Kliebard對課程理論意義的探討

On Kliebard's Discussions About the Meaning of Curriculum Theory

10.6384/CIQ.202207_25(3).0003

單文經(Wen-Jing Shan)

H. M. Kliebard ； 課程理論 ； 隱喻與理論 ； 課程理論即隱喻 ； H. M. Kliebard ； curriculum theory ； metaphor and theory ； curriculum theory as metaphor

課程與教學

25卷3期（2022 / 07 / 01）

53 - 82

繁體中文

本文旨在以美國學者Herbart M. Kliebard（1930－2015）為對象，析論其在課程理論意義方面的探討。於說明題旨、緣由、要項與架構後，以三節分述Kliebard對課程理論所作的概念分析、其對隱喻與理論二者關聯所作的解釋，以及其為課程理論所作的示例。第伍節討論，先指出Kliebard主張寬廣看待課程理論的概念，其較早在課程語境說明隱喻與理論的關聯、並以示例闡釋課程理論即隱喻的意蘊二項特色；後則在其課程理論的大哉問「該教什麼」所提核心四問之上，以後來學者之見另加補充的六問，並據以作成衍釋：除應關注作為課程載體的知識背後之政治意涵，並應更適切地將學生的背景因素納入教學的考慮，俾便確保學生順遂地近取課程的知識。末了結論指出，Kliebard在以學理方法完成之課程理論方面的著述，固然尚有可資進一步研究的專題，而其以歷史方法完成之課程歷史方面的著述，亦不乏與課程理論有關的要項可再作進一步研究。

This article aims to analyze critically on H. M. Kliebard's discussions about the meaning of curriculum theory. After explaining the themes, reasons, main items and structure of the research, Kliebard's discussions of the meaning of curriculum theory are divided into three sections, i.e. his conceptual analysis of curriculum theory, his explanation of the relationships between metaphor and theory, and his examples for curriculum theory. Then, six questions are added to the four core questions of ＂What to teach＂ mentioned by Kliebard, and an interpretation was made: In addition to paying attention to the political meanings behind the knowledge as the curriculum carrier, the students' background factors should be more appropriately incorporated into the teaching to ensure that the students can access to the curriculum knowledge smoothly. Finally, the conclusion points out that Kliebard's works on curriculum theory done by using theoretical method can be further studied, his works on curriculum history done by using historical method, also have some important items on curriculum theory to be further studied.

