透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.221.53.5
  • 期刊

大專財金教科書品質分析之試探

A Tentative Analysis on the Quality of College Financial Textbooks

摘要


學術界已經形成嚴謹之論文審查制度,卻缺乏教科書之評審慣例或文化,導致大專教科書百花齊放之現況。著作權法之終極目的是調和社會公共利益,促進國家文化發展;因此,確保教科書呈現妥適之內容,是著作權法立法目的之一。再就積極實踐受教權觀點,教科書作者應盡職提供正確且妥當之內容,進而確保讀者之受教權,以及賦予讀者充分啟發潛能與發展人格之機會。由於從未有學者公然評論教科書,以致於瑕疵內容在改版後,仍然持續出現,甚至被其他教科書沿用。本研究倡議教師針對使用過之教科書,提出深入之回饋與批評,再公開發表,引起迴響與討論,提供教科書原創作者做為改版之參考素材,促成既有教科書趨向完美,也降低改版成本,嘉惠全國師生。

關鍵字

改版 教科書 著作權法 學術倫理 黑格爾

並列摘要


Although there has been a mature reviewing tradition in academic papers, there is no similar tradition in related college textbooks. As a result, we witness a growing tide of textbooks of mixed quality. The Copyright Act is specifically enacted for the purposes of protecting the rights and interests of authors, including authors of textbooks. However, the ultimate objective of the Copyright Act is to balance different interests for the common good of society, and to promote the development of national culture. Asserting college textbooks to provide proper information should be one of the extended objectives of the explicit articles of the Copyright Law. In addition, the ultimate goal of education is the self-actuation of humans. It is compulsory to enhance the right of textbook users to education, and to the full development of human personality and potential. There has never been open discussion on these issues; consequently, erroneous content often reappears in the revised editions of textbooks, and is replicated in other subsequent textbooks. Finally, we enunciate that college faculties are encouraged to point out and to review some popular textbooks in the form of academic papers or technical reports. Such effort will improve textbook quality and promote higher standards in college education, which in turn reduces revision cost and benefits both students and teachers.

並列關鍵字

revision textbook Copyright Act academic ethics Hegel

參考文獻


王興芳、陳美紀、許連中(2010)。技術學院會計學原則導向教材設計與實驗。教科書研究,3(1),73-107。
周珮儀、鄭明長(2008)。教科書研究方法論之探究。課程與教學,11(1),193-222。
陳月端(2012)。抄襲與引用-學術倫理與著作權之交錯領域。國立高雄大學法學論叢,8(1),133-172。
劉任昌(2013)。主題專家翻譯之教科書內容可靠嗎?檢視 Saunders 與 Cornett 之金融機構管理中譯本。科學與人文研究,2(1),19-54。
劉任昌、葉馬可(2014)。論文自我抄襲之定義與性質。科學與人文研究,3(1),35-53。

被引用紀錄


劉任昌(2017)。檢視台灣大學經濟系教授翻譯的教科書品質科學與人文研究5(1),1-12。https://doi.org/10.6535/JSH2017115101
劉任昌(2017)。評論藍迪斯新國富論中譯本科學與人文研究4(3),44-56。https://doi.org/10.6535/JSH2017074302
劉任昌、葉馬可、蔡旺龍(2017)。狗吠火車無三小路用?評論學者發表英文著作卻不揭露管理學報相似著作之傳統科學與人文研究4(2),52-85。https://doi.org/10.6535/JSH2017014202
劉任昌(2020)。金融市場:發行免費教科書之試探科學與人文研究8(1),19-117。https://doi.org/10.6535/JSH.202011_8(1).0003
劉任昌、葉馬可(2020)。金融市場:一本破壞性創新風格的教科書科學與人文研究7(4),80-97。https://doi.org/10.6535/JSH.202008_7(4).0005

延伸閱讀