:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:再概念化:課程改革的邏輯與實踐
書刊名:課程研究
作者:許芳懿
作者(外文):Hsu, Fang-yi
出版日期:2006
卷期:1:2
頁次:頁47-67
主題關鍵詞:再概念化課程改革九年一貫課程ReconceptualizationCurriculum reformGrades 1st-9th integrative curriculum
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(2) 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:262
  • 點閱點閱:87
「再概念化」起源自1970年代的再概念化運動,由William Pinar所發起。「再概念化」本身意喻著「不斷的重新定義」,代表一種批判、省思與重定位。我國的九年一貫課程改革立意在學習者中心,發展結果卻偏向菁英主義,顯示其邏輯與實踐存有矛盾。本文針對我國當前課程改革進行檢視,檢視角度除蘊含再概念化的歷史變化觀點外,更擷取「再概念化」內在的批判精神來檢驗九年一貫課程,針對統整、基本能力、鬆綁解構、國家教育目標等結構性問題提出質疑,同時亦探討績效責任、社會公平、倫理向度、文化同質性、工具理性問題,文末並提出省思與結論。
“Reconceptualization” stemmed from the “reconceptualization movement” initiated by Pinar in 1970s.“Reconceptualization” means “constant redefinition” which represents criticism, reflection and re-focus. Curriculum reform lately in Taiwan focused on learner-centered, but it was inclined to elitism finally. That represents the relation between the logic and practice of curriculum reform was contradictory mutually. The article was aimed to review the reform of grades 1st–9th integrative curriculum lately in Taiwan. It was not only from the viewpoints of the history of reconceptualizaton, but includes the inner essence of criticism. The structural problems of integration, basic ability, deconstruction and the aims of country education were suspicious. Simultaneously, the accountability, social justice, ethic, cultural homogeneity, instrumental rationality were explored. Finally, the reflection and conclusion were suggested.
期刊論文
1.許芳懿(2003)。九年一貫課程哲學意涵之可能性分析。國民教育研究集刊,11,131-148。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.蘇永明(2002)。九年一貫課程的現代性批判與後現代思考。教育研究月刊,102,13-20。  延伸查詢new window
3.Pinar, W. F.(1978)。Notes on the curriculum field 1978。Educational Researcher,7(8),5-12。  new window
4.Pinar, W.(1979)。What is the reconceptualization?。Journal of Curriculum Theorizing,1(1),93-104。  new window
5.Pinar, W.(1984)。Death in a tenured position。Curriculum Perspectives,4(1),74-76。  new window
6.Pinar, W.(1982)。Feminist curriculum theory: Notes on the American field 1982。The Journal of Educational Thought,16(3),217-224。  new window
7.陳伯璋、薛曉華(20011200)。全球在地化的理念與教育發展的趨勢分析。理論與政策,15(4)=60,49-70。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.陳伯璋(19830600)。課程研究的「第三勢力」:美國「再概念化」學派課程理論的評介。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所集刊,25,179-226。  延伸查詢new window
9.陳伯璋(2002)。後現代與臺灣九年一貫課程改革。教育研究月刊,102,5-12。  延伸查詢new window
10.陳伯璋(19990100)。九年一貫新課程綱要修訂的背景及內涵。教育研究資訊,7(1),1-13。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.Huebner, D.(1976)。The moribund curriculum field: Its wake and our work。Curriculum Inquiry,6(2),153-176。  new window
12.方德隆(20010400)。學校本位課程發展的理論基礎。課程與教學,4(2),1-24+153。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.吳武典(20050300)。臺灣教育改革的經驗與分析--以九年一貫課程和多元入學方案為例。當代教育研究季刊,13(1),35-68。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.方德隆(2002)。「基本能力、統整課程」:課程改革政策的理想與實際。「教育改革政策與實務的對話」研討會,高雄市政府教育局、高雄市教育學會、國立高雄師範大學教育學院教育學系合辦 。高雄。  延伸查詢new window
2.莊勝義(2002)。「教育鬆綁、教改解套」:臺灣自解嚴以來教育改革之政策分析。「教育改革政策與實務的對話」研討會,高雄市政府教育局、高雄市教育學會、國立高雄師範大學教育學院教育學系合辦 。高雄。  延伸查詢new window
3.方德隆(1999)。九年一貫課程基本理念與內涵。國民中小學課程教學研討會,國立高雄師範大學主辦 。高雄。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Pinar, W.(1988)。Contemporary curriculum discourse。Scottsdale, AZ:Gorsuch Scarisbrick。  new window
2.Popkewitz, T. S.(1991)。A political sociology of educational reform。New York:Teachers College of Columbia University。  new window
3.Pinar, W. F.(1975)。Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists。Berkeley, California:McCutchan。  new window
4.Schubert, William H.(1986)。Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility。New York:Macmillan Publishing Company。  new window
5.行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。台北:行政院教育改革審議委員會。  延伸查詢new window
6.Pinar, William F.、Reynolds, William M.、Slattery, Patrick、Taubman, Peter M.(1995)。Understanding curriculum: An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourses。Peter Lang。  new window
7.甄曉蘭(2004)。課程理論與實務:解構與重建。臺北市:高等教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
8.Pinar, W. F.(2004)。What is curriculum theory?。Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
單篇論文
1.李遠哲(2004)。關於教育改革的一些省思,http://www.sinica.edu.tw/as/ytlee/lee-edu.pdf。  延伸查詢new window
2.Schwab, J. J.(1970)。The practical: A language for curriculum,Washington, DC:National Educational Association。  new window
其他
1.Pinar, W.,袁桂林(2002)。派納論「再概念化」&「理解課程」,http://www.pep.com.cn/200304/ca180800.htm。  延伸查詢new window
2.重建教育連線(2003)。教改萬言書,http://www.pnews.com.tw/educhg01.htm。  延伸查詢new window
3.歐用生(1999)。九年一貫課程之「潛在課程評析」,http://class.eje.isst.edu.tw/files/20001020%A4E%A6~%A4@%B3e%AC%E3%B0Q%B7|%C1%BF%B8q200003/dresource/nine/12.htm, 。  new window
圖書論文
1.莊明貞(2004)。當前臺灣課程重建的可能性:一個批判教育學的觀點。課程改革:反省與前瞻。臺北:高等教育。  延伸查詢new window
2.Huebner, D. E.(1975)。Curriculum Language and Classroom Meanings。Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists。Berkely, CA:McCutchan。  new window
3.Pinar, W. F.(2003)。Toward the internationalization of curriculum studies。The Internationalization of curriculum studies。New York:Peter Lang。  new window
 
 
 
 
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