:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:一位國民小學校長課程領導實踐智慧之研究:課程美學探究取向
作者:曾榮華 引用關係
作者(外文):Jung-Hua Tseng
校院名稱:國立臺中教育大學
系所名稱:國民教育研究所
指導教授:謝寶梅
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2006
主題關鍵詞:實踐智慧課程領導課程美學探究教育批評phronesiscurriculum leadershipcurriculum aesthetic inquiryeducational criticism
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(8) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:74
本研究係以課程美學探究取向-教育批評法,針對一位國民小學校長進行課程領導時所展現的實踐智慧進行探究。本研究之目的主要為探析實踐智慧與課程領導的理論,以及瞭解課程美學探究取向—教育批評之理論基礎及實踐方法。其次,則是針對個案國民小學校長課程領導實踐智慧進行描述→闡釋→評價→歸納主題的教育批評。最後則提出對於國民小學校長課程領導實踐智慧之建議。
經由實地觀察、訪談,及相關資料之蒐集分析後,本研究獲致兩項主要發現:第一是個案學校校長課程領導具有「緩慢課程領導」價值觀,亦即具有Kanpol所主張的批判教育學觀。第二項則是個案學校校長在領導學校進行課程發展中,經歷了醞釀期、創造期、指揮期、授權期、協調期、及合作期六個階段,而每個階段都有面臨危機,也各有解決危機的成長方式。
針對研究發現進行闡釋及評價後,本研究獲致以下結論:
一、校長進行課程領導須具有批判教育學觀。
二、緩慢課程領導,可以找到領導者與組織同樣的步調。
三、課程發展各階段有其成長的動力,也有危機,校長課程領導的角色是全面的。
四、校長課程領導實踐智慧的展現是直基於對教育合理性的追求,對當下教育情境的感 知、辨別與頓悟,以及對教育道德品行的彰顯。
五、校長課程領導可以「盆景」作為隱喻。
基於上述研究結論,本研究最後乃針對國民小學校長、學校本位課程發展、以及課程美學探究取向應用三方面提出建議,以作為相關人員及後續研究的參考。
This study intended to explore the phronesis of curriculum leadership of an elementary school principal by employing curriculum aesthetic inquiry – the approach of educational criticism. The purpose of the study was mainly to lay the theoretical foundation for investigating the phronesis and curriculum leadership, as well as to shed light on the theory and practice of curriculum aesthetic inquiry – the approach of educational criticism. In addition, the phronesis of curriculum leadership of the elementary school principal in this case study was examined by the approach of educational criticism: descriptive inquiry, interpretative inquiry, normative inquiry, thematic inquiry. Last but not least, suggestions for enhancing elementary school principals’ phronesis of curriculum leadership were provided.
By means of observation, interview and relevant data collection, this study generated two findings: one was that the curriculum leadership of the principal in this case study may be characterized as the one in line with the values of “slow curriculum leadership.” That is, it was in accordance with the perspectives of critical pedagogy proposed by Kanpol. The other finding was that the principal in this case study had undergone six stages in the stage of curriculum development: incubation, initiation, direction, authorization, coordination, and cooperation. Each stage had its own crisis as well as solution through which the principal found a way to reach development.
Following the explanation and evaluation of the research findings, the study generated conclusions as follows:
1.The principal is supposed to proceed the curriculum leadership in the perspectives of critical pedagogy.
2.Slow curriculum leadership can result in a unified tempo between the leader and the organization.
3.Each stage in the curriculum development has its own dynamics of development as well as crisis. The principal plays a pervasive role in the curriculum leadership.
4.The exhibition of the principal’s phronesis of the curriculum leadership is based on the pursuit of rational education, the perception, distinction and comprehension of the present educational context, and the revelation of morale in education.
5.“Bonsai” can be used as a metaphor in principal’s curriculum leadership.
Based on the above research conclusions, suggestions are provided as reference for those who are concerned and future studies in terms of elementary school principals, school-based curriculum development and application of curriculum aesthetic inquiry.
