:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:康德與布洛的美感經驗論及其在課程與教學的應用
作者:謝廣錚
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:林逢祺
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2013
主題關鍵詞:美感經驗論無涉利害說心理距離說孤立主義取向純藝術theory of aesthetic experiencetheory of disinterestednesstheory of psychical distanceisolationism approachfine art
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(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:41
本研究旨在探討康德和布洛的美感經驗論,並依據其原理創造出「修正式孤立主義取向的課程與教學觀」,強調在教學時運用純藝術的重要性,進而使教學藝術化,為學生創造美感的學習經驗。
為達成上述目的,本研究首先運用分析哲學方法探析康德的無涉利害說,並以「心距光譜論」來探討布洛的心理距離說。次以孤立主義立場的無涉利害說和心距說,並採取類比的方法,描繪了富美感的課程與教學中的美感經驗,推衍出康德式的課程與教學觀、心距說的課程與教學觀,並為建構修正式孤立主義取向的課程美學觀和教學藝術觀,提供適切的建言。
研究成果可歸結為幾個要點:
一、康德的無涉利害說採取嚴格的美感規準,布洛的心距說可避免其過於嚴格的傾向而使之較易實現。
二、無涉利害說的核心也是最為困難之處,乃在於美感認知過程的理解,尤其是共通感如何統合快感、想像力和理解力的問題。心距說的理論核心也是最為困難之處,乃在如何運用「距離的二律背反」原則,以描繪「拉近」和「拉遠」的超離過程。
三、康德式的課程美學觀是由「課程目的觀」、「課程知識觀」、「藝文課程觀」、「潛在課程觀」以及「壯美課程觀」五個面向所建構而成。康德式的教學藝術觀在教學上,注重無目的、無涉利害的態度,並且在教學上採用具共通感的教學方法,在評量上著重課堂上學生實際反應的質性評量。
四、心距說的教學藝術觀可彌補康德式的教學藝術觀實踐上的困難。富美感的課程設計有賴於教師具備課程選擇與組織的持距能力,並採取「締造觀」和「相互調適觀」的「混合觀」,教學的持距能力展現了距離美。
五、修正式孤立主義取向的教學藝術觀在教學中凸顯純藝術的重要性,並以脈絡主義取向的教學藝術觀補足其缺失。
本研究根據上述結論提出了一些建議,其主要內容為:一、修正式孤立主義取向的課程美學觀和教學藝術觀之建構,有助於教師採取無涉利害的立場,培養學生「整全的人」之完整人格;二、無論康德或布洛的美感經驗論,運用在欣賞教學法時皆無法清楚說明想像力的作用;三、修正式孤立主義取向的課程美學觀和教學藝術觀之建構,可進一步進行教材教法的開發工作;四、在師資培育上,可將教師實習當作教學藝術習藝之過程,教師證視為教學藝術工作證。
This research is devoted to explore Kant’s and Bullough’s theories of aesthetic experience and to create a revised approach of curriculum and teaching of isolationism accordingly, emphasizing on incorporating fine art in teaching and the importance of artistry of teaching.
To achieve such goal, the research first utilizes the techniques of analytical philosophy to perform an analysis on Kant’s theory of disinterestedness and based on my design, the distance spectrum, I further study Bullough’s theory of psychical distance. The construction of Kantist curriculum design and teaching and the psychical distance theory of curriculum design and teaching are based upon two theories: the theories of disinterestedness and psychical distance in isolationism. In addition, the construction also incorporates an analogy method to depict the aesthetic feeling in curriculum design and the aesthetic experience in the process of teaching. From our research findings, we are able to make suggestions in terms of the modified isolationism’s aesthetic curriculum and artistry teaching.
The findings of this research are as follows:
1. The disinterestedness condition could be hindered by the Kant’s more restricted aesthetic criteria; therefore, Bullough’s psychical distance theory makes the realization of curriculum easier.
