中小學學校課程決定之研究

簡良平

指導教授 ： 黃光雄 博士 ； 甄曉蘭 博士

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育學系/博士(2000年)

摘要

摘 要本研究之目的在探討現階段課程改革脈落之下，學校課程決定任務與角色的轉變、學校自主發展過程與課程決定的內容、學校課程決定過程中學校成員及教師參與課程決定的程度、影響學校成員課程決定的關鍵因素，最後歸納研究發現作成結論與建議，做為中小學學校課程決定之實務與研究的參考。文獻探討主要以課程決定釋意與實務分析做為本研究之基本論述。就學校課程決定而言，不能脫離學校的環境脈絡，過程中涉及決定者的因素、人的互動與決定的方法，以決定課程的內容、課程取向、課程組織方法等等。現階段學校課程決定的任務與角色轉變，權力下放的課程實踐取向著重學校本位課程的發展，因而授權學校自主發展課程，學校必須在現有的基礎上形成課程革新的目的與過程，調整課程決定的組織結構、建構學校學習型組織的文化，以利教師參與課程決定，達成學校本位課程發展。而此過程中，鼓勵教師發展專業自主，以參與做課程決定，團體課程慎思的方式思維學校課程問題，提出提升學教學品質的解決方法。回顧現階段學校自主發展課程仍受到許多因素左右，包括外在環境、學校系統、教師條件等等，多值得進一步探究。為深入觀察與描述學校課程決定的實施狀況，本研究採取質性研究方法，選擇個案研究以台北縣、市二所國中、二所國小為研究對象，並以學校課程決定的行動為觀察重點，深度描述學校成員課程決定行為及與課程改革相關事宜的因應措施。本研究雖有基本論述，但研究之始不受限於此，而是在長期觀察之後歸納出幾個觀察與分析的面向，最後以學校課程決定的脈絡、教師參與課程決定的程度、學校課程決定的運作機制、學校課程決定的層面、課程慎思的議題、影響教師課程決定的因素等，描述分析四所個案學校課程決定的實際發展狀況。本研究發現如下：一.現階段學校課程決定角色轉變過程充斥著權力運作因素：不僅學校自主發展課程的權限受至於科層體制的約束，事實上也受限於學校本身的權力結構。校長的課程領導意識左右學校課程決定的策略，不僅如此，校長與教務主任之間的權力結構影響推行策略是否穩定、行政人員之間的協調影響推行課程革新是否周延、行政人員與教師之間的互動著實影響教師參與的意願、校園是否民主化影響教師參與做決定的準備度。實際上，學校領導人員是否授權教師課程決定的理想與實際之間差距很大。二.學校推動課程改革機制影響教師參與的程度：學校成立之課程發展委員會是否以增加教師專業對話機會、擴增參與課程決定的機會，影響學校教師參與課程發展的程度。再者，學校是否針對學校特殊的生態條件來建構課程決定的機制，掌握影響教師參與課程決定的態度與行為，關係著課程發展委員會的成功運作與否。三.教師專業自主的發展關係著課程決定的品質：學校以建構學習型組織的目的，提升教師專業知能，而教師以發展專業自主持續發展，則課程決定品質當不斷提升，即使不再有課程改革政策仍能持續提升教學品質。四.教師課程決定內容影響學校本位課程的走向：國小教師多半能以全校性主題課程的規劃，整合各年級的活動課程。這當中不涉及各科教科書內容，乃因不同教科書版本的學科知識結構連貫難、教師教學經驗有異、各學年教師團隊的互動不同、以及教師討論時間有限，而難以就各年級的知識內容進行連貫性課程組織。然而，透過學年教師的團體慎思，教師們發展出活潑的教學活動，提升教室的教學品質。國中教師則以發展學習領域統整課成為核心，來建構學校本位課程的特色。然而，現階段各科教師之間對話習慣尚未建立，學科知識界線難以打破，統整課程所面臨的困境多於國小。五.影響學校教師課程決定的因素龐雜：包括課程決定的來源多，教師課程決定的範疇受限；相關訊息及課程專家建議影響教師課程慎思的內容；學校課程領導方式影響教師參與課程決定的意願；學校課程決定機制運作，影響教師參與課程決定的機會；課程決定的團體互動關係影響課程決定的內容；學校生態結構影響教師實踐課程決定的能力；領導型教師可以促成教師專業發展文化取向、教師個別條件影響教師參與課程決定的投入。有關學校推展課程決定方面，本研究建議：增進學校行政人員的課程領導能力，引導課程改革的正確方向；強化學校行政權力結構，以利課程改革政策推行；健全學校課程發展機制，增加教師參與參與對話的機會；增加教師與專家對話機會，提升課程實踐的程度；有系統地發展校內進修，增進教師專業知能；鼓勵學校文化改變，發展學習型組織；重視教師發展專業自主，鼓勵提升課程決定品質。 School Curriculum Decision-making–Mutiple-Case Study in Junior High School and Elementary School Abstract The aims of this study are to understand how the staff of the junior high school and the elementary school to make curriculum decision. The researcher explored who, what content, and what method are involved in curriculum decision-making process, as well as how the decision are made. In order to see the schools build their vision and plan their procedures under the context of curriculum reform policy, a case study approach was applied in this study since September, 2000 to June, 2001. Methods used for data collection include on-looker observation, interview the principles and teachers, and document analysis. The focuses of the literature are on: (1) the meaning of school curriculum decision-making; (2) the shifting of schools’ roles under the curriculum reform policy; (3) the driving forces behind the practices of school-based curriculum development; (4) the implication of curriculum deliberation in school-based curriculum decision-making. According to the literature review and field study, the research findings are followed: First, the power struggles in the process of school curriculum decision-making helps us to know there are many forces influencing school curriculum decision-making. It shows that the principles' curriculum leadership guides the direction of school-based curriculum. The leader teachers can provide the resources to support teachers making curriculum through building caring relationship, allocating resource, and providing information for curriculum planning. Although schools are given with power for developing school-based curriculum, in reality there is still a gap between the ideal for conducting the concept of empowerment and teachers’ practice of their professional autonomy. Second, if the administrative leaders of the school designate the mechanism of curriculum decision-making and make a platform for the teachers to discuss school-based curriculum, not only the teachers will have opportunities to solve the problems about curriculum and instruction with their colleagues but also they will enhance their confidence to take part in curriculum planning. The quality of the curriculum decision-making are reflected through dialogue among teachers in the curriculum committee. Its principal value lies in the schools' capacity to define the internal problems and to come up with strategies for raising school autonomy. Third, teachers in the four schools confront many difficulties when they make efforts developing integrated curriculum. Especially in junior high school, the connections between subjects are complex and it’s hard to break the boundaries of knowledge structure for teachers. In the process of planning curriculum, teachers usually consider students' interest, the content of subjects, the teachers' ability, and the enviroment of teaching in their curriculum deliberation. It's important to find that when a teacher pursues internal professional satisfaction, this teacher will always keep improving his/her teaching. In sum, there are many factors influencing teachers in participating in making curriculum decisions. They include bureaucratic system, curriculum leadership, teachers' ability, and teacher culture. Under the circumstance of their own choices, the cultural ecology at school prevent their members from developing their school-based curriculum in a more creative way. Finally, the research suggests that teachers in the schools need to be provided with more opportunities to study curricular knowledge and skills to enhance their curricular consciousness. They need to know more about their own cultural ecology in order to grasp multi-dimensional conditions for planning school-based curriculum. It's the most important point that teachers to make curriculum decisions cooperatively and situate their curriculum issues in context.

