作為美國新社會科課改要項的結構與發現二辭之意涵評析

A Critical Analysis of the Significance of Structure and Discovery as Main Items for Curriculum Reform of New Social Studies in the United States

10.6384/CIQ.202004_23(2).0007

單文經(Wen-jing Shan)

新社會科 ； 結構 ； 發現 ； 課程史 ； New Social Studies ； structure ； discovery ； curriculum history

課程與教學

23卷2期（2020 / 04 / 01）

153 - 183

繁體中文

2018年10月甫行公布的《十二年國民基本教育社會領域課程綱要》，於保有較完整史、地、公的科目結構之前提下，於各個科目之內或之外，酌情增設探究與實作的課程，俾便以適切的教學活動帶動學生自主學習的作法，將會為臺灣中、小學的社會科課程理論與實務帶來典範轉移。有鑒於此，近正以相近之美國新社會科課改運動進行系列研究的筆者，乃撰作本文以為呼應。本文於確認新社會科課改以結構與發現二辭為要項，並解說結構與發現的意涵之後指出，新社會科課改以其等作為要項，具有補綴社會科教育之不足、充實其學科內容知識，激勵學生自行發現、紮實學習社會學科的結構，以及其等作為新語言為社會科帶來新氣象並留下歷史紀錄等特性，然而，其等亦有界說寬鬆、歧義屢現，以及立論未周、有待調整之不足。文末並以本文限制的反思為據，說明四項可資未來研究之方向。

In the newly promulgated ＂Social Studies Field Guideline,＂ Inquiry and Practice courses were added, with the premise of keeping complete subject structure of History, Geography, and Civic and Society, to encourage students’ self-regulated learning is believed to bring up a paradigm shift for the social studies curriculum theory and practice in this country. For this reason, the author, who has planned to do a series of studies on the similar topics on the history of social studies curriculum in the United States, decides to write this paper as an echo. The paper confirms that structure and discovery were main items for curriculum reform of the New Social Studies (NSS) in the United States and then explain their significances by referring the related literature and documents. The paper also critically points out that the curriculum reform including those two items as the core could be characterized as the enrichment of subject content knowledge, encouragement of students' self-regulated learning and the employment of new languages in social studies area. However, at the same time, they are criticized as having loose and ambiguous definitions and un-comprehensive theoretical foundation. Finally, this article concludes by presenting an epitome and a description of four future research directions based on a reflection of the limitations of this research.

