日本教師參與課程改革之經驗探究

日本教育自1989年至今，歷經四次課程改革。從新學力觀、生活力、活用能力，到2020年透過主體性、對話性、深入學習，培育新時代的知識素養，展現出極大的結構性改革。而臺灣同處在課程改革轉換期，108課綱主張將知識深化為兼具知識、能力與態度的素養，兩者在落實學生本位教學的目的、方法、理念皆有相似之處。日本的新課綱於2020年正式實施，本研究希望能探究日本教師在課程改革的脈絡下對課綱的理解與教學轉化經驗，尋求更多改革付諸實踐的可能性。　　本研究以敘事研究方法，針對兩位日本教師敘說其參與課程改革的經驗，探討1989年以來個案教師對課綱的理解與認同；以及教師面對課程改革中的教師角色調適與教學轉化的經驗；最後分析課程改革中個案教師遭遇的困境與因應之道。蒐集資料的方法包括敘事訪談與文件分析，並將兩位教師的故事與前導研究中的資深教師觀點進行對話與討論。　　本研究重要的研究發現如下：一、課綱是課程聖經及引領教師前進的燈塔，但根據不同情境而有不同的解讀空間。二、個案教師跳脫既有的教學思維，以學校認同，發展學校本位的課程，建立因地制宜的改變策略。三、個案教師由忠實觀到創造觀的角色轉換中，以建構個別化的改革經驗，重置課綱與教師間的關係，實施以學生為中心的課程。四、教師遭遇的難題，包含實務與理論的落差：上而下的推動方式，造成教師與政策陷入對峙的局面；以及教師專業與改革需求的落差：由上而下的決策，教師缺乏自主性。　　課程改革和學校教師是互相成長的關係，並透過教師發展專業自主及個別化的實踐知識，將課程改革化為內在自省的力量。跨文化旅程的最後，我重新反思初任教師的角色認同，發現以學生為中心的課程即是讓學生學習認同。當學生能夠認同自己與他人的觀點，就能夠破解被動服從的枷鎖，以多元的眼光看世界。

關鍵字

日本教育；課程改革；教師角色調適；教學轉化

並列摘要

Japanese education has undergone four curriculum reforms since 1989. Its experience ranges from the new viewpoint on academic abilities, zest for living and utilizing abilities, to active learning to cultivate the knowledge of core competence in the new era in 2020, which shows a great structural reform. The education in Taiwan is also in the transition period of curriculum reform. The latest 12-year Basic Education Curriculum Guidelines advocates deepening knowledge into core competencies. These two countries have similarities in the purpose, methods, and concepts of implementing student-based teaching. Japan’s new curriculum was formally implemented in 2020. This study aims to explore the Japanese teachers' understanding of the curriculum guidelines and their teaching practice in the context of curriculum reform, in order to seek more possibilities for the reform to be put into practice. This study invited two elementary school teachers to narrate the experiences of change that they encountered during curriculum reform. Using the narrative inquiry approach, we explored how case teachers handled the curriculum reform process, and explored their understanding and recognition of curriculum guidelines since 1989, as well as teachers' role adjustments and teaching practice in curriculum reform. The data collection methods included narrative interview and document analysis. The important findings of this study are as follows. First, the curriculum guideline is the Bible of curriculum and the beacon to guide teachers forward, but it has different interpretation space according to different situations. Second, the case teachers able to break away from the existing teaching thinking, develops school-based curriculum with school identity, and establishes change strategies adapted to local conditions. Third, in the process of changing the role of case teachers from the fidelity orientation to the curriculum enactment orientation, it aims to construct individualized experience during curriculum reform, reset the relationship between curriculum and teachers, and implement student-centered curriculum. Fourth, the difficult situations that teachers have experienced include the gap between practice and theory: the top-down promotion mode leads to the confrontation between teachers and policies; and the gap between teachers' profession and reform needs: top-down decision-making leads to teachers' lack of autonomy. Curriculum reform and school teachers are in a relationship of mutual growth. Through the development of teachers' professional autonomy and the development of personalized practical knowledge, curriculum reform has become an internal driving force for self-reflection. At the end of the cross-cultural journey, I reconsidered my identity as a novice teacher and found the core value of student-centered curriculum. When students perceived their own and others' points of views, they can break the shackles of passive obedience and appreciate the world from multiple perspectives.