:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:教學建構主義的哲學基礎
書刊名:臺東大學教育學報
作者:郭實渝
作者(外文):Kuo, Shih-yu
出版日期:2008
卷期:19:2
頁次:頁119-142
主題關鍵詞:個人建構主義社會建構主義維根斯坦E. von GlasersfeldK. J. GergenRadical constructivismSocial constructivismWittgenstein
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(5) 專書(1) 專書論文(1)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:9
  • 點閱點閱:53
一般而言,作為一項教學技術的建構主義,可分為個人的或激進的建構主義以及社 會的建構主義,分別以E. von Glasersfeld 及Gergen 為代表學者。本文將探討這兩個理論 所根據的知識論系統是什麼?知識成立的有效性立場又是什麼?討論這個主題,同時提 出研究者的論辯,不論是個人或是社會建構主義都可以藉由維根斯坦晚期哲學,釐清兩 者,並在理論上彰顯出兩者在知識的看法上仍未能脫離傳統知識的實在論基礎。按照von Glasersfeld 提出的理論,知識是屬於個人的經驗,而且不可能有客觀實體作為知識的基 礎,知識只借助於其是否適合(fit)的原則,這與只承認屬於自己的知識說法一樣。那 麼,我們如何得知他人擁有的知識呢?在維根斯坦的討論中,這是不可能的,因為我們 無法根據私人語言獲得任何知識。Gergen 的理論,只以語言作為知識建構的媒介,不能 創造事實。研究者的論辯是知識的建構主義只能說在解釋上可以依據不同的個人經驗或 社區關係而有不同的知識理論,但是在其解釋的背後,仍需要有實在事實現象或對象為 本。
In this paper, I will discuss the philosophical foundation of individualistic or radical constructivism and social constructivism with E. von Glasersfeld and K. J. Gergen as their leading scholars respectively. The main questions discussed are what their epistemological systems are, and what their philosophical foundation would be. I will argue that both theories still have to base on realism in terms of traditional epistemology. When applying ‘fit’ principle of radical constructivism, we can only apply personal experience in various situations for explanation and for creating our own meanings, but are unable to alter the fact which is open to everyone for different explanations. Based on Wittgenstein’s viewpoint, neither theory is able to rid of the realistic view of knowledge. Also, according to Wittgenstein’s later philosophy, it is not possible to create knowledge by personal language, since language cannot be the media of constructing knowledge and cannot create fact either.
期刊論文
1.徐光台(19991200)。建構主義與科學教育進步。歐美研究,29(4),153-183。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.鄭毓信(19980900)。建構主義與數學教育。數學傳播,22(3)=87,36-49。  延伸查詢new window
3.林麗婷(2006)。建構數學之我見。網路社會學通訊期刊,55,22 -24。  延伸查詢new window
4.Matthews, M. R.(1993)。Constructivism and science education: Some epistemological problems。Journal of Science Education and Technology,2 (1),359-370。  new window
5.Small, R.(2003)。A fallacy in constructivist epistemology。Journal of Philosophy of Education,37 (3),483-502。  new window
6.Vanderstraeten, R.(2002)。Dewey’s transactional constructivism。Journal of Philosophy of Education,36 (2),233-246。  new window
圖書
1.Kozulin, A., Gindis, B. Ageyev, V. S.,、Miller, S. M. Eds..(2003)。Vygotsky ‘s educational theory in cultural context。Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press。  new window
2.Cromer, A. H.(1997)。Connected Knowledge: Science, Philosophy, and Education。New York, NY:Oxford University Press。  new window
3.Larochelle, Marie、Bednarz, Nadine、Garrison, Jim(1998)。Constructivism and education。Cambridge University Press。  new window
4.Steffe, Leslie P.、Gale, Jerry E.(1995)。Constructivism in education。Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc.。  new window
5.Wittgenstein, Ludwig、Paul, Denis、Anscombe, G. E. M.、von Wright, G. H.(1972)。On Certainty。New York:Harper & Row。  new window
6.Karpov, Y. V.(2003)。Vygotsky’s doctrine of scientific concepts. Its role for contemporary education。Vygotsky ‘s educational theory in cultural context。Cambridge。  new window
7.Wittgenstein, L.(1978)。Philosophical investigations。Oxford。  new window
圖書論文
1.Gergen, K. J.(1995)。Social construction and the educational process。Constructivism in education。Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE