so much that it creates a heavy pressure on learning especially on those students who are considered as “good students”. Although they really gained the pleasure on the process of active learning, they still could not get rid of the pressure brought by the scores they got from tests because of the requirements of their parents. The ultimate goal of learning is to get high score on exams rather than have fun.
The insufficiency of family education, the lack of community educational resources and the influences of past learning experiences of students, all made the students in my class encounter a great number of educational limitations. A teacher’s teaching plays a critical role on breaking through these limitations. My teaching reform, which conflicted with the expectation of my students’ parents about education and contradicted with the learning habits of my students, actually limited the effectiveness of my teaching reform. Fortunately, my teaching reform have had been performed smoothly due to the outcomes of implementations on both my teaching practice which awoke students’ pleasure on active learning and my communication with parents about educational concepts when I visited their houses. My teaching practice provided students a better learning experience in relation to the nature of subject and learning.
On the processes of teaching praxis in Little Okinawa, something inspired my further thinking on two aspects about research method and teaching approach. What I am concerned about research method includes the issue of empowerment and intervention, the significance of empowerment project, the procedure of concrete implementation on and the criteria of critical ethnography. On the aspect of teaching, I criticize what role and function a story can play in mathematic teaching. I also examine the issues of mathematics education. How a teacher negotiates and compromises what he/she insists on teaching with the parents’ educational expectations are carefully observed.
My research story of teaching praxis in Little Okinawa may provide some suggestions to those who intend to take critical ethnography as an approach or administrators who would like to implement educational reform in distant area in Taiwan.
參考書目
一、中文部分:
方吉正(民89):認知學徒制在國小數學解題教學成效之研究。未出版博士論文,國立高雄師範大學教育學系,高雄。new window
王更生(民90)。語文教學與培養學生的思考能力。人文及社會學科教學通訊,12(4),14-27。
王震武、林文瑛(民86)。教育改革的台灣經驗。台北:業強。
民族誌學(賴文福譯)(民89)。台北:弘智。(原著出版年:1989年)
行動科學─實踐中的探究(夏林清、鄭村棋譯著)(民78)。台北:張老師。
朱則剛(民83)。建構主義知識論與情境認知對教育科技的意義。視聽教育雙月刊,35(4),1-15。new window
余安邦(民90)。哪株紅杏不出牆?開放教育的誘惑與陷阱。應用心理學研究,11,175-212。new window
李亦園(民81)。文化的圖像。台北:允晨文化。
李奉儒(民92)。P. Freire的批判教學論對於教師實踐教育改革的啟示。教育研究集刊,49(3),1-30。new window
李佳錦(民83)。國中理化教師的教學信念研究。未出版碩士論文,國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所,高雄。
李幸長(民91)。小卒變英雄。台北:平安文化。
李宗祐(民92年8月1日)。誰說建構式數學開倒車。中國時報,第5版。
宋怡慧(民88)。柏恩斯坦對言說形式之分析。未出版碩士論文,私立南華大學教育社會學研究所,嘉義。
吳福蓮(民78)。小琉球漁村婦女家庭生活的研究。未出版碩士論文,國立台灣大學考古人類研究所,台北。
吳宜玲(民82)。初任生物教師專業知能成長之詮釋性研究。未出版碩士論文,國立台灣師範大學生物學研究所,台北。
呂木琳(民87)。教學視導─理論與實務。台北:五南。
社會學的想像(張君玫、劉鈴佑譯)(民84)。台北:巨流。(原著出版年:1959年)
林燈茂(民78)。國小機率教材--「大數法則、機率值」教學困難與對策之試探研究。屏東:東益。