2. The most challenging part of understanding the disinterestedness theory is how the common sense coordinates the aspects of pleasant, imagination and understanding. The nucleus of the theory of psychical distance is to use the principle of antinomy of distance to analyze the distanced process.
3. Kant’s curriculum aesthetic perspective is composed of five perspectives. These include the curriculum purpose, the curriculum knowledge, art and cultural curriculum, the hidden curriculum and, finally, the sublime curriculum. Kant’s perspective of the art of teaching place special emphasis on disinterestedness and the void of purpose, and adopts teaching methods with common sense. It also values the qualitative assessment of students』 actual responses.
4. The perspective of the art of teaching based on the theory of psychical distance makes great contribution to the realization of Kant’s perspective of the art of teaching. Aesthetic curriculum design relies on teachers』 distanced ability to choose and organize curriculum. The design in this study adopts teachers』 enactment perspective and mutual adaptation perspective. The teaching ability of using distanced principle manifests the beauty of distance.
5. The perspective of the art of teaching based on the isolationism approach highlights the importance of fine art, compensated by the perspective of the art of teaching derived from contextualism.
According to my analysis, some suggestions can be brought about as follows. The construction of curriculum aesthetic perspective and perspective of the art of teaching based on the modified isolationism approach will benefit educators and help cultivate the whole humanity out of students. Following that, Kant’s and Bullough’s theories of aesthetic experience are both insufficient to clarify how imagination works when using appreciative teaching techniques. In addition, the construction of curriculum aesthetic perspective and the perspective of the art of teaching based on modified isolationism approach can be beneficial to the development of curriculum and teaching methods. Last but not least, in reference to education for teachers, pre-service internship can be viewed as a process prior to becoming artists. As a result, teaching credentials are no different from the art teaching certificate.
