課程發展已逝？－課程發展與課程理解的關係探究

Is the Curriculum Development Past? Inquiring the Relationship Between Curriculum Development and Understanding Curriculum

陳美如(Mei-Ru Chen)

《課程與教學》 8卷4期 (2005/10) Pp. 165-177

https://doi.org/10.6384/CIQ.200510.0165

摘要

Pinar等人的《理解課程：歷史與當代課程論辯導論》宣告了課程發展的時代已經過去⋯⋯課程發展，生於1918年，死於1969年。真否如此？本研究認為Pinar等人所指的死於1969年的課程發展，所指涉的課程發展與現今課程學者所談的課程發展有程度與本質上的差異，「課程發展」其實並沒有死亡。而課程發展與課程理解也具備相互補充，彼此生成的關係。課程理解的提出作為對照，讓課程工作者有機會因兩個語言的對照，進行對話，更加深對課程的理解，進一步去思考課程。

關鍵字

課程發展 ； 課程理解 ； 課程探究

並列摘要

In ”Understanding Curriculum: An Introduction to the Study of Historical and Contemporary Curriculum Discourses, Pinar et al. expressed: ”The era of curriculum development is past. ...... Curriculum development: Born: 1918. Died: 1969.” Is it true? The study proposes the curriculum development Pinar talked about is different from the curriculum development most curriculum researchers refer to. In fact, curriculum development is not past. The relations between curriculum development and understanding curriculum are renewing each other. Because of the two names, curriculum scholars could begin to dialogue, understand, and reflect the curriculum.

並列關鍵字

curriculum development ； curriculum inquiry ； understanding curriculum

參考文獻

霍秉坤、黃顯華(2004)。課程領域中應用範式概念之爭議。教育研究集刊。50(1)，33-62。

單文經(2004)。論革新課程實驗之難成。教育研究集刊。50(1)，1-32。

李鑑慧(2003)。知者無罪:海登懷特的歷史哲學。台灣社會研究季刊。52，1-55。

Aoki, T.(1986).Teaching as in - dwelling between two curriculum worlds.The B.C. Teacher.April/May,8-10.

Clandinin, D. J.,Connelly, F. M.(1992).Handbook of research on curriculum.New York:Macmillian.