1. 宋明娟(2007).D. Tanner、L. Tanner 與 Kliebard 的課程史研究觀點解析.教育研究集刊,53(4),1-32.
   連結：
2. 單文經(2017)。解析杜威有關工作活動（Occupations）的主張。課程與教學季刊，20(2)，139-164。
   連結：
3. 鍾鴻銘(2004)。H. M. Kliebard 的課程史研究及其啟示。教育研究集刊，50(1)，91-118。
   連結：
4. Beauchamp. G. A.(1981).Curriculum theory.F. E. Peacock.
5. Cuban, L.(1993).How teachers taught: Constancy and change in American classrooms, 1890-1990.Teachers College Press.
6. Dewey, J.(2008).Experience and education.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
7. Dewey, J.(2008).The public and its problems.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
8. Dewey, J.(2008).Logic.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
9. Dewey, J.(2008).Child and curriculum.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
10. Dewey, J.(2008).School and society.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
11. Dewey, J.(2008).The influence of the high school upon educational methods.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
12. Dewey, J.(2008).The sources of a science of education.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
13. Dewey, J.(1966).Lectures in the philosophy of education: 1899.Random House.
14. Dewey, J.(2008).Democracy and education.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
15. Dewey, J.(2008).Growth in activity.The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953
16. Franklin, B.M. (Ed.)(2000).Curriculum and consequence: Herbert M. Kliebard and the promise of schooling.Teachers College Press.
17. Hall, G. S. (1901). Ideal school as based on child study. Forum, 32(1), 24-39. https://quote.ucsd.edu/childhood/files/2013/05/hall-idealschool.pdf
18. Hall, G. S. (1911). Some defects of our public school. Educational Problems, 2, 570-633. https://archive.org/details/educationalprobl02halliala
19. Harris, W. T. (1895). Report of the fifteen: Correlation of studies in elementary schools. The Journal of Education, 41(10), 155-167. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44046314
20. Harris, W. T. (1896). How the will combines with the intellect in the higher orders of knowing. Journal of Proceedings and Addresses of the Thirty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the National Education Association, 440-446. https://books.google.com.tw/books?id=kqopAQAAMAAJ&hl=zh-TW&pg=PA443#v=onepage&q&f=false
21. Hickman, L.(Ed.)(2008).The Collected Works of John Dewey, 1882-1953.Intelex Corp.
22. Kliebard, H. M.(1975).Persistent curriculum issues in historical perspectives.Curriculum Theorizing: The Reconceptualists
23. Kliebard, H. M.(1975).Reappraisal: The Tyler rationale.Curriculum Theorizing: The Reconceptualists
24. Kliebard, H. M.(2006).s reconstruction of the curriculum.John Dewey and our educational prospect: A critical engagement with Dewey’s Democracy and Education
25. Kliebard, H. M.(1975).Metaphorical roots of curriculum design.Curriculum Theorizing: The Reconceptualists
26. Kliebard, H. M.(1989).Problems of definition in curriculum.Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,5(1),1-5.
27. Kliebard, H. M.(1992).Curriculum theory: Give me a ‘for instance.Forging the American curriculum; Essays in curriculum history and theory
28. Kliebard, H. M.(1992).Curriculum theory as metaphor.Forging the American curriculum: Essays in curriculum history and theory
29. Kliebard, H. M.(1992).Dewey and Herbartians: The genesis of a theory of curriculum.Forging the American curriculum; Essays in curriculum history and theory
30. Kliebard, H. M.(1992).The decline of humanistic studies in the American school curriculum.Forging the American curriculum; Essays in curriculum history and theory
31. Kliebard, H. M.(2002).Constructing the concept of curriculum on the Wisconsin frontier: How school restructing sustained a pedagogical revolution.Changing course: American curriculum reform in the 20th century
32. Kliebard, H. M.(2009).Chance encounters and consequential choices.Leaders in curriculum studies: Intellectual self-portraits
33. Kliebard, H. M.(1992).Forging the American curriculum: Essays in curriculum history and theory.Routledge.
34. Kliebard, H. M.(2004).The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893-1958.Routledge & Kegan Paul.
35. Lawrence, G. D.(1966).Claremont Graduate School and University.
36. Marsh, C.,Willis, G.(2007).Curriculum: Alternative approaches, ongoing isssues.Pearson.
37. Nagel, E.(1969).Philosophy of science and educational theory.Studies in Philosophy and Education,7,5-27.
38. Ornstein, A. C.,Hunkins, F. P.(1998).Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues.Pearson.
39. Ornstein, A. C.,Hunkins, F. P.(2004).Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues.Pearson.
40. Page, R. N.(2010).Struggle: A history of “mere” ideas.Curriculum Inquiry,40(2),205-220.
41. Pinar, W. F.(2004).What is curriculum theory?.Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Pinar, W. F.(2012).What is curriculum theory?.Routledge.
43. Reese, W. J.(2002).The Philosopher-King of St. Louis.Curriculum and consequence: Herbert M. Kliebard and the promise of schooling
44. Scheffler, I.(1960).The language of education.Charles C. Thomas.
45. Scheffler, I.,林逢祺（譯）(1994).教育的語言.桂冠.
46. Schubert, W.(1986).Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility.MacMillan.
47. Small, A. S. (1897). Some demands of sociology upon pedagogy. American Journal of Sociology, 2(6), 839-851. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2761828.pdf.
48. 何珊雲(2010)。課程史研究的經典範式與學術意義－－試析《1893-1958 年的美國課程鬥爭》。北京大學教育評論，2010(1)，164-171。
49. 李奉儒（2000）。理論。教育大辭書。http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1310542/
50. 李倩雯(2018)。克里巴德診斷：進步主義教育真的存在嗎？。課程教學研究，2018(7)，11-15。
51. 李倩雯(2017)。克里巴德「混重」課程變遷觀述評。外國教育研究，44(2)，47-59。
52. 李倩雯(2018)。美國課程史研究的史觀問題。外國教育研究，45(9)，93-103。
53. 李倩雯(2018)。克里巴德課程研究的河流隱喻及其歷史意涵——基於《美國課程鬥爭（1893—1958）》的文本解讀。中國人民大學教育學刊，2018(1)，125-135。
54. 夏英(2015)。西方課程史研究路徑的比較與啟示。教育學術月刊，2015(7)，2017-2111。
55. 張鍠焜（2000）。論述。教育大辭書。http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1314126/
56. 華東師範大學出版社（編）(2015).杜威全集晚期著作第五卷（1929-1930）.華東師範大學出版社.
57. 黃政傑(1991).課程設計.東華書局.
58. 黃政傑（編）(2005).課程思想.冠學.
59. 楊智穎（編）(2015).課程史研究.學富.
60. 簡成熙(1996).理性、分析、教育人.師大書苑.
61. 魏小梅(2018)。西南大學。