1. 周淑卿,章五奇(2016)。從實驗教材到官方課程──小學社會科板橋模式教材與改編本教科書的發展教。教科書研究，9(1)，37-70。
   連結：
2. 單文經(2019)。美國新社會科運動及其有關教材改革計畫評析（1950-70 年代）。教科書研究，12(1)，69-109。
   連結：
3. 楊國揚,張茂桂,張懿婷,陳亭潔,黃春木,楊秀菁(2018)。十二年國民基本教育社會領域課程綱要發展。教科書研究，11(1)，101-124。
   連結：
4. 楊國揚,張茂桂,張懿婷,陳亭潔,黃春木,楊秀菁(2018)。十二年國民基本教育社會領域課程綱要發展。教科書研究，11(1)，101-124。
   連結：
5. (1962).Announcement for project social studies.Social Education,26(6),300.
6. American Council of Learned Societies(ed.),National Council for the Social Studies(ed.)(1962).The social studies and the social sciences.New York, NY:Harcourt, Brace & World.
7. Bestor, A. E., Jr.(1953).Educational wastelands: The retreat from learning in our public schools.Urbana, IL:University of Illinois Press.
8. Bohan, C. H.,Feinberg, J. R.(2010).Leader-writers: The contributions of Donald Oliver, Fred Newmann, and James Shaver to the Harvard Social Studies Project.The new social studies: People, projects, and perspectives,Charlotte, NC:
9. Bruner, J. S.(1979).John Dewey.On knowing: Essays for the left hand,Cambridge, MA:
10. Bruner, J. S.(1961).The act of discovery.Harvard Educational Review,31,21-31.
11. Bruner, J. S.(1983).In search of mind: Essays in autobiography.New York, NY:Harper & Row.
12. Bruner, J. S.(1966).Toward a theory of instruction.New York, NY:W. W. Norton.
13. Bruner, J. S.(1979).The act of discovery.On knowing: Essays for the left hand,Cambridge, MA:
14. Bruner, J. S.(2006).In search of pedagogy: The selected works of Jerome S. Bruner.London, UK:Routledge.
15. Bruner, J. S.(1966).Structure in learning.Readings in curriculum,Boston, MA:
16. Bruner, J. S.(1960).The process of education.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University.
17. Bruner, J. S.(1971).The process of education revisited.Phi Delta Kappan,53(1),18-21.
18. Bruner, J. S.(1996).The culture of education.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
19. Bruner, J. S.(ed.)(1971).The relevance of education.London, UK:George Allen & Unwin.
20. Bush, D. (1955, January 9). Education for all is education for none. The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1983/03/06/obituaries/dr-douglas-bush-86-author-and-former-harvard-teacher.html
21. Cremin, L.(1965).The genius of American education.New York, NY:Random House.
22. Dow, P. B.(1991).Schoolhouse politics: Lessons from the Sputnik era.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
23. Dow, P. B.(1975).MACOS revisited: A commentary on the most frequently asked questions about Man: A Course of Study.Social Education,39(6),388+393-396.
24. Evans, R. W.(2011).The tragedy of American school reform: How curriculum politics and entrenched dilemmas have diverted us from democracy.New York, NY:Palgrave/McMillan.
25. Evans, R. W.(2004).The social studies wars: What should we teach the children?.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
26. Evans, R. W.(2011).The hope for American school reform: The Cold War pursuit of inquiry learning in social studies.New York, NY:Palgrave Macmillan.
27. Fenton, E.,Good, J. M.(1965).Project Social Studies: A progress report.Social Education,29(4),206-208.
28. Flesch, R.(1955).Why Jonny can't read: And what you can do about it.New York, NY:Harper & Row.
29. Foshay, A. W.(1966).Knowledge and the structure of the disciplines.Readings in curriculum,Boston, MA:
30. Haas, J. D.(1977).The era of the new social studies.Boulder, CO:Social Science Education Consortium.
31. Haley, F.(1972).Harvard University Social Studies Project.Social Education,36(7),749-750.
32. Haley, F.(1972).Sociological resources for the social studies.Social Education,36(7),765-767.
33. Hertzberg, H. W.(1981).Social studies reform: 1880-1980.Boulder, CO:Social Science Education Consortium.
34. Kliebard, H.(2004).The struggle of the American curriculum, 1893-1958.Boston, MA:Routeledge & Kegan Paul.
35. Kliebard, H. M.(1965).Structure of disciplines as an educational slogan.Teachers College Record,56(7),598-603.
36. Kliebard, H. M.(ed.)(2002).Changing course: American curriculum reform in the 20th century.New York, NY:Teachers College.
37. Lindzey, G.(ed.)(1980).A history of psychology in autobiography.San Francisco, CA:W. H. Freeman.
38. Lynd, A.(1953).Quackery in the public schools.New York, NY:Grosset & Dunlap.
39. Northup, T. E.(1971).West Lafayette,Purdue University.
40. Olson, D.(2007).Jerome Bruner: The cognitive revolution in educational theory.New York, NY:Continuum.
41. Phenix, P. H.(1962).The use of the discipline as curriculum content.The Educational Forum,March,273-280.
42. Ribble, R. B., Jr.(1966).Columbus,Purdue University.
43. Sanders, N. M.,Tanck, M. L.(1970).A critical appraisal of twenty-six national social studies projects.Social Education,34(4),383-388.
44. Schwab, J. J.(1962).The concept of structure of a discipline.The Educational Record,43(3),197-205.
45. Shaver, J. P.(1992).The new social studies, textbooks, and reform in social studies.Publishing Research Quarterly,8(4),23-32.
46. Smith, M. (1949). And madly teach: A layman looks at public school education. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery
47. Takaya, K.(2013).Jerome Bruner: Developing a sense of the possible.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Springer Netherlands.
48. Trace, A. S.(1961).What Ivan knows that Johnny doesn’t.New York, NY:Random House.
49. 李緒武,蘇惠憫(1984).社會科教材教法.臺北市:五南.
50. 周淑卿,章五奇(2016)。流動長河的光與影：臺灣近五十年小學社會科教科書課程觀之演變。臺灣國民中小學教科書課程觀的演變：口述史的研究，臺北市:
51. 邵瑞珍（編譯）,Bruner, J. S.(1995).教育的過程.臺北市:五南.
52. 張春興(1994).教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐.臺北市:東華書局.
53. 教育部(2018)。教育部（2018b）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要技術型高級中等學校─社會領域。臺北市：教育部。
54. 教育部(2018)。教育部（2018a）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校─社會領域。臺北市：教育部。
55. 梁恆正(1975)。布魯納認知理論在課程組織中的應用。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所集刊，17，413-486。
56. 單文經(1998)。美國中學社會科課程架構。美國教育研究－－師資培育及課程與教學，臺北市:
57. 黃光雄（編）(2004).教學原理.臺北市:師大書苑.
58. 歐用生(2001).國民小學社會科教學研究.臺北市:師大書苑.
59. 謝文全（2000）。衛生教育福利部（美國）。取自 http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1313987/

1. (2024)。探究教學的教育關懷：安默斯特課程方案研究。教育研究集刊，70(1)，37-72。