參考書目
一、中文部分
方德隆(譯)(2004)。A. C. Orenstein & F. P. Hunkins著。課程基礎理論。台北市:高等教育。
白先勇(2000)。孽子。台北市:允晨文化。
李奉儒(2004)。教育哲學:分析的取向。台北市:揚智。
牟宗三(譯)(1992)。I. Kant著。判斷力批判:上冊。台北市:學生書局。(原著出版年:1790年)
牟宗三(譯)(1992)。I. Kant著。判斷力批判:下冊。台北市:學生書局。(原著出版年:1790年)
朱光潛 (1982)。西方美學史(下卷)。台北市:漢京。(原著出版年:1963年)
朱光潛(1983a)。西方美學的源頭。台北市:金鋒。(原著出版年:1963年)
朱光潛(1983b)。啟蒙運動的美學。台北市:金鋒。(原著出版年:1963年)
朱光潛(1990)。談文學。台北市:萬卷樓。
朱光潛(1995)。文藝心理學。台北市:大夏。(原著出版年:1936年)new window
朱光潛 (2001a)。名家談寫作。台北市:牧村。
朱光潛 (2001b)。詩學。台北市:國際少年村。
朱光潛 (2006a)。談美。台南市:文國。(原著出版年:1932年)
朱光潛 (2006b)。悲劇心理學。安徽:安徽教育。(原著出版年:1933年)
何致和(譯)(2009)。D. Delillo著。白噪音。台北市:寶瓶。
何恭上(1999)。梵谷星夜。台北市:藝術。
何信勤(譯)(2006)。J. Conrad著。黑心。台北市:聯經。
宋明娟等(譯)(2007)。J. Passmore著。教學哲學。台北市:心理。
范信賢(2013)。敘事探究的社會學想像:個體經驗與社會脈絡的交織。課程與教學季刊,16(1),139-158。new window
范夢(1997)。寫實到印象。台北市:藝術。
李子建、黃顯華(1996)。課程:範式、取向和設計。台北市:五南。new window
李忠盛(2007)。康德美學的教育涵義研究。國立台中教育大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。
李秋零(譯)(2007)。康德著作全集第5卷:實踐理性批判、判斷力批判。北京:中國人民大學。
李宗薇、高麗娟(2012)。流行歌曲文本分析及教學:以國小六年級學生為例。課程與教學季刊,15 (1),91-118。new window
李詠吟(1997a)。三種基本教學法。載自李詠吟、單文經著,教學原理(頁131-148)。台北市:遠流。
李詠吟(1997b)。啟髮式教學法。載自李詠吟、單文經著,教學原理(頁149-170)。台北市:遠流。
李詠吟(1998)。認知教學:理論與策略。台北市:心理。
李家同(2010)。李家同談教育:希望有人聽我的話。台北市:聯經。
李渝(譯)(1984)。J. Chaill著。中國繪畫史(第五版)。台北市:雄獅。
李雅婷(2002)。課程美學探究取向與實踐之研究:以國小藝術統整課程之藝術批評為例。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文。未出版。new window
李雅婷(2005)。社會轉化與美感創造:探析社會重建的課程關懷。課程與教學季刊,8(2),41-52。new window
李雅婷(2007)。H. Rugg創造性自我表現之課程美學觀點探究。課程與教學季刊,10(2),145-160。new window
李雅婷(2010)。美感教育之實踐策略探究:以敘事課程為例。教育學刊,35, 65-98。new window
李淳玲(譯)(2011)。文哲著。康德美學。台北市:聯經。
李醒塵(1996)。西方美學史教程。台北市:淑馨。
宗白華(譯)(1986)。I. Kant著。判斷力批判:上卷。台北市:滄浪。(原著出版年:1790年)
侯文詠(2003)。危險心靈。台北市:皇冠。
侯孝賢等(1983)。兒子的大玩偶。台北市:中央電影公司。
吳靖國(2009)。「詩」對教學藝術的啟示:G. Vico的觀點。當代教育研究,17(4),27-60。new window
林玉體(2008)。蘇格拉底的教師圖像。載於林逢祺、洪仁進主編,教師哲學:哲學中的教師圖像(頁1-28)。台北市:五南。
林玫君(2012)。台灣幼兒園課綱美感領域學習指標發展初探以戲劇指標與量表之建構歷程為例。當代教育研究,20(4),1-44。new window