壹、中文部分
方永泉(譯)(2004)。Paulo Freire著。受壓迫者教育學(Pedagogy of the oppressed)。台北市:巨流。
王文科(1995)。教育研究法(第四版)。台北市:五南。new window
王志明(譯)(1989)。Claude Levi-Strauss著。憂鬱的熱帶(Tristes tropiques)。台北市:聯經。
王秀雲、李惠銘(1999)。跨世紀之夢—柑園國中學校本位課程統整機制的營造歷程。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會(主編),邁向課程新紀元(下)(頁287-299)。台北市:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
王紅宇(譯)(1999)。William E. Doll著。後現代課程觀(A post-modern perspective on curriculum)。台北市:桂冠。
朱光潛(2003)。談美。台中市:晨星。
宋文里(譯)(2001)。Jerome Bruner著。教育的文化—文化心理學的觀點(The culture of education)。台北市:遠流。new window
沈清松(1998)。情意發展與實踐智慧。通識教育季刊,5(1),65-84。
李小紅、鄧友超(2003)。論教師實踐智慧。教育研究,284,32-36。
李安民(1999)。為教學而行政的校長教學領導—領論與實務。教育政策論壇,2(2),158-203。
李茂興、余伯全(譯)(1995)。E. Aronson, T. D. Wilson,& R. M. Akert著。社會心理學(Social psychology)。台北市:揚智。
李新民(1997)。傅柯的「權力/知識」觀點對兩性教育的啟示。高市文教,59,8-16。
李雅婷(2003)。國小藝術統整課程之教育批評。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,台北市。
李醒塵(1996)。西方美學史教程。臺北市:淑馨。
何泰昇(2003)。校長課程領導之個案研究-以桃園縣一所國中為例。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
林文生(1998,12月)。學校本位的課程發展—以一所學校課程發展的經驗為例。論文發表於國立台北師範學院舉辦之「現代教育論壇:新世紀新課程」研討會,台北市。new window
林文律(2001,10月)。學校領導—學校成功的決定性因素。載於國立台北師範學院舉辦,中小學校長培育、證照、甄選、評鑑與專業發展學術研討會論文集(頁55-71),台北市。
林天祐(1998)。教導型組織—創造教育永續成功的發動機。教育資料與研究,23,61-63。new window
林明地(譯)(1998)。T. E. Deal, & K. D. Peterson著。學校領導—平衡邏輯與藝術(The leadership paradox balancing logic and artistry in schools)。台北市:五南。
林清江(1981)。教育社會學新論—我國社會與教育關係之研究。台北市:五南。
林清江(1999)。國民教育九年一貫課程規劃專案報告。載於教育部(編),教育改革的理想與實踐(頁159-171)。台北市:教育部。new window
林鈺萍(2003)。個案教師教學之賞析—艾斯納教育鑑賞與批評模式及其應用。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
范梅南(2001)。教學機智—教育智慧的意蘊。北京:教育科學出版社。
苗力田、徐開來(譯)(2001)。Aristole著:倫理學。台北縣:知書房。
吳芝儀、李奉儒(譯)(1995)。Patton, M. Q. 著。質的評鑑與研究(Qualitative evaluation and research methods)。台北縣:桂冠。
吳芝儀、廖梅花(譯)(2001)。A. Strauss, & J. Corbin, J. 著。紮根理論研究方法(Basic of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures theory procedures and techniques)。嘉義市:濤石文化。
吳清山(1999)。推行「國民教育階段九年一貫課程」學校行政配合之探究。教育研究資訊,7(1),14-21。new window
吳瑪俐(譯)(1995)。Kandisky著。藝術與藝術家論。臺北市:藝術家。
周珮儀(1994)。艾斯納教育批評理論之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
洪漢鼎(譯)(1993)。Hans Georg Gadamer著。真理與方法—哲學詮釋學的基本特徵(Wahrheit und methode : grundzuge einer philosophischen hermeneutik)。台北市:時報文化。
洪漢鼎(1998)。當代詮釋學和實踐智慧概念。社會理論學報,1(2),229-251。new window
