:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:大學女性主義教室裡的知識學習、經驗敘說與主體建構
作者:張佳琳 引用關係
作者(外文):Chang, Chia-Lin
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:卯靜儒
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2017
主題關鍵詞:女性主義教育學女性主義教室敘事課程高教課室研究課程經驗gender coursesfeminist classroomnarratives in the classroomgender researchcurriculum experiences
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:14
我國性別研究主要受到國外女性主義論述直接且深遠地影響,而挖掘台灣性別教育現象、問題與特色,累積生產在地的女性主義理論與實證研究,實屬重要。本研究以女性主義教育學為啟發,融合研究者自身的教學經驗,欲瞭解大學生在女性主義教室中學習性別知識之經驗、學生主體敘說及實踐改變之可能。意圖揭露學生學習之動態歷程與多元複雜之課室脈絡,理解高等教育場域性別課程之真實存在,累積更多高教課程實踐之實徵研究,反思高教性別課程的發展。
本研究探討面向聚焦於「知識學習」、「經驗敘說」與「主體建構」三大軸線,主要研究問題如下:
一、探究女性主義教室學生的知識學習,討論認識方法及影響知識學習之問題。
二、探討女性主義教室學生於關係中學習,從互動、對話及經驗敘說所產生學習上的意義。
三、探究學生在知識學習、經驗敘說之主體建構,從個人化意義及互為主體的理解中,改變與實踐行動之可能。
本研究於田野學校(化名「自由大學」)歷經一學年教授性別通識課程,從四門女性主義教室(四門課室均各為18週),透過學生學習檔案文件分析、深度訪談法及課室觀察進行研究。其中深度訪談跨班總計訪談35位研究參與者(女男比為1.5:1)。
本研究發現在大學女性主義教室裡,令學生「有感」的故事,通常是具有真誠的主體,在所營造具平等關係及安全信任之情境,引發學生自我敘說。故以生命故事與對話設計,引發參與者共感,進而呼喚出敘說。研究發現學生之敘說,有的學生聚焦在意見、觀點的不同,形成一種「說意見」的言說表現,也作為一種課室互動策略。此外,學生可能將差異經驗進入至一種詮釋學習,去理解產生同理,或進而解釋分析個人之性別處境的脈絡,從而發掘社會性別問題、看見性別權力關係,將個人與社會連結,深化自我的理解、思考知識對自我的關聯、價值及意義。從敘說進行知識學習,產生改變的動力與反思社會公平,且對學生日後經驗發展產生多元改變。學生之性別意識發展關鍵是覺知及對權力關係、個體位置性的反思,學生反思自身所處的主體位置、感受處境、建構意義則引發個人能動性。最後本研究亦提出研究與教學之省思,並說明自我揭露風險課題及課室敘說可能的侷限。
Since the gender researches in Taiwan are affected deeply and directly by foreign feminist theories, it is truly important to produce the feminist theories and empirical researches which involve the pedagogical phenomenon, the educational issues and indigenous features derived from Taiwan. Therefore, this study, which is based on feminist pedagogy and the teaching experiences of the researcher as an instructor, is an empirical research on the college course to realize the reality in the feminist classroom and examine the gender course in universities.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the process of knowledge learning, personal narrative and subject construction of those students in the feminist classroom. To comprehend the reality of the gender course in universities, this study exposed the multiple and complicated context in the feminist classroom. This study mainly focused on the three aspects: knowledge learning, personal narrative and subject construction. The research questions are as followed.
1. Different ways of learning are discussed to research into the process of knowledge learning of the students in the feminist classroom.
2. The study investigated how the students in the feminist classroom learned from the interactions, conversations and personal narratives among them.
3. The inquiry elicited the subject which is constructed from the knowledge learning and personal narratives of the students in the feminist classroom. From the true understanding on the basis of subject with each other, could the students possibly utilize the knowledge to create and put into practice?
The field research was conducted in the general gender curriculum in a university under the name of Liberty University for one year, which included four classes, each for eighteen weeks long. The research methods included portfolio analysis, depth interview and classroom observation. As to the depth interview, thirty-five students were interviewed (the ratio of female to male is 1.5 to 1).