林莉娜編輯(2001)。文學名著與美術展覽圖錄。台北市:國立故宮博物院。
林進材(1999)。教學理論與方法。台北市:五南。
林逢祺(1998)。美感創造與教育藝術。教育研究集刊,40,51-72。new window
林逢祺(2004)。教育規準論。台北市:五南。
林逢祺、洪仁進(2006)。啟蒙思潮與教師啟蒙。載於但昭偉主編,教師的教育哲學(頁43-79)。台北市:高等教育。
林逢祺(譯)(2007)。D. Townsend著。美學概論。台北市:學富。
林逢祺(2010)。教學的「遊戲」結構。載於黃政傑主編,教學藝術(頁27-43)。台北市:五南。new window
林逢祺(2011)。釋放教育想像的「部分/整體」觀。載於陳伯璋主編,課程美學(頁103-121)。台北市:五南。
林建福(2006)。德行、情緒與道德教育。台北市:學富。
施良方(1997)。課程理論。高雄市:麗文。
洪俊源、許學鳴(2012)。五體不滿足之五育融通。載於陳瓊花主編,101年度德智體群美理念與實踐教材教法設計徵選 (頁10-55)。
洪仁進(2008)。包曼哲學中的教師圖像。載於林逢祺、洪仁進主編,教師哲學:哲學中的教師圖像(頁393-406)。台北市:五南。
洪如玉(2013)。地方教育學探究:Sobel、Theobald與Smith的觀點評析。課程與教學季刊,16(1),115-138。new window
洪懿妍(2001)。美感大調查,台灣美不美?天下雜誌2001年教育特刊。
倪再沁(1995)。台灣美術:細說從頭二十年。台北市:藝術家。
周行之(譯)(1969)。A. Camus著。瘟疫。台北市:志文。
周佩儀(2010)。藝術教育、課程藝術與教學藝術。載於黃政傑主編,教學藝術(頁89-106)。台北市:五南。new window
周淑卿(2005)。課程的美學探究範疇之建構。課程與教學季刊,8(2),1-14。
周淑卿(2010)。學習歷程中美感經驗的性質:藝術與科學課堂的探究。課程與教學季刊,14(1),19-40。new window
姚一葦(1997)。美的範疇論。台北市:開明。(原著出版年:1978年)new window
梁歆、黃顯華(2007)。以課程實施的取向為基礎探討學校改進的實施。課程與教學季刊,10(2),81-94。new window
梁福鎮(1999)。普通教育學。台北市:師大書苑。
梁福鎮(2004)。改革教育學:起源、內涵與問題的探究。台北市:五南。new window
郭禎祥、陳碧珠(譯)(2008)。E. W. Eisner著。教育想像力:學校課程、教學的設計與評鑑。台北市:洪葉文化。
陳至中(2010)。基測前夕,孩子崩潰了。載於中國時報(9月12日),A3版。
陳延興(2006)。英國實施價值教育的發展與實際。當代教育研究,14 (3), 25-58。
陳延興(2011)。「績效」是否會讓教育辦得更好?從哲學的角度看待教育。臺灣教育評論月刊,1(5),71-73。
陳俊偉、黃毅志(2011)。重探學科補習階層化與效益:Wisconsin模式的延伸。教育研究集刊,57(1),101-135。
陳美如(2010)。美學取向的課程與教學。教育研究月刊,191,111-115。new window
陳錦惠(2005)。教學歷程中的教學美感經驗之研究---杜威美感經驗的觀點。課程與教學季刊,8(2),15-24。
陳伯璋(2005)。從課程改革省思課程研究典範的新取向。當代教育研究,13(1),1-34。new window
陳伯璋、張盈堃(2007)。來自日常生活的教育學院:社區、課程與美學探究。教育與社會研究,12,41-72。new window
黃光國(1995)。知識與行動:中華文化傳統社會心理詮釋。台北市:心理。
黃政傑(1991)。課程設計。台北市:東華。
黃政傑(2002)。重建教科書的概念與實務。課程與教學季刊,6(1),1-12。new window
黃政傑(2010)。教學藝術的理念與實踐。載於黃政傑主編,教學藝術 (頁3-12)。台北市:五南。new window
黃煜文(譯)(2008)。金安平著。孔子:喧囂時代的孤獨哲人。台北市:時報。
黃倩茹(2004)。康德美學及其美育蘊義。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。
馮至、范大燦(譯)(1988)。 F. Schiller著。審美教育書簡。台北市:淑馨。
傅偉勳 (1965)。西洋哲學史。台北市:三民。
琴涵(2010)。慢讀 / 唐詩:愛上源自生活的美麗。台北市:夏日。
楊家駱編著(1995)。史記今譯。台北市:中正。
蔡坤鴻(譯) (1978)。S. Korner著。康德。台北市:長橋。
蔡宗河(2006)。教師課程立論初探。課程與教學季刊,9(4),79-100。new window
