課程研究的「第三勢力」－美國「再概念化」學派課程理論的評介

The ＂Third Force＂ Of Curriculum Studies - An Introduction And Critique Of ＂Reconceptualist＂ Curriculum Theory

陳伯璋(Po-chang Chen)

《國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所集刊》 25輯 (1983/06) Pp. 179-226

https://doi.org/10.6910/BGIENTNU.198306_(25).0005

並列摘要

Until the last decade, the ＂Reconceptualist＂ movement was not characterized as an important camp of curriculum studies in the United States. It grounded in the diverse theoretical traditions of Continental philosophies- - -hermeneutics, phenomenology, existentialism, as well as psychonalysis, Marxism and Crital Theory- - -which were different from the dominant Anglo-American context with strong empericist paradigm. Being a significant movement to invistigate both the scope of its concerning and the question its raising, it provides the basis for the establishing of a critical pedagogy which was dissatisfied with the static and mechnical quality of works of the earlier criticism on schooling in 1970s and with the positivist analysis of 1950s and 60s. Above all, it's getting more influential in the fields of curriculum studies by serving alternative conceptual frameworks and methodologies addressed both with conciousness and structure (economic, political, cultural etc.) through the dialectical process of ＂theory/practice＂ ＂fact/value＂, ＂subjectivity/objectivity＂, ＂action/order＂. It has become the ＂Third Force＂ 'in curriculum studies distinquished from the other two schools- -the Traditionalist and the Conceptual-Empericism. The ＂Reconceptualist＂ inquiry does not exist as a cohesive, unified curriculum theory. There are two distinct groups: the first group discribes the ＂life-world＂ of teachers and students in classrooms and schools, in name of the quality of educational experiences through ongoing unconcealing existential meaning. The method which they used are aesthetic critique, psychoanalyztic autobibliography, participation observation and so forth. The second camp pays attention on the social-economic-cultural context of schools and the meaning of hidden curriculum through the ＂ideologiekritik＂ and structural analysis. To grasp its comprehensive picture of what it is, this paper is first to analyze its theoretical background and its developmental stages. Then, the works of three important figures (M. Greene, W. Pinar, M. Apple) are interpreted and criticized. Their contributions and implications to the establishing of curriculum theory are presented at the third part of this paper. Finally, some comments on the conceptual frameworks and methodologies are offered.