In conclusion, the “touching” stories were told by the sincere storytellers in the classroom where members had sense of security and trust with each other, which initiates the narratives of the narrator’s life stories and the sympathy of participants and then those participants begin their narratives. When students narrated in class, some of them considered the dialogue of differences to be the differences of opinions or viewpoints. Furthermore, some viewed the differences as the differences of life experiences, and learned from others’ narratives in the classroom, which may affect their development in days to come and make all the difference. The experiences of narratives in the classroom would let students reflect on the power relationship and their situation where they are. Being aware of where they are, students are willing to start their narratives and to some extent it may initiate their motivation for learning. Lastly, this study provides the reflections on the research and teaching, and the limitations of the risk of self-disclosure and narratives in the classroom.
參考文獻
一、中文
王孝勇(2007)。女性主義立場論的主體與權力問題。政治與社會哲學評論,21,89 -146 。
王明珂(1996)。誰的歷史:自傳、傳記與口述歷史的社會記憶本質。思與言,34(3),147-184。new window
王勇智、鄧明宇(譯)(2003)。C. K. Riessman著。敘說分析(Narrative analysis)。臺北市:五南。
卯靜儒(2004)。重構女性教師的主体性研究─女性主義研究觀點的探索。載於潘慧玲(主編),教育研究方法論:觀點與方法(頁319-338)。臺北市:心理。
卯靜儒(2004)。理論化女性教師的性別意識與認同建構過程。通識教育,11:1-2。
卯靜儒、楊滿玉、張宜煌(譯)(2006)。Thayer-Bacon & S.Bacon著。教育的應用哲學:培育教室裡的民主社群。臺北市:學富文化。
成令方、蔡麗玲、張盈堃(2009)。拆解臺灣的父權違建。發表於第三屆亞太地區性別平等教育論壇。
成虹飛(2007)。行動與敘說研究的個人學習筆記。行動研究在台灣-2007年。
吳慎慎(2006)。藝術人的終身學習:生命故事敘說的教學實踐。藝術教育研究,12:1-30。new window
呂美慧(2008)。M. Foucault 與D. E. Smith 論述分析之比較及其對教育研究之啟示,臺北市立教育大學學報,39(2):71-104new window
李金鳳、劉健芝(譯)(1999)。Keith W.Hoskin著。教育與學科規訓制度的緣起:意想不到的逆轉。載於劉健芝等(主編),學科,知識,權力(頁43-84)。北京:生活讀書,新知三聯書店。
李淑君(2017)。從成人教育到大學體制:女性主義教育模式的嘗試與實踐。台灣社會學刊,6,16-23。
李嘉齡(2002)。教育研究中的女性發聲:以碩博士論文為例。人文與社會科學教學通訊,12(5),91-110。
汪文聖(2001)。現象學與科學哲學。臺北市:五南。new window
林美珠(2000)。敘事研究:從生命故事出發。輔導季刊,36(4),27-34頁。社會田野中的實踐者研討會:第二冊。臺北市:蘆荻社區大學。new window
林香君(2015)。在互為主體性中建構主體性:以批判實踐取向敘說與對話為方法的教學實踐。教育實踐與研究,28(2),181-212。new window
林香君(2015)。置身處境、在地實踐:走一條主體性的專業發展道路。應用心理研究,63(12),51-104。new window
林麗珊(2014)。女性主義與性別關係。臺北市:五南。
邱麗珍(2000)。女性雜誌中美容美體論述的解構。未出版,國立台灣師範大學碩士論文,臺北市。
柯倩婷(譯)(2004)。Mary Talbot著。語言與社會性別導論。武昌市:華中師範大學出版社。
洪久賢(2001)。教師性別教育專業成長之分析研究。師大學報:教育類,46(2),213-231。new window
胡紹嘉(2008)。敘事、自我與認同:從文本考察到課程探究。臺北市:秀威資訊科技。
夏傳位(譯)(1997)。Clough, Patricia Ticineto著。女性主義思想-慾望、權力及學術論述。臺北市:巨流。