姜靜繪(譯)(2000)。J. Briggs, & F. D. Peat著。亂中求序—渾沌理論的永恆智慧(Seven life lessons of chaos: Timeless wisdom from the science of change)。台北市:先覺。
高新建(2000)。學校本位課程發展的意涵與實施。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會(主編),邁向課程新紀元(二)(頁18-44)。台北市:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
高新建(2002)。學校課程領導者的基本素養與角色。台北市立師範學院學報,33,113-128。
高熏芳、林盈助、王向葵(譯)(2001)。J. A. Maxwell著。質化研究設計(Qualitative research design: An interactive approach)。台北市:心理。
栗筱雯(譯)(2004)。Mitch Albom著。在天堂遇見的五個人(The five people you meet in heaven)。台北市:大塊文化。
徐炳勳(譯)(1999)。Stephen R. Covey著。與領導有約(Principle-Centered leadership)。台北市:天下遠見。
徐俊祥(2003,10月)。突破課程改革的止步點:一個多方參與共同匯聚領導模式的實例。課程領導與課程評價的理論與實施研討會,蘭州:西北師範大學。
徐詩思(譯)(2000)。Clare Cooper Marcus著。家屋—自我的一面鏡子(House as a mirror of self)。台北市:張老師文化。
郭小平(1997)。藝術心理學新論。臺北:臺灣商務。
陳向明(2000)。質的研究方法與社會科學研究。北京:教育科學出版社。new window
陳伯璋(1985)。潛在課程研究。臺北:五南。
陳伯璋(1999):九年一貫課程的理念與理論分析。載於中華民國教材發展研究學會(編),邁向課程新紀元—九年一貫課程研討會論文集(上冊)(頁10-18)。台北縣:中華民國教材發展研究學會。new window
陳伯璋(2003a)。新世紀的課程研究與發展。國家政策季刊,2(3),149-168。
陳伯璋(2003b)。實踐智慧與校長課程領導。載於歐用生(主編),邁向課程新紀元—活用課程領導(頁3-17)。台北縣:中華民國教材發展研究學會。
陳奎憙(1980)。教育社會學。台北市:三民。
陳姿穎(譯)(2005)。Antonie de Saint-Exupery著。小王子(The little princ)。台北市:小知堂。
陳茗芬(譯)(1996)。Jack canfield, & Mark V. Hansen著。心靈雞湯III(A 3rd serving of chicken soup for the soul: 101 more stories to open the heart and rekindle the spirit)。台中市:晨星。
陳惠邦(1998)。教育行動研究。台北市:師大書苑。
夏林清(譯)(2004)。D. A. Schön著。反映的實踐者:專業工作者如何在行動中思考(The reflective practitioner: How professional think in action)。台北市:遠流。
游羽蓁(譯)(1999)。Spencer Johnson著。誰搬走我的乳酪(Who moved my cheese)。台北市:奧林文化。
游家政(2002)。國民中學的課程領導。課程與教學,5(2),1-20。new window
游家政、許籐繼(2003)。校長轉型課程領導的角色與任務。教育研究月刊,108,119-132。new window
曾榮華(2003,10月)。誰搬走了我的乳酪—當一位國小教師遇上九年一貫課程改革。九十二學年度師範學院教育學術論文發表會,台南市:國立台南師範學院。
張沛文(譯)(2001)。James C. Hunter著。僕人—修道院的領導啟示錄(The servant: asimple story about the true essence of leadership)。台北市:商周。
張南星(譯)(1995)。Jiddu Krishnamurti著:人生‧教育‧學習(Education and the significance of life)。台北市:方智。
張鼎國(1997)。「實踐智」與新亞里斯多德主義。哲學雜誌,19,66-84。new window
黃政傑(1987)。課程評鑑。台北市:師大書苑。
黃政傑(1991)。課程設計。臺北:東華。
黃政傑(1997)。課程改革的理念與實踐。台北市:漢文。new window
黃炳煌(1997)。課程理論之基礎。台北市:文景。
黃超陽(2002)。國小校長課程領導行為之研究-以花蓮縣實施九年一貫課程為例。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,花蓮縣。
黃旭鈞(2002)。國民小學校長課程領導模式建構之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,台北市。new window