曹俊峰(2003)。康德美學導論。台北市:水牛。
張炎憲、曾秋美主編(2010)。花蓮鳳林二二八。台北市:台灣史料中心。
張培倫(譯) (1998)。C. Wand著。康德。台北市:立緒。
張嘉育(2007)。改進課程研究:爭議、問題與省思。課程與教學季刊,10(3), 63-74。new window
崔光宙(1992)。美感判斷發展研究。台北市:師大書苑。new window
崔光宙(1996)。音樂欣賞教學的理論與實施。載於黃政傑主編,音樂科教學法(二)(頁87-106)。台北市:師大書苑。
崔光宙(2000)。美學中人的概念及其教育內涵。載於崔光宙、林逢祺編,教育美學(頁3-12)。台北市:五南。
崔光宙(2005a)。康德崇高觀念的背景與內涵。原載於情意教育經典研讀會。2013年5月25日,取自http://faculty.ndhu.edu.tw/~shtang/classical/fruit/lecture/
20050622.htm
崔光宙(2005b)。康德對優美的分析:分析優美的脈絡與邏輯。原載於情意教育經典研讀會。2013年5月25日,取自http://faculty.ndhu.edu.tw/~shtang/classical/
fruit/lecture/20050928.htm
崔光宙(2007)。美感規準、藝術語言與美感教育。載於潘慧玲主編,追求美善的教育(頁279-292)。台北市:心理。
崔光宙(2008)。情緒轉化的心理機制---Sublime。載至崔光宙主編,美學與正向心理學的饗宴(頁41-66)。台北市:五南。
陳閔翔、洪仁進(2007)。追尋教學的藝術:從J. Dewey思想演藝教師角色與教學的美感特質。教育研究集刊,53(1),87-118。
馮朝霖(2000)。教育哲學專論。台北市:元照。
游麗卿(2010)。教室劇場的劇本是誰寫的:教學藝術實踐的評析。載於黃政傑主編,教學藝術(頁253-278)。台北市:五南。new window
歐用生(2004)。課程領導:議題與展望。臺北:高等教育。
歐用生(2006)。課程理論與實踐。台北市:學富。
歐用生(2010)。課程研究的新視野。台北市:師大書苑。
歐陽教(1973)。教育哲學緒論。台北市:文景。
楊深坑(1986)。柏拉圖美育思想研究。台北市:水牛。new window
楊深坑(1999)。知識形式與比較教育。台北市:楊智。new window
劉昌元(1994)。西方美學導論。台北市:聯經。new window
劉文潭(1967)。現代美學。台北市:商務。new window
劉玉玲(2010)。美學融入「青少年心理學」:敘說探究、藝術治療與服務學習的混合式教學。載於黃政傑主編,教學藝術(頁405-430)。台北市:五南。new window
劉斐如(2010)。探討「藝術統整課程」之教學藝術。載於黃政傑主編,教學藝術(頁353-377)。台北市:五南。new window
劉豐榮(1985)。艾斯納藝術教育思想研究。國立台灣師範大學美術學系碩士論文。未出版。new window
甄曉蘭(2004)。課程理論與實務:解構與重建。台北市:高等教育。
甄曉蘭(2007)。課程研究的趨勢與方法論問題。課程與教學季刊,10(3),49-62。new window
甄曉蘭、王立心(2012)。從中小學教科書發展評我國百年課程政策之演變。課程與教學季刊,15(4),73-100。new window
謝廣錚(2001)。英國1988年以降官方教育政策之研究:以新右派市場機制理論分析。國立台灣師範大學教育系碩士論文,未出版。
謝攸青(2011)。法國大革命時代藝術作品對人文教育的啟示:以〈馬拉之死〉與〈1808年五月三日〉為例。課程與教學季刊,14(3),181-198。new window
蘇永明(2000)。垂直多元與水平多元的思考模式。載於但昭偉、蘇永明主編,文化、多元文化與教育(頁133-179)。台北市:五南。
蘇永明(2006)。主體的爭論與教育。台北市:心理。
蘇永明(2008)。臺灣政治解嚴以來的較改趨勢與檢討。載於蘇永明、方永泉主編,解嚴以來臺灣教育改革的省思。台北市:學富。
蘇永明(2011)。杜威美學及其在教學美學的主張與蘊義。載於陳伯璋主編,課程美學(頁1-28)。台北市:五南。
龍應台(2009)。大江大海:一九四九。台北市:天下。
龔世芬、周淑卿(2006)。課程理論與實務的落差即期改善途徑。教育研究月刊,8(2),109-119。

二、英文部分
Apple, M. W.(1998). The Cultural and Commerce of the Textbook. In L. E. Beyer &; M. W. Apple (Eds), The Curriculum : Problems, Politics, and possibilities. NY : SUNY Press.