孫文菁(2009)。女性主義教育學對我國高等教育改革的啟示。浙江海洋學院學報,26(4)。
翁秀琪(1998)。批判語言學、在地權力觀和新聞文本分析:宋楚瑜辭官事件中李宋會的新聞分析。新聞學研究,57,91-126。new window
張君玫(譯)(2006)。Spivak Gayatri Chakravorty著。後殖民理性批判:邁向消逝當下的歷史。臺北市:群學。
張宏輝(1992)。結構化論旗手:季登斯,載於葉啟政(主編),當代社會思想巨擘,臺北市:正中。
張華蓀(2005)。蝸行20 年:女性主義地理學在臺灣的發展。地理學報,(42),25-46。new window
張學謙(2005)。從『中國化』到『多元化』的台灣語文政策:語言生態的觀點。載於臺北市立教育大學(主編),中華文化與台灣本土化研討會」論文集(頁155-180)。臺北市:臺北市立教育大學。
許芳懿(2006)。課程概念重建的發展與爭議-兼論其在課程理解典範之重要性。師大學報,51(2),195-217。new window
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北市:五南。new window
陳素秋(2015)。以學生抗拒作為性別教育資源:結構vs.能動性教學模式之實踐。載於彰化師範大學輔諮系(主編),高教工作者生活世界的反映與回顧:性別運動與學術勞動。彰化:國立彰化師範大學教育學院與輔諮系。
曾漢塘、林季薇(譯)(2000)。Noddings, N.著。教育哲學。臺北市:弘智。
游美惠(2003)。女性主義方法論。兩性平等教育季刊,23,112-115頁。
游美惠(2004)。從方法論的要求到女性主義方法論的追求-檢視教育研究期刊中的性別論述。載於潘慧玲(主編),教育研究方法論:觀點與方法(頁371-400)。臺北市:心理。
游美惠、黃馨慧、潘慧玲、謝小岑(2004)。從性別盲到性別敏感的教育研究:以婦女成人教育與性教育研究的文獻回顧為例。通識教育季刊,11(1,2),1-38。
游家政(2005)。後現代課程理論的探究取向和特性。載於游家政、莊梅枝(主編),後現代課程:實踐與評鑑(頁5-16)。臺北市:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
湯仁燕(2015)。邁向以學生為主體的轉化教學。臺灣教育評論月刊,4(5),142-144。
甯應斌(1997)。女性主義立場論的一些問題。刊於國科會哲學學門專題計畫研究成果發表會。
黃秀香(2001)。婦女教育現況與問題探討。社教雙月刊,7。
黃瑞祺(2003)。後學新論。臺北市:左岸文化。
黃鈺樺(2004)女性主義觀點在社區大學婦女教育之應用。載於2004兩岸大學經營理念與運作實務研討會論文集。臺北市:中華民國社區教育學會。
楊幸真(2002)。由女性主義的觀點探究女性研究生在課堂裡沉默的真相,載於謝臥龍(主編),性別平等教育-探究與實踐(頁441-484)。臺北市:五南。
楊幸真(2006)。女性主義教室與校園生活:敘說女性主義教師實踐女性主義教育學之困境與抗拒,論文發表於淡江大學教育學院舉辦之「教育改革微觀分析國際學術研討會」,臺北市市。new window
楊幸真(2010)。校園生活與性別:性別學習與教學實踐。臺北市:巨流。new window
楊幸真(2010)。探究女性主義教師關懷倫理與教學實踐策略。臺東大學教育學報,21(2),117-145。new window
楊深坑(1998)。理論詮釋與實踐:教育學方法論論文集。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
楊雅婷譯(2009)性別與女性研究手冊。臺北市:韋伯文化。
劉美慧(2009)。多元文化教育名著導讀。臺北市:學富文化。
劉淑雯、蔡易儒(2013)。大學通識課程以「性別與習俗」為主題的性別議題教學。性別平等教育季刊,63,66-73。
歐素汝(譯)(2000)。Stewart, D. W. & Shamdasani, P. N.著。焦點團體:理論與實務。臺北市:弘智。
潘才學(2015)。大學生參與性別教育經驗和性別意識關係研究:以逢甲大學修習性別教育相關課程為例。學生事務與輔導,54:3,18-34。
潘慧玲(1999)。教育學發展的女性主義觀點:女性主義教育學初探。載於臺灣師範大學(主編),教育科學的國際化與本土化。臺北市:揚智。
潘慧玲、梁文蓁、陳宜宣(2000)。台灣近十年教育領導碩博士論文分析:女性主義的觀點。婦女與兩性學刊,(11),151-190。new window
鄭夙芬(2005)。焦點團體研究法的理論與應用。選舉研究,12(1),211-239。new window
鄭明長(1999)。教學創新-從改變教室言談型態做起。載於高雄師範大學(主編),新世紀中小學課程改革與創新教學學術研究論文彙編,高雄市:國立高雄師範大學。
謝小岑(1998)。性別與教育期望。婦女與兩性學刊,9期,205-231頁。
謝小岑(譯)(1999)。Sophia Phoca著。後女性主義。臺北市:立緒文化。
謝小岑、楊佳羚(1999)。教育研究中的性別論述:十年來台灣性別與教育的文獻回顧。論文發表於「邁向21 世紀兩性平等教育國內學術研討會」。高雄:高雄醫學大學兩性研究中心。
謝小芩(1995)。教育:從父權的複製到女性的解放。載於劉毓秀(主編),臺灣婦女處境白皮書(頁182-218)。臺北市:時報文化。
謝小芩(2000)。臺灣的性別教育:回顧與前瞻。載於張建成(主編),多元文化教育:我們的課題與別人的經驗(頁103-122)。臺北市:師大書苑。
簡成熙(2003)。女性主義的教育哲學。載於邱兆偉(主編),當代教育哲學(頁209-246)。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