黃旭鈞(2003)。課程領導的理論與實務。台北市:心理。
黃嘉雄(1999)。落實學校本位課程發展的行政領導策略。國民教育,40(1),29-34。new window
黃慶明(1991)。知識論(一)懷疑與確定性。鵝湖,16(6),18-30。new window
彭秉權(譯)(2005)。Barry Kanpol著。批判教育學的議題與趨勢(Issue and trends in critical pedagogy)。高雄市:麗文。
單文經(2000)。初探革新課程領導者的特質。收錄於國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所、中華民國課程與教學學會主辦,第三屆課程與教學論壇「課程改革的反省與前瞻學術研討會」論文集(下冊)(頁23-35)。台北市:主辦單位。
葉興華(2002)。從課程領導的角色與期望—談我國國小校長課程領導的困境與展望。初等教育學刊,13,177-200。new window
楊茂秀(1999)。我們教室有鬼。台北市:遠流。
楊深坑(1998)。美育與實際智慧。通識教育季刊,5(1),123-136。
楊忠斌(1994)。論「符號」在朗格美學中的意涵—藝術符號的語意學及邏輯基礎。國立中央大學哲學研究所碩士論文,未出版,中壢市。
楊振昇(1999)。我國國小校長從事教學領導概況、困境及其因應策略之分析研究。暨大學報,3(1),183-236。
齊思賢(譯)(2000)。L. C. Thurow著。知識經濟時代(Building wealth: The new rules for individuals, and nation in a knowledge based economic)。台北市:時報文化。
鄧曉芒(譯)(2004)。Immanuel Kant著。實踐理性批判(Kritik der Praktischen Vernunft)。台北市:聯經。
熊川武(2002)。論理解教育的學校道德場建設。思想‧理論‧教育,11,3-6。
鄭懷超(譯)(2000)。H. Mintzberg等著。領導(Harvard business review on leadership)。台北市:天下遠見。
潘慧貞(2001)。國民小學校長課程領導角色與任務之研究—以盛世國小為例。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
歐用生(1995)。教師成長與學習。板橋:台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
歐用生(1999)。課程發展的基本原理。高雄市:復文。
歐用生(2000a)。課程改革—九年一貫課程改革的經驗與啟示。台北市:師大書苑。new window
歐用生(2000b)。轉型的課程領導及其啟示。國民教育,41(1),2-9。new window
歐用生(2003)。課程典範的再建構。高雄市:麗文。new window
歐用生(2004 a)。課程領導—議題與展望。台北市:高等教育文化。
歐用生(2004b)。校長的課程領導與專業成長。研習資訊,21(1),60-70。
歐用生(2004c)。課程領導的道德蘊義-超越企業領導。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會(編),課程改革的再概念化(上)(頁101-116)。台北縣:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
歐陽教(1999)。教育哲學。高雄市:麗文。
盧美貴、方慧琴、陳勤妹(2000)。教改何價—台北市立師院實小模式學校願景及其本位課程實踐反思。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會(主編),邁向課程新紀元(二)(頁74-144)。台北市:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
錢幼蘭(2001)。校長領導課程改革之瓶頸與突破。教師之友,42(5),44-51。
錢清泓(2001)。有地無位、有名無實?—九年一貫重大議題課程實施困境之探討。國教學報,13,1-17。
謝寶梅(2002)。學校本位課程發展與實施評鑑。載於國立台中師範學院(編),九年一貫課程理念與實際(頁61—90)。台中市:國立台中教育大學。
顏湘如(譯)(2005)。Carl Honoré著。慢活(In Praise of slow)。台北市:大塊文化。
關文遠(譯)(2002)。David Hume著。人性論(A treatise of human nature)。台北市:商務。
嚴祥鸞(1996)。參與觀察法。載於胡幼慧(主編),質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(頁195-222)。臺北市:巨流。
龔素丹(2003)。台北縣國民小學校長課程領導行為及困難之調查研究。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
貳、英文部分
Apple, M. W. (1979). Ideology and curriculum. New York: Routledge.
