結構縫隙、社群連結與教育學想像的實踐

Structural Chasm, Networked Community, and Pedagogical Imaginary

10.6249/SE.2015.66.1.04

陳佩英(Pei-ying Chen)

結構縫隙 ； 專業學習社群 ； 網絡學習社群 ； 教育學想像 ； structural chasm ； professional learning community ； network learning community ； pedagogical imaginary

中等教育

66卷1期（2015 / 03 / 01）

58 - 78

繁體中文

本文透過研究者和教師過去十年的合作經驗，揭示結構縫隙和政策空間對於激發教師變革意願和持續投入的重要性。結構縫隙指的是在制度限制中找到行動的機會，而改革政策除了資源挹注之外，尚有透過具實驗性質的教育理念、教學方法、評量模式等改變，給予行動者空間，以利學校成員尋找組織內的結構縫隙，在做中學和在實踐中探究與反思，或開創新的課程與嘗試新的教學方法，甚至可以構築關懷與信任的同儕關係。面對政策和社會的期待衝突、工作負荷和創新的改革要求，教師過去習以為常的工作模式與關係必須轉化為可以滋養互惠和互賴的支持系統，校本專業學習社群和跨校社群的出現，是回應工作需求的變革路徑。然而，只有方法是不足以產生有機的連帶關係，教育學想像是行動意義的視框，是連帶關係的黏著力和變革行動的正當性基礎，透過持續接觸與交流中，形成共同的新理解、新語言和共享實踐的未來想像。「想像」具有穿透力和轉化的潛力，個體在縫隙中經由行動和對話的連結，逐漸演化成新的結構。政策空間的允諾，是讓那由下而上的自然匯流，找到問題解決的出口，讓教師可以持續學習、創新、和找出實踐教育學想像的可行路徑。

This study, based on the collaboration with teachers in the past decade, displays how teachers can motivate themselves to engage in education change through the structural chasm and policy space. The structural chasm refers to the third space where change agents can find opportunity from constraints; whereas policy space is defined by the input of resources, changes of experimental ideals, methods, and assessments, or even by trust building among practitioners. In face with the conflicts between policy and social expectation, workload, and innovation demands, supportive system of mutual and interdependent relation is needed. The presence of school-based and school-crossing PLC reflects the seeking of change patheays in response to such needs. However, only instrumental techniques cannot generate organic ties of relationship; rather pedagogical imaginary is the framework for sensemaking of action, glue of ties, and legitimacy of initiatives. Through constant contact, practitioners can develop new understanding, common languages and shared practice of future imaginary. ＂Imaginary＂ has the potential of penetration and transformation. The connection between action and dialogue via chasm may evolve the new structure. The promise of policy space may nurture the flow of bottom-up action, the outlet of solution, which may motivate teachers continue to learn, innovate, and seek possibility of realizing pedagogical imaginary.

1. 陳佩英(2009)。一起學習、一起領導：專業學習社群的建構與實踐。中等教育，60(3)，68-88。
   連結：
2. 陳佩英、焦傳金(2009)。分散式領導與專業學習社群之建構：一所高中教學創新計畫的個案研究。教育科學研究期刊，54(1)，55-86。
   連結：
3. Abrams, P.(1983).Historical Sociology.Ithaca, New York:Cornel University Press.
4. Argyris, C.,Schon, D.(1974).Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness.San Francisco:Jossey Bass.
5. Ball, Stephen J.(2008).The Education debate: Policy and Politics in the Twenty-First Century.Bristol, UK:Policy Press.
6. Church, M.,Bitel, M.,Armstrong, K.,Fernando, P.,Gould, H.,Joss, S.,Marwaha-Diedrich, M.,de la Torre, A. L.,Vouhe, C.(2003).Participation, Relationships and Dynamic Change: New Thinking on Evaluating the Work of International Networks.London:University College London.
7. Copland, M. A.(2003).Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,25(4),375-395.
8. De Lima, J. Á.(2008).Department networks and distributed leadership in schools.School Leadership & Management,28(2),159-187.
9. Fullan, M.(2007).The new meaning of educational change.NewYork, NY:Teachers College.
10. Gronn, P.(2002).Designer-leadership: The emerging global adoption of preparation standards.Journal of School Leadership,12(5),552-578.
11. Gutiérrez, Kris D.,Baquedano‐López, Patricia,Tejeda, Carlos(1999).Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space.Mind, Culture, and Activity,6(4),286-303.
12. Hopkins, D.,Ainscow, M.,West, M.(1994).School improvement in an Era of Change.London:Cassell.
13. Leithwood, K.(Ed.),Hallinger, P.(Ed.),Furman, G.(Ed.),Gronn, P.(Ed.),MacBeath, J.(Ed.),Mulford, W.(Ed.),Riley, K.(Ed.)(2002).Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
14. McKinsey(2010).McKinsey & Company, reportMcKinsey & Company, report,McKinsey & Company.
15. Spillane, J. P.,Halverson, R.,Diamond, J. B.(2004).Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective.Journal of curriculum Studies,36(1),3-34.
16. Stoll, L.(Ed.),Louis, K. Seashore(Ed.)(2006).Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas.Berkshire, England:Open University Press.
17. Taylor, C.(2003).Modern Social Imaginaries.Duke University Press.
18. 中國教育學會編(2011)。百年教育的回顧—傳承與創新。臺北:學富文化。
19. 林南(2005)。社會資本。臺北:弘智文化。
20. 涂爾幹、黃丘隆譯(1990)。自殺論。臺北:結構群。
21. 郭進隆譯、齊若蘭譯、彼得．聖吉(2005)。第五項修練（全新增訂版）：學習型組織的藝術與實務。臺北:天下文化。
22. 陳佩英(2004)。意識與行動─婦女與性／別研究建制化歷程之探討。通識教育季刊，11(3,4)，37-70。
23. 陳佩英編(2013)。從心學習：聽專業學習社群老師說故事。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學出版中心。
24. 黃郁倫譯、鐘啟泉譯、佐藤學(2012)。學習的革命：從教室改革的出發。臺北:天下文化。

1. 陳佩英(2017)。對話即實踐：網絡學習社群專業資本積累之個案研究。教育科學研究期刊，62(3)，159-191。
2. 陳佩英(2018)。深耕未來：課程共力、動能永續與系統翻轉。中等教育，69(1)，8-20。
3. 阮孝齊(2017)。從縣市行動者觀點探討學習共同體政策擴散之研究。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，10(3)，27-58。
4. 楊幸真,符雅筑(2021)。從教師專業學習社群到行動網絡學習社群：性別融入醫學教育的另類途徑。教育實踐與研究，34(3)，165-204。
5. 鍾蔚起,薛曉華,陳佩英,陳玉娟,洪雯柔,柯喬元,林國楨(2020)。前導學校促動民主專業機制的網絡行動。中等教育，71(4)，11-35。