Apple, M. W. (2010). Fly and fly bottle: On Dwayne Huebner, the uses of language, and the nature of the curriculum field. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(1), 95-104.
Ball, V. K. (1965). The aesthetics of color: A review of fifty years of experimentation. The Journal of Aesthetic and Art Criticism, 23(4), 441-452.
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 (3rd ed.) (pp. 273-292). New York: Macmillan.
Beyer, L. E. (1995). Beyond the formal and the psychological: The arts and the social possibility. In W. Kohli (Ed.), Critical conversations in philosophy of education (pp. 258-277). New York: Routledge.
Black, M. (1958). Education as art and discipline. In I. Scheffler (Ed.), Philosophy and education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. (Original work published 1944).
Blocker, H. G. (2005). Kant for kids. Arts Education Policy Review, 107, 31-33.
Broudy, H. S. (1972). Enlightened cherishing: An Essay on aesthetic education. Urbanna &; Chicago: University of Illinions Press.
Broudy, H.S. (1988). Aesthetics and the Curriculum. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Contemporary curriculum discourses (pp. 332-342). Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
Bruner, J. (1985). Narrative and paradigmatic modes of knowing. In E. W. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and teaching the ways of knowing. Eight-fourth yearbook of NSSE (pp. 23-36). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bullough, E. (1957). Aesthetic: Lectures and essays. In E. M. Wilkinson (Ed.), Aesthetics: Lectures and essays. Standford University Press. (Original work published 1912).
Burke, E. (1990). A philosophical enquiry into the origin of our ideas of the sublime and beautiful. In A. Phillips (Ed.), A philosophical enquiry into the origin of our ideas of the sublime and beautiful. NY: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1757).
Carr, W. (2004).Philosophy and education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38 (1), 53-73.
Carnafa, A. (2007). Lessons of Solitude: The Awakening of Aesthetic Sensibility.
Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41 (1), 113-127.
Cladinin, D. J. &; Connelly, M. (2005). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 363-401). NY: Macmillan, .
Cladinin, D. J. &; Huber, J.(2002). Narrative inquiry: Toward understanding life’s artistry. Curriculum Inquiry, 32(2), 161-170.
Clement, R. D. &; Smith, S. W. (1968). Bullough’s perspective type reconsidered. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 2(4), 109-116.
Conle, C. (2000). Thesis as narrative or What is inquiry in narrative inquiry? Curriculum inquiry, 30 (2), 189-213.
Crawford, D. W. (1974).Kant’s aesthetic theory. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Davis, J. (1998). The dialectic of freedom . In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), The passionate mind of Maxine Greene:」I am…not yet」 (pp. 39-45). London: Falmar .
Dewey, J. (1980). Art as experience. NY: Penguin. (Original work published 1934).
Dickie, G. (1961). Discussion: Bullough and the concept of psychical distance. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 22(2), 233-238.
Edel, A. (1998). Analytic philosophy of education at the crossroad. In P. Hirst &; P. White (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Major themes in the analytic tradition (Vol.1) (pp. 39-60). London: Rouledge. (Original work published 1973)
Egan, K. &; Judson, G. (2008). Values and imagination in teaching: With a special focus on social studies. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41(2), 126-140.
Eisner, E.W. (1985). Aesthetic modes of knowing. In E. W. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and teaching the ways of knowing. Eight-fourth yearbook of NSSE(pp. 23-36). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Eisner, E. W. (1992). Curriculum ideology. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum(pp. 302-326). New York: Macmillan.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination(3rd ed.). New York: Macmillian.