蘇玉欣 (2011)。營造關懷的情境,締造師生雙贏的可能性-Noddings關懷倫理學初探。網路社會學通訊期刊,94,引自http://society.nhu.edu.tw/e-j/94/a10.htm。
蘇芊玲(2001)。教什麼?怎麼教?-通識課程「性別文化研究」的內涵與教學。通識教育季刊,8(2),1-31。

二、西文
Alcoff, L.(1988). Cultural feminism versus post-structuralism: The identity crisis in feminist theory. Signs, 13, 405-436.
Beane,J.A.,&Apple,M.W.(2007).The case for democratic school.InM.W. Apple,&J.A. Beane l(Eds), Democratic school-Lessons in powerful education(pp.1-29) NH: Heinemann.
Beyer, A. M. (2008). The Beauty of Focus Groups, Marketing Matters, GCI, 32-33.
Calderhead, J., & Miller, E. (1986). The integration of subject matter knowledge in studentteachers'classroom practice . Research Monograph, School of Education, University of Lancaster.
Carole Leathwood(2006). Gender,equity and the discourse of the independent learner in higher education. Higher Education,52: 611–633.
Chambliss,J.M.&Calfee,R.C.(1998).Textbooks for learning. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell.ee
Cherryholmes, C. H. (1988). Power and criticism : Poststructural investigations in education. NY. : Teachers College.
Christine Etherington Wright(2009). Gender, Professions and Discourse:Early Twentieth-Century Women's Autobiography.NT: New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
Clark, M. C.(2006).“He hits me and my world shatters…”: How could adult education possibly make a difference here? In Merriam S. B.,. Courtenay B. C, & R.Cervero (Eds.). Global issues and adult education: Perspectives from Latin America, Southern Africa, and the United States(pp.61-63). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cook, Judith A., & Fonow, Mary M. (1986). Knowledge and Women's Interests: Issues ofEpistemology and Methodology in Feminist Sociological Research. SociologicalInquiry, 56(2) : 611–633.
David Comer Kidd&*Emanuele Castano(2013)Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of Mind. Science 18 Oct 2013:Vol. 342, Issue 6156, pp. 377-380.DOI: 10.1126/science.1239918
Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3(1). Available http:// seammonkey. ed.asu.edu/epaa.
Eichler, M. (1989). Nonsexist Research Methods. Boston. MA: Allen & Unwin.
Elkind, D. (1995). School and family in the postmodern world. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(1), 8-14.
Epstein, J. L., Coates, L., Salinas, K. C., Sanders, M. G., & Simon, B. S. (1997). School, family, and community partnerships: Your handbook for action.
