學校自主發展課程中課程籌劃的探究

Exploring the Curriculum Deliberation Issue within Schools' Autonomous Development Curriculum

10.6384/CIQ.200104.0025

簡良平(Liang-Ping Jian)

學校本位課程發展 ； 課程籌劃 ； 教師的彰權益能 ； 學習型組織 ； 轉化型課程領導 ； school-based curriculum development ； teachers' empowerment ； curriculum deliberation ； transformative curriculum leadership

課程與教學

4卷2期（2001 / 04 / 01）

25 - 46+154

繁體中文

本文首先探討學校自主發展課程的意義與實施要件，最主要的意義是學校具備權力自主地發展學校的課程，同時培養教師的專業能力來發展課程，其實施的要件包括學習型組織的形成與行政組織的民主化，更能支持學校發展課程。然而，在發展課程的過程可能遭遇的困境與限制包括學校的生態系統固定難以改變，學校的結構難以調整等等。但我們不能等待所有條件就緒才去發展課程，應該逆向思考在實踐中學習，也就是在發展過程中學習，去做改變，最好的方法就是視學校課程發展為教師的行動研究，從課程籌劃過程中突破困境。學校發展課程的過程中，所應用的方法是課程籌劃（curriculum deliberation）。課程籌劃的意義在思考課程實踐的各種問題，存在於學校脈絡中的問題，並思考在實踐的脈絡中解決課程與教學的問題，並促使教師願意改變提昇教學品質。課程籌劃的思考層面包括道德的問題以及實踐理性的推理，同時包含團體互動產生的情感，必須倡導關懷的倫理，以支持改革的持續。課程籌劃必須仰賴學校組織及結構的支持，因此學校領導者所倡導學習文化及政治的民主氣氛非常重要。突破現有學校生態以及學校結構的種種限制，是支持課程實踐的重要步驟。如此一來，課程籌劃才能針對課程的各種層面加以思考與規劃，真正進入課程的專業對話，討論、研商、批判與修正課程的發展。課程籌劃是理論轉化到實踐的思考，促成教師轉化為教學的思考，因此，領導者必須能有轉化的能力，促成組織結構、組織氣氛與專業知識的改變，此為轉化型的課程領導。學校領導者以此為基礎，全力促成學校課程籌劃，當能成就學校自主發展課程。

This paper explores the meaning of autonomous curriculum development of school-based curriculum. First, it means the members in schools have a will to develop their school's curriculum by themselves. Second, it means empowering the teachers and enhancing their profession in curriculum design and teaching. Third, it means the schools have to reconstruct the organization and form a democratic environment. Finally, their political democracy can support teachers to design various activities of curriculum development.The schools must face the problems in their ecology and their structure. It would take too long for us to wait to find the resolutions to solve the problems. We can solve them while we are developing curriculum.The core of the whole curriculum development is curriculum deliberation. In schools, they often adopt the form of group deliberation. Everyone in the group makes decisions about the objectives, teaching materials, tests, etc. in curriculum. They have the directions in deliberation intellectually and morally. They criticize the distorted parts in curriculum, too. There can be open debate, arguement and discussion of any theme in curriculum, when particrpants treat eachother as partners and critical friends and take care to control their emotions.The leader in the school plays the very important role if the group can make the curriculum deliberation run smoothly. He must evoke the teachers participation in discussing and transforming the decision into their classrooms. Of course, the leader must deal with the problems in developing curriculum activities rationally. We can call this kind of leadership transformative curriculum leadership. It can help the school to develop curriculum deliberately. We hope the leaders in schools, especially the principals, can take this form of leadership to bring out the curriculum deliberation in their schools. Then, we can see the school make real progress in designing their curriculum and teaching.

1. Campbell-Evans, G.(1993).School-based management and school effectiveness.London:Routledge.
2. Dillon, J. T.(1994).Deliberation in education and society.Norwood:Ablex.
3. Eisner, E. W.(1988).The ecology of school improvement.Educational Leadership,5,24-29.
4. Greene, M.(1986).Handbook of Research on Teaching.New York:Macmillan.
5. Hannay, L. M.,Seller, W.(1991).The curriculum leadership role in facilitating curriculum deliberation.Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,6(4),340-357.
6. Henderson, J. G.,Hawthorne, R. D.(1995).Transformative curriculum leadership.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
7. Holt, M.(1994).Deliberation in education and society.Norwood:Ablex.
8. Kelly, A. V.(1989).The curriculum: Theory and practice.London:Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd..
9. Mulder, M.(1994).Deliberation in education and society.Norwood:Ablex.
10. Phillips, Denis C.(1990).The paradigm dialog.London:Sage.
11. Reid, W. A.(1994).Deliberation in education and society.Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
12. Reid, W. A.(1988).The institutional context of curriculum deliberation.Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,4(1),3-16.
13. Reid, William A.(1979).Practical reasoning and curriculum theory: In search for a new paradigm.Curriculum Inquiry,9(3),187-207.
14. Ross, E. W.(1993).Institutional constraints on curriculum deliberation.Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,8(2),95-111.
15. Schon, D. A.(1983).The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action.London:Temple Smith.
16. Schwab, Joseph J.(1978).Science, curriculum, and liberal education.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
17. Schwab, Joseph J.(1978).Science, curriculum and liberal education.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
18. Schwab, Joseph J.(1983).The practical 4: Something for curriculum professors to do.Curriculum Inquiry,13(3),239-265.
19. Skilbeck, M.(1976).School-based curriculum development.Milton Keynes:Open University Press.
20. Stenhouse, L.(1975).An introduction to curriculum research and development.London:Heinemann.
21. Westbury, Ian(1994).Deliberation in education and society.Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
22. 林佩璇(1999)。學校本位課程發展的個案研究：台北縣鄉土教學活動的課程發展。臺北:國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所。
23. 林維能(1999)。自我成長的再思：從Carol Gilligon的關懷倫理來思考教師對成熟個體的期待。國立台灣師範大學教育學系。
24. 唐小兵(1990)。後現代主義與文化理論（Fredric Jameson教授講座）。台北:當代叢書。
25. 高新建(1999)。「課程統整與教學」學術研討會。台北市立師範學院。
26. 高新建(1999)。迎向千禧年「新世紀中小學課程改革與創新教學」學術研討會。高雄:國立高雄師範大學教育學系。
27. 高新建(1999)。八十七學年度教育學術研討會論文集。台北市立師範學院。
28. 張嘉育(1999)。學校本位課程發展。台北:師大書苑。
29. 黃政傑(1985)。課程改革。台北:漢文。
30. 歐用生(1999)。新世紀的學校。台北:揚智。
31. 歐用生(1999)。迎向千禧年新世紀中小學課程改革與創新教學學術研討會。高雄:國立高雄師範大學。
32. 蔡清田(1999)。迎向千禧年新世紀中小學課程改革與創新教學學術研討會。高雄:國立高雄師範大學教育學系。

1. 陳添球(2004)。鄉土教學素材融入社會學習領域教科書之模式。花蓮教育大學學報：教育類，18，159-190。
2. 蕭錫錡、陳甦彰、王瑩瑋(2005)。以能力分析規劃技術學院航運管理系專業課程之研究。教育科學期刊，5(1)，97-122。
3. 楊諮燕、高熏芳(2002)。九年一貫課程改革下國民中學教師專業發展個案研究。課程與教學，5(4)，19-36。
4. (2002)。學校課程改革實務之批判分析—以兩所九年一貫課程試辦學校爲例。中等教育，53(6)，116-137。
5. (2002)。學校課程領導者的任務與角色探析。臺北市立師範學院學報，33，113-128。