Barone, T. (1994). Things of use and things of beauty: The story of the Swain county high school arts program. In E. W. Eisner (Ed.), The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs (pp. 273-292)(3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Barone, T., & Eisner, E. (1997). Arts-based educational research. In R. M. Jaeger (Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education(2nd ). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Beyer, L. E. (1995). Beyond the formal and the psychological: The arts and ocial possibility. In W. Kohli (Ed.), Critical conversations in philosophy of education. New York: Routledge.
Blase, J. & Anderson, G. L. (1995). The micropolitics of educational leadership. London: Cassell.
Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Clandinin, D. J. (1985). Personal practial knowledge: A study of teacher classroom image. Curriculum inquiry, 15(4), 361-385.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (2000). Narrative inquire: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Van Rees.
Doll, W. E. (1998). Curriculum and concepts of control. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum: Toward new identities(pp.295-323). New York: Garland.
Donmoyer, R. (1993). Art criticism as a guide to student evaluation. Theory into Practice, 32(4), 252-259.
Dotson, M. L. (2000). The theories of action of three prekindergarten teachers: A study in teaching thinking. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(05), 1736. (University Microfilms No. AAT9971538)
Edward, W. L. (2001,October). School leadership: The crucial factor for successful schools. 載於國立台北師範學院舉辦,中小學校長培育、證照、甄選、評鑑與專業發展學術研討會論文集(頁55-72),台北市。
Eggleston, J. (1979). School-based curriculum development in England and Wales. In Center for educational research and innovation(Ed.), School-based curriculum development(pp. 77-105). Washington, DC: Organization for economic co-operation and development.
Eisner, E. W. (1985). Learning and teaching: The ways of knowing. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination: On the design of evaluation of school programs(3rd ed.). New York : Macmillan.
Eisner, E. W. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Flinders, D. J., & Eisner, E. W. (1994). Educational criticism as a form of qualitative inquiry. Research in the Teaching of English, 28(4), 341-390.
Fullan, M. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York: Teacher College Press.
Fullan, M. (1993). Change force: School development and the management of change. New York: Routledge Falmer.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
Giroux, H. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Glatthorn, A. A. (2000). The principal as curriculum leader: Shaping what is taught and tested. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gross, S. J. (1998). Staying centered:Curriculum leadership in a turbulent era. Washington, DC: Assocation for supervision and curriculum development.
Grundy, S. (1987). Curriculum: Product or praxis. London: The Falmer Press.
Haggerson, N. L. (2000). Expanding curriculum research and understanding. New York: Peter Lang.
Hall, J. M. (1996). Curriculum leadership as perceived by North Dakota elementary principals and teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Dakota,North Dakota.
Harrop, M. F. (1999). Improving curriculum: Practices and problems that exist in local school settings. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Massachusetts.
Hawthorn, R. K. (1993). Classroom curriculum : educational criticisms of teacher choice. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI.
Henderson, J. G., & Hawthorne, R. D. (2000). Transformative curriculum leadership(2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.
Huebner, D. E. (1975). Curricular language and classroom meanings. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp.217- 236). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Huebner, D. E. (1985). Spirituality and knowing. In E. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and teaching: The ways of knowing. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
Jackson, P. W. (1966). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Jackson, P. W. (1992). Conceptions of curriculum and curriculum specialists. In P. W. Jackson (Eds.), Handbook of research on curriculum. New York: Macmillan.