林燈茂,曹宗萍(民84)。國小職前教師機率教學之個案研究。未發行手稿。
周珮儀(民88)。從社會批判到後現代─季胡課程理論之研究。台北:師大書苑。new window
洪縑德(88)。從韋伯看馬克思。台北:揚智。
胡台麗(民81)。燃燒憂鬱。台北:張老師。
胡台麗(民82)。性與死。台北:張老師。
范文芳(民90)。改進語文教學培養思辨能力。國立新竹師院語文學報,7,93-111。new window
侯志欽(民81)。教學設計的哲學省思─由客觀主義到建構主義。教育資料集刊,17,221-230。new window
科學革命的結構(程樹德、傅大為、王道還、錢永祥譯)(民83)。台北:源流。(原著出版年:1972年)
高敬文(民85)。質化研究方法論。台北:師大書苑。
夏林清(民85)。實踐取向的研究方法。載於胡幼慧(編),質性研究─理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(頁99-120)。台北:巨流。
夏林清(民82)。從實務取向到社會實踐。台北:張老師。
徐新逸(民87):情境學習對教學革新之回應。研習資訊,15(1),16-24。
徐偉民(民85)。國小數學教師初步機率教學之研究。未出版碩士論文,國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所,屏東。
徐偉民、黃金鐘(民91)。情境導向的數學教學─一個結合情境認知與建構取向的教學模式。載於國立嘉義大學數學教育研究所(編),革新國民中小學數學教育議題(頁349-378)。嘉義:嘉義大學。
張英傑(民90)。發展九年一貫數學領域課程之省思。國民教育,41(6),29-38。
張靜儀(民82)。一位國小資深自然科教師的個案研究。載於國立台東師範學院(編),八十一學年度國小數理科教育學術研討會(頁17-33)。台東:台東師範學院。new window
張靜儀(民83)。國小自然科學教學個案研究─教師學科知識和教學之關係(NSC83-0111-S-153-003)。台北:行政院國家科學委員會。
許良榮(民82)。談建構主義的理論觀點與教學爭論。國教輔導,33(2),7-12。
陳淑芳(民90)。一群「實習幼兒」的短期就學經驗:另類教育實習方式和方法省思。應用心理研究,12,133-173。new window
陳向明(民91)。社會科學質的研究。台北:五南。new window
琉球鄉誌(民90)。中華綜合發展研究院應用史學研究所總編篡。
教育部(民90)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北:教育部new window
黃樹民(民83)。林村的故事:1949後的中國農村變革。台北:張老師。
黃政傑、林佩璇(民85)。合作學習。台北:五南。
黃嘉雄(民89)。轉化社會結構的課程理論:課程社會學的觀點。台北:師大書苑。new window
黃慶祥(民90)。彼邊人。http://freehomepage.taconet.com.tw/This/is/taconet/ top_hosts//shain/a1/liu_chiu1/aa21.htm
曾慶豹(民87)。哈伯瑪斯。台北:生智。new window
辜華興(民86):情境學習環境中媒體特性對學習成就與學習態度的影響。未出版碩士論文,私立淡江大學教育資料科學學系研究所,台北。
賈馥茗(民73)。教育研究的反省。收於師大教育研究所(編)中國教育的展望(頁3-15)。台北:五南。
楊順南(民86):情境認知教學觀的衝擊與啟示。教育研究雙月刊,56,51-62。new window
甄曉蘭(民89)。批判民族誌及其在教育研究上的應用。載於中正大學教育研究所(編),質的研究方法(頁369-393)。高雄:麗文。
葉興華(民88)。國語科教學之檢討與改進。課程與教學季刊,2(4),119-134。new window
鄔瑞香(民83)。我的數學教學模式─探索、反省與成果。載於台灣省國民學校教師研習會(編)國民小學數學科新課程概說(頁168-181)。台北:台灣省國民學校教師研習會。new window
劉好(民80)。小學教師數學基本能力之研究。台中師院學報,5,230-256。new window
鄭晉昌、李美瑜(民84):情境式電腦教學對國中階段不同數理成就群學生科學知識學習成就之效益評估。視聽教育學報,1,61-91。
質性研究概論(徐宗國譯)(民86)。台北:巨流。(原著出版年:1990年)
學校的職能(沈劍平譯)(民88)。台北:桂冠。(原著出版年:1994年)
謝敏鈴(民90)。台灣偏遠地區教育發展─從基層教師的觀點談起。未出版碩士論文,國立台灣大學社會學研究所,台北。
謝欣倩(民85)。宣傳車─城市中的流浪者。未出版碩士論文,國立中正大學電訊傳播研究所,嘉義。
戴慈慧(民89)。站在離島教育的十字路口─記小琉球之教育人種誌研究報告。未出版碩士論文,私立南華大學教育社會學研究所,嘉義。
鍾邦友(民83):情境式電腦輔助數學學習軟體製作研究。未出版碩士論文,國立台灣師範大學,台北。
鍾邦友(民84):情境式電腦輔助數學學習軟體的研究與發展。視聽教育學報,1,113-154。
韓昌宏(民88)。唐吉軻德與青少年、兒童。未出版碩士論文,私立輔仁大學應用心理學系,台北。
薩摩亞人的成年:為西方文明所做的原始人類的青年心理學研究(周曉紅、李姚軍譯)(民88)。台北:源流。(原著出版年:1953年)
顧瑜君(民91)。實踐取向之教師專業成長─在職教師進修模式之變革之解析。課程與教學季刊,5(4),1-18。new window
顧瑜君、朱慧清、林曉萍(民88)。教學與課程的變革:從化解教學困境到成為一個好老師的行動研究。載於1999行動研究國際學術研討會中小學組論文集(頁485-500)。台東:國立臺東師範學院。
鷹架兒童的學習─維高斯基與幼兒教育(谷瑞勉譯)(民88)。台北:心理。(原著出版年:1997年)
二、英文部分:
Anderson, G. L. (1987). Toward a critical ethnography of educational administration. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 284 351)
Anderson, G. L.(1989). Critical ethnography: origins, current status, and new direction. Review of educational research, 59(3), 249-270。
Benson, J, K. (1983). A dialectical method for the study of organizations. In Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research( pp.331-346). CA: Sage.
Blackledge, D. & Hunt, B. (1985). Sociological Interpretations of Education. Lodon, Sydney, Dover, New Hampshire: Croom Helm.
