一所公辦民營學校課程創新與教學實踐之研究

A Study on Curricular Innovation and Teaching Practices in a Public School Managed by the Private Sector

10.6423/HHHC.202103_(132).0006

陳碧卿(Bi-Ching Chen)；范熾文(Chin-Wen Fan)；吳正成(Cheng-Cheng Wu)

公辦民營學校 ； 課程創新 ； 教學實踐 ； The private management of public schools ； curricular innovation ； teaching practices

學校行政

132期（2021 / 03 / 16）

123 - 144

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討一所公辦民營學校在課程創新與教學實踐之作為，以半結構式訪談作為主要之資料蒐集方法，並輔以參與觀察及文件分析。研究結果發現：1.校長在學校課程創新的理念為開發學生的潛能與性向，並以培養能專注自己（自發）、關心別人（互動）、改變世界（共好）的地球公民為教學目標；2.學校在提升教師專業知能與促進課程教學的團隊動能的做法：以建構「人師」的核心價值與目標，並形塑創新教學與優質教師學習共同體文化；3.學校之課程特色是：兼顧學力的自然與人文在地課程及以解決問題為導向的創意行動方案DFC（Design for Change）創意教學；4.學校在推動實驗教育創新有高度成效。最後本文提出二點建議：第一、多元培育師資並強化教師的穩定度，持續的教師專業成長與發展；第二、注入資源及社區家長共學模式，各學習主軸可再延伸並深化主題課程。

This study attempted to discuss the curricular innovation and teaching practices in a public school managed by the private sector using a semi-structured interview to collect primary data, supplemented with participant observation and data analysis. Research findings indicate the following. First of all, the principal believes that an innovative curriculum facilitates students' ability to develop their potential and characters. To nurture our next generation to become global citizens, the curriculum should uphold the three values of the 12-year Basic Education in Taiwan: students' intrapersonal and interpersonal competencies such as self-development and caring for others, and contribution to public goods. Second, to enhance teachers' pedagogical competence and promote team-building in curricular design, the school stresses the importance of building exemplars to guide students, shaping the culture of innovative teaching and building a learning community where exceptional teachers are asked to partake in. Third, The characteristics of curriculum not only pay attention to academic ability, but also integrate local resources where students can immerse themselves in local nature and culture. DFC (Design for Change), a creative teaching method used to develop students' problem solving, is also highlighted in the curriculum. Last, the school proves to be successful in promoting experimental and innovative education. Finally, the findings of the study suggested that it is important to train teachers in multiple ways and strengthen the stability of teachers, and continuous teacher professional growth and development is also necessary. Moreover, each learning spindle can be extended and deepened thematic courses by injecting resources and sharing parental learning model in the community.

1. 李柏佳(2016)。學校型態實驗教育實施條例解析──國民教育階段為例。學校行政，101，15-33。
   連結：
2. 顏童文(2007)。優質學校創新經營的理念與策略。學校行政雙月刊，47，92-112。
   連結：
3. Burns, M. K.(2013).Contextualizing school psychology practice: Introducingfeatured research.School Psychology Review,42(3),334-342.
4. Denzin, N. K.(1994).The art and politics of interpretation.Handbook of qualitative research,London, England:
5. Dewey, J.(1997).Experience and education.New York:Free Press.
6. Fitz, J.,Beers, B.(2002).Education management organisations and the privatisation of public education:A cross-national comparison of the USA and Britain.Comparative Education,38(2),137-154.
7. Fuhrman, S. H.,Elmore, R.F.(1990).Understanding local control in the wake of state education reform.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,12,82-96.
8. Fullan, M.(2007).The new meaning of educational change.New York:Teachers College Press.
9. Glatthorn, A. A.(2000).The principal as curriculum leader.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
10. Jusović, R. R.,Vidović, V. V.,Grahovac, M.(2013).Framework of teacher competences—ATEPIE approach.Teaching profession for the 21st century,Belgrade:
11. Kotter, J. P.(1990).A force for change: How leadership differs from management.New York:The Free Press.
12. Lincoln, Y. S.,Guba, E.G.(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
13. Zakirova, R. A.(2016).The structure of primary school teachers’ professional competence.International Journal of Environmental and Science Education,11(6),1167-1173.
14. 左逢源(2002)。台南市，台南師範學院。
15. 吳明清(1997)。發展學校特色理念與做法。北縣教育，18，21-26。
16. 吳清山(1999)。臺北市國中小實施「公辦民營」之可行性分析。教育政策論壇，2(1)，157-179。
17. 吳清山(2018).幸福教育的實踐.臺北市:高等教育.
18. 吳清山(1998)。臺北市政府教育局委託研究報告臺北市政府教育局委託研究報告,臺北市:台北市景興國民小學。
19. 李希揚(1999)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學。
20. 林志成（編）(2011).特色學校理論、實務與案例.臺北市:高等教育.
21. 林錫恩,范熾文,石啟宏(2018)。學校型態實驗教育經營策略之探析。臺灣教育評論月刊，7(1)，135-142。
22. 范熾文(2008).學校經營與管理─概念、理論與實務.高雄市:麗文.
23. 秦夢群(2015).教育選擇權研究.台北市:五南.
24. 秦夢群,曹俊德(2001)。我國義務教育公辦民營制度之可行性研究。國立政治大學教育與心理研究，24，19-48。
25. 馬信行,于倬民,歐進士,周志宏,戴玉綺,林珈夙(1996)。教育部國民教育司委託研究報告教育部國民教育司委託研究報告,教育部國民教育司。
26. 陳麗美(2005)。台中市，台中師範學院。
27. 馮朝霖(2015)。把根紮深、把夢作大──臺灣實驗教育發展願景。新北市教育，14，13-18。
28. 黃政傑(1999).課程改革.台北:漢文.
29. 溫育賢(2019)。國中小學校創新經營關鍵因素──以五位 KDP 首獎校長的經驗為例。臺灣教育評論月刊，8(4)，103-110。
30. 蔡清田(2002).學校整體課程經營.臺北市:五南.
31. 鄭崇趁(2011).教育經營學導論：理念、策略、實踐.臺北:心理.