Eisner, E. W. &; Powell, K. (2002). Art in science?. Curriculum Inquiry, 32(2), 131-160.
Eisner, E. W. (2005). Reimagining schools: The selected works of Elliot W. Eisner. New York: Routledge Press.
Fenner, D.E. (2003). Aesthetic experience and aesthetic analysis. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 37(1), 40-53.
Flinders, D. J. (1987). What teachers learn from teaching: Educational criticism of instructional adaptation. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Stanford University, California.
Garrison, J. (1997). Dewey and Eros: Wisdom and desire in the art of teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gonzalez, A. M. (2011). Kant’s philosophy of education: Between relational and systemic approaches. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 45(3), 433-454.
Goldthwait, J. T. (1960). Translator’s introduction. In I. Kant, Observations on the feeling of the beautiful and sublime (J. T. Goldthwait Trans.)(pp. 1-39). Los Angeles: University of California Press.(Original work published 1764)
Goodlad, J. &; Su, Z. (1992). Organnization of the curriculum. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 327-344). NY: Macmillan.
Greene, M. (1973). Teacher as Stranger: Educational Philosophy for the Modern Age. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of Learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination-Essays on Education, the Arts, and Social Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Press.
Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a Blue Guitar: The Lincoln Center Institute lectures on aesthetic education. New York: Teachers College press.
Grierson, E. (2011). Art and creativity in global economies of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(4), 336-350.
Hansen, D. T. (2002). Dewey’s conception of envirnment for teaching and learning. Curriculum Inquiry, 32(3), 267-280.
Hansen, D. T. (2004). A poetics of teaching. Educational Theory, 54 (2), 119-142.
Hansen, D. T., Burdick-Shepherd, C., &; Obelleiro, G. (2009). Education, value, and valuing in cosmopolitan perspectives. Curriculum Inquiry, 39(5), 587-612.
Hellstrom, H. G. (2011). Aesthetic creativity: Insights from classical literary theory on creative learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(4), 323-335.
Hirst, P. H. (1974). Knowledge and the curriculum. London: Routedge &; Kegan Paul.
Hirst, P. H. &; Peters, R. S. (1998). Education and philosophy. In P. Hirst and P.White (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Major themes in the analytic tradition (Vol.1) (pp. 27-38). London: Rouledge. (Original work published 1970)
Hullis, E. C. (2009). On being Socratic philosophy instructor. Teaching Philosophy, 32(4) , 345-359.
Kant, I. (1959). What is Enlightment?. In I. Kant, Foundations of the metaphysics of marals and, what is Enlightment? (L. W. Beck Trans) (2rd ed) (pp. 83-90). New York: Macmillan. (Original work published 1784)
Kant, I. (1928). The critique of judgement (J. C. Meredith, Trans.). Oxford: Clarendon. (Original work published 1790)
Kant, I. (1960). Observations on the feeling of the beautiful and sublime (J. T. Goldthwait, Trans.). Los Angeles: University of California Press.(Original work published 1764)
Kemal, S. (1992). Kant’s aesthetic theory: An introduction. London: Macmillan.
Knox, I. (1936). The aesthetic theories of Kant, Hegel, and Schopenhauer. NJ: Humanities Press.
Koopman, C. (2005). Art as fulfillment: On the justification of education in the arts. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 53(1), 85-97.
L』hote, C. (2012). Philosophy in the wild: An introductory exercise. Teaching Philosophy, 35(3), 263-274.
Lloyd, D. (1989). Kant’s examples. Representation, 28, 34-54.
Makkai, K. (2009). Kant on recognizing beauty. European Journal of Philosophy, 18(3), 385-413.
McClosky, M. A. (1987). Kant’s Aesthetics. The Macmillan Press.
Mcdonald, J. B. (1971).Cruuiculum theory. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualist. Berkeley (pp. 5-14), CA: McCutchan.