Ericsson K. & Simon H.A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, Revised Edition. Cambridge. MA:MIT Press.
Ericsson K. & Simon H.A. (1993). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, Revised Edition. Cambridge:MIT Press.
Fisher, B. M. (2001). No angel in the classroom - Teaching through feminist discourse. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
Flannery & Hayes(eds)(2000).Women as learners. San Francisco:Jossey-bass.
Foucault,M.(1972).The archaeology of knowledge and discourse on language. New York Pantheon.
Gestwicki, C. (2000). Home, school, and community relations. Albany, NY: Delmar.
Gill Kirkup(2010).Gendered knowledge production in universities in a web 2.0 world.In Shirley Booth&Sara Goodman&Gill Kirkup (Eds.), Gender issues in learning and working with information technology : social constructs and cultural contexts(pp.231-243). New York : Hershey& PA : Information Science Reference.
Gore, Jennifer. (1993). The struggle for pedagogies: Critical and feminist discourse as regimes of truth. New York: Routledge.
Griffith, A. (1995). Coordinating family and school: Mothering for schooling. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 3(1). Available http:// seammonkey. ed. asu.edu/epaa.
Hall, R.M. and Sandler, B.R. (1984). Out of the classroom: A chilly campus climate for women? Washington: Association of American Colleges.
Hall, R.M.& Sandler, B.R. (1982).The classroom climate: A chilly one for women? Washington: Association of American Colleges.
Harding, Sandra (1987). Feminism & Methodology: Social Science Issues. Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
Joan Swann(2003). Schooled language: language and gender in educational settings.In Janet Holmes & Miriam Meyerhoff(Eds.), Handbook of Language and Gender(pp.624-644). Malden, MA : Blackwell.
Judy S.Richardson, Raymond F.Mogan, Charlene E.Fleener (2011).Reading to learn in the content areas. CA: Thomson Higher Education.
Julie Thompson Klein(1996).Crossing boundaries: knowledge, disciplinarities, and interdisciplinarities. Publisher: University of Virginia Press
Liao(2001).Adult learning in social action: homemakers’union and foundation (huf) of Taiwan.Northern illinois university.
Madeleine Arnot(2006). Gender voices in the classroom. In Christine Skelton&Becky Francis&Lisa Smulyan (Eds.), The Sage handbook of gender and education(pp.407-421). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage Publications.
Maher 及 Tetreault(2001).The Feminis Classroom: Dynamics of Gender, Race, and Privilege.
Marie-Pierre Moreau&Carole Leathwood(2006) Graduates’ employment and
Masher,F.A.(1987).Toward a richer theory of feminist pedagogy:A comparison of“liberation”and “gender” models for teaching and learning. Journal of Education,169(3),91-100.
McCarthy, E. D. (1996). Knowledge as cultural the new sociology of knowledge. N. Y. :Routledge.
Merton R. (1968) Social Theory andSocial Structure: Part One on Theoretical Sociology: Five Essays Old and New. New York: Free Press.
Meyer, K.A. (2010). A study of online discourse at the chronicle of higher education. Innovative Higher Education, 35(3).
Michaelson,G. and Pohl,M.(2001).Gender in email-based co-operative problem-solving’,inE.Green and A.Adam(eds),Virtual Gender: London: Routledge.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2ⁿd ed.). Thounsand Oaks,CA: Sage.
Noddings ,N(1992).Gender and curriculum. In Jackson Ed. Handbook of research on curriculum. pp659-684, A project of the American Educational Research Association 1992.
Noddings, N. (2002). Educating Moral People-A Caring Alternative To Character Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Noddings, N. (2007).Philosophy of Education. Boulder, Colorado :Westview Press.
Noddings, N.(1992). The Challenge to Care in Schools:An Alternative Approach to Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Noddings, N.(2003).Caring: a Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education (2nd ed.). Berkeley:University of California Press.
Noddings, N.(2005).Educating Citizens for Global Awareness. New York: Teachers College Press.
Noddings,N. (2008).Caring and Moral Education, Handbook of Moral and Character Education(pp161-174). New York: Routledge Press.