關鍵字

學校課程決定 ； 學校本位課程發展 ； 團體課程慎思

並列摘要

The aims of this study are to understand how the staff of the junior high
school and the elementary school to make curriculum decision. The researcher
explored　who, what content, and what method are involved in curriculum
decision-making process, as well as how the decision are made. In order to see
the schools build their vision and plan their procedures under the context of
curriculum reform policy, a case study approach was applied in this study
since September, 2000 to June, 2001. Methods used for data collection include
on-looker observation, interview the principles and teachers, and document
analysis. The focuses of the literature are on: (1) the meaning of school
curriculum decision-making; (2) the shifting of schools’ roles under the
curriculum reform policy; (3) the driving forces behind the practices of
school-based curriculum development; (4) the implication of curriculum
deliberation in school-based curriculum decision-making.
According to the literature review and field study, the research findings are
followed:
First, the power struggles in the process of school curriculum decision-making
helps us to know there are many forces influencing school curriculum decision-
making. It shows that the principles' curriculum leadership guides the
direction of school-based curriculum. The leader teachers can provide the
resources to support teachers making curriculum through building caring
relationship, allocating resource, and providing information for curriculum
planning. Although schools are given with power for developing school-based
curriculum, in reality there is still a gap between the ideal for conducting
the concept of empowerment and teachers’ practice of their professional
autonomy.
Second, if the administrative leaders of the school designate the mechanism of
curriculum decision-making and make a platform for the teachers to discuss
school-based curriculum, not only the teachers will have opportunities to
solve the problems about curriculum and instruction with their colleagues but
also they will enhance their confidence to take part in curriculum planning.
The quality of the curriculum decision-making are reflected through dialogue
among teachers in the curriculum committee. Its principal value lies in the
schools' capacity to define the internal problems and to come up with
strategies for raising school autonomy.
Third, teachers in the four schools confront many difficulties when they make
efforts developing integrated curriculum. Especially in junior high school,
the connections between subjects are complex and it’s hard to break the
boundaries of knowledge structure for teachers. In the process of planning
curriculum, teachers usually consider students' interest, the content of
subjects, the teachers' ability, and the enviroment of teaching in their
curriculum deliberation. It's important to find that when a teacher pursues
internal professional satisfaction, this teacher will always keep improving
his/her teaching.
In sum, there are many factors influencing teachers in participating in making
curriculum decisions. They include bureaucratic system, curriculum leadership,
teachers' ability, and teacher culture. Under the circumstance of their own
choices, the　cultural ecology at school prevent their members from developing
their school-based curriculum in a more creative way.
Finally, the research suggests that teachers in the schools need to be
provided with more opportunities to study curricular knowledge and skills to
enhance their curricular consciousness. They need to know more about their own
cultural ecology in order to grasp multi-dimensional conditions for planning
school-based curriculum. It's the most important point that teachers to make
curriculum decisions cooperatively and situate their curriculum issues in
context.

參考文獻

黃炳煌（民77）。技職教育課程發展模式之研究。教育部技職司委託專題

甄曉蘭（民90）。從課程組織的觀點檢討課程統整的設計與實施。課程與

歐用生（民80）。課程發展的基本原理。高雄：復文。

簡良平（民89）。知識形式的劃分與課程組織。課程與教學季刊，3

簡良平（民89）。學校自主發展課程—課程籌畫的議題。論文發表於中華