Borgnakke, K. (2000). The critical empirical and ethnographic turn in education and learning research. http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/files/clasp/critical-ethnography-and-education-research.doc.
Brickhouse, N. W. (1990). Teachers’ beliefs about nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62.
Campbell, M. (1999). Young worker becoming critical: A critical ethnography study of the theory and practice of young Christian workers’ movement as lived by a group of young workers in “Workington”. http://www.cardijn.net/michael.compbell/page1.htm
Clark, C. M. & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching(pp.255-296). New York: Macmillan.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19(6), 2-10.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1991). Technology and the design of generative learning environment. Educational Technology, 31(5), 34-40.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992a). The Jasper experiment: An exploration and issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology and Development, 40(1), 65-80.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992b). The Jasper Series as an Example of Anchored instruction: Theory, Program Description, and Assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52-70.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1994). From visual word problem to learning communities: Changing conceptions of cognitive research. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classrooms lessons: Cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp.157-200). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Collins, A. Brown, J. S. & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick(Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser(pp.453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering Minority students: a framework for intervention. Harvard Educational Review, 56(1), 18-36.
Erickson, F. (1987). Transformation and school success: the politics and culture of educational achievement. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 18(4), 335-356.
Fennema, E. & Franke, M. (1992). Teachers’ knowledge and its impact. In C. A. Gouglas(Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics learning(pp.147-164). New York: Macmillan.
Forester, J. (1983). Critical theory and organization analysis. In C. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research( pp.234-246). CA: Sage
Freire, P. & Macedo, N. P. (1995). A dialogue: culture, language, and race. Harvard educational review, 65(3), 377-402.
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education. NY: Bergin & Garvey.
Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school: prospects for the future. LA: McGraw-Hill.
Gordon, J. A. (1998). It’s a fine line…Deconstructing youth at-risk: critical ethnography as padagogy. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 422 427)
Heaton, R. M. (1992). Who is minding mathematics content? A case study of a fifth-grade teacher. The elementary school journal, 93(2), 153-162.
Heydebrand, W, V. (1983). Organization and praxis. In C. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research(pp.306-330). CA: Sage.
Hammersly, M. (1993). What wrong with ethnography? NY: Routledge.
Jordan, S. (2003). Critical ethnography and the sociology of education. In C. A. Torres & A. Antikainen (Ed.), The international handbook on the sociology of education: an international assessment of new research and theory(pp.82-100). MA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Jordan, S. & Yeomans, D. (1995). Critical ethnography: problems in contemporary theory and practice. British journal of sociology of education, 16(3), 389-408.
Kincheloe, J. L. & McLaren, P. (2000). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), Handbook of qualitative research(2nd ed.)(pp.279-313). Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
Klein, D. (1996). Convergent inquiries: Gloria Anzaldus’s “Mestiza” consciousness and critical ethnography. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 395 996)
Koba, S. B. (1996). Empowering teachers: a critical ethnography of a multicultural science reform. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
Koehler, M. S. & Grouws, A. (1992). Mathematics teaching practices and their effects. In G. A. Gouglas(Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics and learning(pp.115-126). New York: Macmillan.
Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard educational review, 56(3), 257-277
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Masemann, V, L. (1982). Critical ethnography in the study of comparative education. Comparative education review, 26(1), 1-15.
McLaren, P. (1998). Life in school: an introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education(3nd ed.). CA: Longman.
McLellan, H. (1993a). Situated learning in focus: Introduction to special issue. Educational Technology, 33(3), 5-9.
McLellan, H. (1993b). Evaluation in situated learning environment. Educational Technology, 33(3), 39-45.
Morgan, C. (1983a). Toward a more reflective social science. In C. Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research(pp.368-376). CA: Sage.
Morgan, C. (1983b). Research strategies: Modes of engagement. In Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research(pp.19-44). CA: Sage.
Morgan, C. (1983c). Research as engagement: A personal view. In Morgan (Ed.), Beyond method: Strategies for social research(pp.11-18). CA: Sage.
Newbill, S. L. & Stubbs, J. P. (1996). Critical ethnography of an urban high school. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 414 379)
Putnam, R. T. & Reineke, J. W. (1993). Learning to attend students’ mathematical thinking: case study of collaboration. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 355 119)
Robinson, H. A. (1994). The ethnography of empowerment: the transformative power of classroom interaction. Washington: The Falmer press.
Romberg, T. A. & Carpenter, T. P. (1986). Researching on teaching and learning mathematics: two disciplines of scientific inqury. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching(pp.850-873). New York: Macmillan.
Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: critical teaching for social change. Chicago: The university of Chicago press.
Shor, I. & Freire, P. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: dialogues on transforming education. MA: Bergin & Garvey Publishers.
Simon, R. I. & Dippo, D. (1986). On critical ethnographic work. Anthropology & education quarterly, 17, 196-202.
Smith, J. (1983). Quantitative versus qualitative research: An attempt to clarify the issue. Educational Researcher, 12(3), 6-13.
Spindler, G & Spindler, L. (1997a). Cultural process and ethnography─An anthropological perspective. In G. D. Spindler(Eds), Education and cultural process─anthropological approach(pp.56-76). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Spindler, G. & Spindler, L. (1997b). Cross-cultural, Comparative, Reflective Interviewing in Schoenhausen and Roseville. In G. D. Spindler(Ed.), Education and cultural process─anthropological approach(pp.472-494). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tobin, J. J., Wu, Y. H. & Davidson, D. H. (1989). Preschool in three culture. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Thomas, J. (1993). Doing critical ethnography. CA: Sage.
Willis, S. L., & Schaie, K. W. (1993). Everyday cognition: Taxonomic and methodological considerations. In J. M. Puckett & H. W. Reese (Eds.), Mechanism of everyday cognition (pp.19-32). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Wolcott, H. F. (1973). The man in the principal’s office. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
Wolcott, H. F. (1997). The teacher as an enemy. In G. D. Spindler(Ed.), Education and cultural process─anthropological approach (pp.77-92). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE