社會轉化與美感創造－探析社會重建論的課程關懷

Social Transformations and Aesthetic Creation-The Analyses on the Curriculum Concerns of Social Reconstructionism

10.6384/CIQ.200504.0041

李雅婷(Ya-Ting Lee)

社會重建論 ； 社會轉化 ； 美感創造 ； 概念重建論 ； Social Reconstructionism ； Social Transformations ； Aesthetic Creation ； Reconceptualist

課程與教學

8卷2期（2005 / 04 / 01）

41 - 52

繁體中文

現今社會改良取向之課程理念多為課程理論與實務所關注，然而，社會重建論者Rugg將課程的政治旨趣闡結至「美感創造」，倡議「美感創造」對於人類生活品質的重要性，重新思考與想像民主社群的意義，兼顧主體與社會重建的複雜知識觀，展現其獨特論說。本文探討之重點有五：一、社會重建論的源起背景與主要哲學；二、社會重建論的教育/課程論述；三、社會重建論的美感創造之主體重建旨趣；四、從社會重建論至概念重建論；五、評論與影響。上述探究以提供課程理論建構與課程實務者之參考。

The curriculum discourses of social milieu approach is notable by curriculum community. However, social reconstuctionists, Rugg proposed distinguished ideas, that made connection between the politics of curriculum and aesthetic creation, put emphasis on aesthetic creation to quality of the human lives, renewed and imagined the meanings of democracy community, combined the complicated epistemology of self and social reconstruction. The purpose of this article explores the social reconstructionism, including, 1) the history context and main philosophy; 2) the education/curriculum discourses; 3) the self reconstruction interest of aesthetic creation; 4) the differences between social reconstruction and reconceptualists; 5)comments and influences.

1. Carbone, P. F.,Wilson, V. S.(1995).Social reconstruction through education.New Jersey:Ablex Publishing.
2. Counts, G. S.(1997).The curriculum studies reader.New York:Routledge.
3. Giroux, H. A.(1983).Theory and resistance in education: A pedagogy for the opposition.Massachusetts:Bergin & Garvey.
4. Giroux, H. A.(1988).Schooling and the struggle for public life: Critical pedagogy in the modem age.Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
5. Kliebard, H. M.(1995).The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958.Boston:Routledge and Kegan Pau.
6. Littleford, M. S.(1999).Contemporary curriculum discourses.New York:Peter Lang.
7. McNeil, J. D.(1996).Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction.New York:Harper Collins.
8. ndy, E.,McKenzie, J.(1999).Resilience building and social reconstructionist teaching: A first-year teacher's story.The Elementary School Journal,100(2),129-150.
9. Pinar, W. F.(2004).What is curriculum theory?.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Pinar, W. F.,Reynolds, W. M.,Slattery, P.,Taubman, P. M.(1995).Understanding curriculum: An introduction to the study of historical and contemporary curriculum discourses.New York:Peter Lang.
11. Riley, K. L.,Stern, B. S.(1999).Selling democracy: Revisiting Rugg for the next millennium.
12. Rosario, J.(1978).Qualitative evaluation.Berkeley, California:McCutchan.
13. Rosario, J.(1988).Contemporary curriculum discourses.Arizona:Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
14. Rugg, H.(1969).The foundations and technique of curriculum-construction.New York:Arno.
15. Rugg, H.(1923).The twenty-second yearbook of the National Society for me Study of Education.Bloomington, Illinois:Public School Publishing.
16. Rugg, H.(1947).Foundations for American education.New York:World Book.
17. Rugg, H.,Shumaker, A.(1928).The child-centered school.New York:Arno & The New York Times.
18. Schubert, W. H.(1986).Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility.New York:Macmillan.
19. ssler, D.(1997).Introducing educational reconstruction: The philosophy and practice of transforming society through education.San Francisco, California:Alan H. Jones.
20. Stanley, W. B.(1992).Curriculum for Utopia: social reconstructionism and critical pedagogy in the postmodern era.Albany:State University of New York.
21. Ukpokodu, O. N.(2003).The challenges of teaching a social studies methods course from a transformative and social reconstructionist framework.The Social Studies,94(2),75-80.
22. 文里譯、J. Bruner著(2001)。教育的文化。臺北:遠流。

1. 李雅婷(2007)。H. Rugg創造性自我表現之課程美學觀點探究。課程與教學，10(2)，145-159。
2. (2007)。來自日常生活的教育學院：社區、課程與美學的探究。教育與社會研究，12，41-72。
3. (2012)。台灣課程美學研究之現況與未來趨勢。教育學報，40(1-2)，45-66。