Pascarella, E.T& P.T. Terenzini (2005) .How College Affects Students (Vol.2): A Third decade of research. San Grncisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Pascarella, E.T., Whitt, E.J., Edison, M.I., Nora, A., Hagedorn, L.S., Yeager, P.M., and Terenzini, P.T. (1997). Women’s perception of a “chilly climate” and their cognitive outcomes during the first year of college. Journal of College Student Development,38(2): 109-110.
Pinar,W.F.(1978).The reconceptionalization of curriculum studies.Journal of Curriculum studies,10(3),205-214
Popkewitz,T.S(2003).Governing the child and pedagogicalization oh the parent:A historical excursus into the present.In M.N.Bloch, K.Holmlund,I.Moqvist, &T.S.Popkewitz(Eds), Governing children,families and education(pp.35-61)Macmillan:Palgrave.
Popkewitz2003Popkewitz,T.S(1998).The sociology knowledge and the sociology of education:Michel Foucault and critical tradition.In C.A.Torres,&T.R.Mitchell(Eds),Sociology of education-Emerging perspectives(pp.47-89).New York:State University of New York:State Press.
Reiharz, S. (1992). Feminist Methods in Social Rresearch. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reinharz,S.(1992).The principles of feminist research: A matter of debate.In C.Kramarae& D.Spender (Eds),The knowledge preduction:Generations of feminist scholarship (pp.423-437).New York:Teacher College Press.
Sarah J. Mann(2008)Study, power and the university. New York : McGraw Hill. Sax, L.J., Bryant, A..N., and Harper, C.E. (2005) The differential effects of student-faculty interaction on college outcomes for women and men. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6): 642-659.
Sarah J.Mann(2001). Alternative Perspectives on the Student Experience:alienation and engagement. Studies in Higher Education,26(1),7-19.
Saville T. Roike&Muriel(1985). The Place of Silenceinan In tegrated Theory of Communication.Norwood: Ablex.
Sax, L.J., Bryant, A..N., and Harper, C.E. (2005). The differential effects of student-faculty interaction on college outcomes for women and men. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6): 642-659.
Serex, C.P. and B.K. Townsend (1999). Student perceptions of chilling practices in sex-atypical majors. Research in Higher Education, 40(5): 527-538.
Shrewsbury, C. M.(1987). What is feminist pedagogy. Women's Studies Quarterly,15(3-4), 6-14.
Stanely, Liz (1990). Feminist Praxis-Research, Theory and Epistemology in Feminist sociology . London: Routledge.
Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1979). Feminist Research, Feminist Consciousness and Experiences of Sexism. In Women’s Studies International Quarterly, 2:359-74.
Stanley, L. & Wise, S. (1983). Breaking Out: Feminist Consciousness and Feminist Research. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Stanley, L. (1984). How the Social Science Research Press Discriminates Against Women. In Sandra Acker and David Warren Piper (Eds.), Is Higher Education Fair to Women ? (pp.189-209). London: Nelson.
Stanley, L. (1997). Methodology Matters!In V. Robinson and D. Richardson(Eds.), Introducing Women’s Studies. (pp.199-219). New York: New York University Press.
Sullivan,P.(2002).”It’seasier to be yourself when you are invisible”:Female college students discuss their online classroom experiences’, Innovative Higher Education,27(2).the discourse of employability:a critical analysis.Journal of Education and Work,19(4)pp. 305–324.
Thomas D.R. (2000) .Qualitative DataAnalysis: Using A General Inductive Approach. Health Research Methods Advisory Service, Department of Community Health University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Tiisdell,E.J.(1996).Feminist pedagogy and adult learning: Underlying theory and emancipatory practice. Adult Education Research Conference.No.37.Tampa:University of South Florida.
Tiisdell,E.J.(1998). Poststructural feminist pedagogies:The possibilities and limitations of feminist emancipatory adult learning theory and practice. Adult Education Quarterly ,48(3),139-156.
Tong,R.P(1998).Feminist Thought : A more Comprehensive Introduction.Boulder,CO:Westview Press..
Townsend, L. F. & Hanson, C. (2001). The self and narrative : A conversation on education biography. Educational Studies, 32(1), 38-52.
Wormeli, R. (2004). Summarization in any subject: 50 techniques to improve student learning.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE