高中職種子教師對審議民主融入課程的觀點研究

簡乃欣

指導教授 ： 董秀蘭 教授

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/公民教育與活動領導學系/碩士(2009年)

摘要

摘要

本研究以參與「2007審議民主高中種子教師培訓營」及「2007 審議式民主與公民養成研討會」高中職教師為研究對象，探究教師們對於審議民主融入高中職課程的觀點，分別以問卷調查及訪談混合設計來蒐集資料，研究教師的個人背景因素及環境因素等自變項，與審議民主融入高中職課程目標、必備條件及所需支援等依變項之相關情形。
研究結果有以下發現：
一、不同背景教師對審議民主融入課程的「知識」、「情意態度」目標看法一致。
二、不同「年資」教師對審議民主融入課程的「技能」目標有差異。
三、不同「任教科目」教師對審議民主融入課程的途徑看法不一致。
四、不同任教科目教師對教師應具備的基本知能看法不一致。
五、不同背景教師對教師應具備的人格特質看法一致。
六、不同「性別」、「學歷」、「擔任導師」及「任教科目」教師對教師應具備專業能力看法有差異。
七、不同背景教師對所需專業進修與成長看法相同。
八、不同背景教師對所需行政與政策支援觀點達顯著一致性。
本研究最後根據文獻探討並總結研究發現，對高中職教師、高中職學校、高中職教育主管機關、師資培育與進修機構以及後續研究者提出建議。

關鍵字

審議民主 ； 審議民主融入課程 ； 教師觀點

並列摘要

Abstract
This study aimed at investigating senior high school teachers’ perspectives toward infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum. The teacher samples were chosen from the targeted population who joined two workshops on deliberative democracy hold by The National Youth Commission and National Taiwan Normal University.
The study employed a mix method design which included a questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews. The first phased utilized a questionnaire survey to explore whether teachers with different backgrounds held difference perspectives on infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum at senior high school level. In-depth interviews were conducted in the following phase to gain teachers’ insightful viewpoints of infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum.
The followings are main findings generated from this study:
1. Teachers of different backgrounds share similar perspectives on the cognitive and affective goals of infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum.
2. Teachers of different teaching seniority held different perspectives on the skill goals of infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum.
3. Teachers of different subject areas held diverse opinions concerning effective approaches of infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum.
4. Teachers of different subject areas held diverse opinions concerning the required professional competency for infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum.
5. The teachers’ perspectives toward the basic personality needed for infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum are significantly similar.
6. Teachers with different gender and educational background held diverse opinions concerning the required professional competency for infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum.
7. The teachers’ perspectives toward further in-service training needed for infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum are significantly similar.
8. The teachers’ perspectives toward the administrational supports needed for infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum are significantly similar.

並列關鍵字

deliberative democracy ； infusing deliberative democracy into curriculum ； teachers’ perspectives

參考文獻

林國明、陳東升（2003）。公民會議與審議民主：全民健保的公民參與經驗。台灣社會學，6，65-66。

高博銓（2002）。杜威「民主與教育」在課程上的啓示。課程與教學季刊，5（2），65-80。

陳東升（2006）。審議民主的限制－公灣公民會議的經驗。台灣民主季刊，3（1），77-104。

陳建銘（2006）。形構學校課程行政的三因層面－來自國民教育現場的慎思觀點。國教新知，52（2），79-84。

郭乃菁（1990）。哈怕瑪斯溝通行動理論及其對教育的啓示。教育研究，8，