Jaeger, R. M. (1997). Complementary methods for research in education. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Kennedy, P. (1994). Preparing for the twenty-first century. New York: Macmillan.
Kliebard, H. (1975). Reappraisal: The Tyler rationale. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp.70-83). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Kozol, J. (1991). Savage inequalities. New York: Crown.
LeCompte, M. D., Preissle, J., Tesch, R. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Cuba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Behar-Horenstein, L. S. (2003). Narrative research: Understanding teaching and teacher thinking. In A. C. Ornstein, & L. S. Behar-Horenstein(Eds.), Contemporary issues in curriculum(pp. 90-102). Boston : Allyn and Bacon.
Macdonald, J. B. (1975). Curriculum theory. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp.5-14). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Mann, J. (1975). Curriculum criticism. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing- the reconceptualists (pp. 133-148). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Marsh, C., Day, C., Hannay, L., & McCutcheon, G. (1990). Reconceptualizing school-based curriculum development. New York : Falmer Press.
Mazza, K. A. (1982). Reconceptual inquiry as an alternative mode of curriculum theory and practice: A critical study. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 4(2), 5-89.
McLaren, P. (1994). Life in schools. New York: Longman.
Oliva, P. F. (2001). Developing the curriculum(5th ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman
O’Neill, J. (1993). Ecology, policy and politics. New York: Routledge.
Owen, J. D. (1988). An investigation of the curricular and instructional leadership roles of elementary principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, Greensboro.
Pinar, W. F. (1975). Curriculum criticism. In W. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. ix-xii). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Pinar, W. F. (1995). Understanding curriculum as phenomenological and deconstructed text. New York : Teachers College Press.
Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P., & Taubman, P. M. (1995). Understanding curriculum: An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourses. New York : Peter Lang.
Purpel, D. (1989). The moral and spiritual crisis in education. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Schön, D. A . (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schubert, W. H. (1986). Curriculum: perspective, paradigm, and possibility. New York: Macmillan.
Siegesmund, R. E. (2000). Reasoned perception: Art education at the end of art. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(11), 4261. (University Microfilms No. AAT9995283)
Short, E. C. (1991). Forms of curriculum inquiry. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
Snyder, J., Bolin, F., & Zumwalt, K. (1992). Curriculum implementation. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 402-435). New York: Macmillan.
Solow, S. S. (1995). The nature and scope of curricular roles and responsibilities of elementary principals: a case study of principals with district-wide curriculum leadership functions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lehigh University, Bethlehem.
Soltis, J. F. (1990). The ethics of qualitative research. In E. W. Eisner & A. Peshkin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Speedy, J. (2003). Narrative inquiry and life story research in counseling and psychotherapy. New York: Macmillan.
Stake, J., Briggs, C., & Rowland-Poplawski, J. (2000). Curriculum leadership roles of chairs in “continuously planning” departments. Retrieved December 10, 2005, from http: // www.eric.ed.gov/ ERICDocs/ data/ ericdocs2/ content_storage_01/ 0000000b/ 80/ 22/ fb/ e3.pdf
Sumara, D. J., & Davis, B. (1998). Unskinning curriculum. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum: Toward new identities(pp.75-92). New York: Garland.
Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. (1990). History of the school curriculum. New York: Macmillan.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tye, K. A. (2003). Global education as a worldwide movement. Phi Delta Kappan, 85(2), 165-168.
Vallance, E. (1981). Focus on students in curriculum knowledge: A critique of curriculum criticism. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED201556)
Vallance, E. (1991). Aesthetic inquiry: Art criticism. In E. C. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry(pp. 155-172). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Walker, D. F. (1971). The process of curriculum development: A naturalistic model. School Review, 80, 51-65.
Willis, G. (1978). Qualitative evaluation. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
Zmuda, A., Kuklis, R., & Kline, E. (2004). Transforming schools: Creating a culture of continuous improvement. Alexandria, VA: Assocation for supervision and curriculum development.
 
 
 
 
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