McEwan, H. (2003). The Primitive Artist and The Lover: Two Stories of The Origins of teaching. Education Theory, 53(4), 421-436.
McEwan, H. (2011). A portrait of the teacher as friend and artist: The example of Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(5), 508-520.
McMahon, J. (2011). Aesthetic autonomy and praxis: Art and language in Adorno and Habermas. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 19(2), 155-175.
Miller, J. L. (2010). Curriculum as a consciousness of possibilities. Curriculum Inquiry, 40(1), 125-142.
Ornstein, A. C. (1995). Philosophy as a basis for curriculum decisions. In A. C. Ornstein &; L. S. Behar (Eds.), Contemporary issues in curriculum (pp.10-17). Baston: Allyn &; Bacon.
Peters, R. S. (1966). Ethics and Education. London: George Allen &; Unwin.
Pinar, E. F. (1978). The reconceptualization of curriculum studies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 10(3), 205-214.
Phillips, M. (1997). All must have prizes. London: Manner Book.
Reimer, B. (1998). What knowledge is of most worth in the arts? In P. Hirst &; P. White (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Major theme in the analytic tradition (Vol.4) (pp.145-170). London: Routledge. (Original work published 1996)
Santayana, G. (2007). The Sense of Beauty: Being the Outlines of Aesthetic Theory. Lightning Source Inc. (Original work published 1896)
Saxena, S. K. (1978). The aesthetic attitude. Philosophy East and West, 28(1), 81-90.
Sear, J. T. (1992). The second wave of curriculum theorizing: Labyrinths, orthodoxies, and other legacies of the glass bead game. Theory into Practice, 31(3), 210-218.
Scheffler, I. (1998). The concept of teaching. In P. Hirst &; P. White (Eds.), Philosophy of education: Major theme in the analytic tradition (Vol.4) (pp.259-267). London: Routledge. (Original work published 1968)
Schiller, F. (1965). On the aesthetics educatuon of man ( R. Snell, Trans). New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Company. (Original work published 1794)
Sharkey, J. (2004). Lives stories don’t tell: Exploring the untold in autobiographies. Curriculum Inquiry, 34(3), 495-512.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundation of new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Simpson, D. J., Jackson, M. J. B., &; Aycock, J. C. (2005). John Dewey and the art of teaching: Toward reflective and imaginative pratice. London: Sage.
Suissa, J. (2007). Teaching and Doing Philosophy of Education: The Question of Style. School of Educational Foundations and Policy Studies: Research Seminar,
IOE, University of London.
Sullivan, A. &; McCrary, A. B. (2002).The Aesthetics of a Marine Biologist’s Engagement with her work. Curriculum Inquiry, 32(3), 357-366.
Tauber, Z. (2006). Aesthetic education for morality: Schiller and Kant. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 40(3), 22-47.
Toom, A. (2012). Considering the artistry and epistemology of tacit knowledge and knowing. Educational Theory, 62(6), 621-640.
Townsend, D. (1997). An Introduction to aesthetics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Uhrmacher, P. B. (2009). Toward a theory of aesthetic learning experience. Curriculum Inquiry, 39(5), 613-636.
Vallance, E. (1985). Ways of Knowing and Curricular Concepts: Implications for Program Planning. In E. W. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and teaching the ways of knowing. Eight-fourth yearbook of NSSE (pp.199-217). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vallance, E. (1991). Aesthetic inquiry: Art criticism. In E. C. Short (Ed.), Forms of curriculum inquiry (pp. 155-172). Albany: University of New York Press.
van Manen, M. (1982). Phenomenological Pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 12 (3), 283-299.
Weber, B. (2011). Childhood, philosophy and play: Friedrich Schiller and interface between reason, passion and sensation. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 45(2), 236-250.
Wilkinson, E. M.(1957). Introduction. In E. M. Wilkinson (Ed.), Aesthetics (pp.xvii-xliii). Standford University Press.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE