知識形式的劃分與課程組織

Forms of Knowledge and Curriculum Organization

10.6384/CIQ.200004.0075

簡良平(Liang-Ping Jian)

理解 ； 知識形式 ； 課程組織 ； forms of knowledge ； curriculum organization ； understanding

課程與教學

3卷2期（2000 / 04 / 01）

75 - 94+155

繁體中文

本文從「理解」發展的觀點來討論課程內容選擇，也就是認識論對課程內容的影響。哲學的認識論對於人如何獲得認知及應獲取何種認知的界定，乃影響課程內容與課程組織。近代科學的發展，不但增加了認知的內容，科學具體的成就建構不同知識的專業發展，增加課程內容選擇與組織的困難。課程研究就意義領域的劃分、知識形式的規劃、生活經驗的內容等等，規劃課程內容與組織的原則。除此之外，課程規劃就知識內容選擇仍有其他影響因素，在觀念上可以溯及課程理論研究取向的差異、選擇過程的「權力」因素、意識型態的不當宰制等來探討。了解這些成因有助於我們如何去辯證選擇的正當性與合理性，避免不合理的因素過於干擾教育本身。最後，進入課程組織時，對於課程組織的概念、意義與原則的釐清，可以提供討論課程組織與統整的問題方面，有更清楚的規劃原則。

This study aims the relationship between forms of knowledge and curriculum organization. Epistemology influences the schools' choices about what to teach and how to organize the materials into curriculum. Philosophers explain the concept ”understanding” differently and changed the content in education. Then, the progress in science and different disciplines enhanced the difficulty of what we choose and how we arrange teaching materials. We can plan a curriculum according to the students' interest or the structure of disciplines. Anyway, we all must resolve the problems in curriculum organization, including how to integrate the content of forms of knowledge and the students' development in psychology. We also must consider elements which always influence the development of curriculum, especially the political power. Finally, the paper discusses the principles of how to make curriculum organization in order to help teachers to plan a curriculum.

1. Apple, M. W.(1993).Official knowledge: Democratic Education in a conservative age.New York, NY:Routledge.
2. Bernstein, B.(1971).Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education.London:Collier-Macmillan.
3. Brent, Allen(1978).Philosophical foundation for the curriculum.London/ Boston:Allen ＆ Unwin.
4. Cornford, F. M.(1964).The republic of Plato.N. Y.:Oxford University Press.
5. Eisner, Elliot W.(1985).Five basic orientations to the curriculum.The Educational Imagination,61-86.
6. Featherstone, M.(1995).Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity.London:Sage Publications.
7. Hamn, Cornel M.(1989).Philosophical issues in education: An introduction.London:Taylor ＆ Francis Inc..
8. Hirst, P. H.(1974).Knowledge and the Curriculum: A Collection of Philosophical Papers.London:Routledge and Kegan Paul.
9. Kuhn, T. S.(1970).科學革命的結構.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press ＆ University of Hawaii Press.
10. Phillips, D. C.(1998).Education, knowledge, and truth - beyond the postmodern impasse.London:Routledge.
11. Schrag, Francis(1989).Handbook of Research on Curriculum.
12. Soltis, Jonas F.(1981).Philosophy and Education 80th Yearbook of the NSSE.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
13. Tyler, R. W.(1949).Basic principles of curriculum and instruction.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
14. Young, Michael F. D.(1971).Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education.London:Collier-MacMillan.
15. 尤瑞根．哈伯瑪斯, J.(1968).Knowledge and human interests.London:Heinemann.
16. 林玉体(1990)。西洋教育史。台北:文景。
17. 侯健(1976)。柏拉圖理想國。台北:聯經。
18. 勞思光(1974)。康德知識論要義。台北:河洛。
19. 黃政傑(1998)。課程設計。台北:東華書局。
20. 慶澤彭(1986)。希臘哲學史。台北:雙葉。
21. 簡良平(1992)。赫思特課程理論研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所。

1. 葉佳容、許淑瑾、馬祖琳、江淑卿(2006)。幼兒數學創造力教學引導策略之分析研究—以測量為例。課程與教學，9(1)，157-175。
2. 周芳怡(2019)。通識課程落實大學社會責任之行動研究。通識學刊：理念與實務，7(1)，1-31+33。
3. (2002)。日本的統整課程政策與模式及其對台灣實施統整課程的啓示。國民教育研究學報，9，201-222。