高中男校社會組學生的陽剛氣質建構與實踐：以台灣中部一所高中之考察為例

Masculinity Construction and Practice Process of Male Students in Humanity and Social Science Programs in a Senior High School

10.3966/160857872017052301001

邱長彥(Chang-Yen Chiu)

男性氣質（陽剛氣質） ； 性別教育 ； 高中學生 ； 類組選擇 ； masculinities ； gender education ； senior high school students ； high school progam tracking

台灣性學學刊

23卷1期（2017 / 05 / 01）

1 - 28

繁體中文

台灣普通高中在實施分流教育時，一直都有男生傾向選自然組而女生傾向選社會組的性別隔離現象，本研究想要瞭解打破傳統規範的社會組男學生如何建構與實踐自己的陽剛氣質。因此，以台灣中部某男子公立高中做為研究場域，透過深度訪談法與焦點團體法進一步分析2013年與2014年間該校16名高三社會組男生陽剛氣質的建構與實踐過程。結果發現，在數理學科知識掛帥的男校文化中，選修社會組會遭遇各種阻礙與歧視，讓學生產生不少壓力與困擾。社會組的陽剛氣質實踐，會經歷「被否定與再建構」的過程，一方面要抵抗與否定自然組學生的價值，另一方面也會塑造出社會組男生的多元陽剛氣質。不過，單一性別學習環境也讓他們更難擺脫傳統父權文化與價值觀桎梏，認為他們的學業與成就還是比女生優秀。期許透過本研究，能使更多人擺脫性別意識型態的束縛，落實性別平等，進而營造性別友善的學習環境。

In the education streaming process of senior high schools in Taiwan, there is always a gender segregation tendency that boys are inclined to choose natural science programs while girls choose humanity and social science programs. This article intended to know how students who broke traditional regulations in humanity and social science programs construct and practice their masculinities. Therefore, 16 male students in a boys' senior-high-school in central Taiwan were selected as the participants, and the author further analyzed the masculinity construction and practice process of students in humanity and social science programs based on the data collected from in-depth interviews and focus group interviews. It is found that majoring in natural science programs is the main choice in the school, that students who choose humanity and social science programs will meet different obstacles and discrimination, causing them stresses and troubles. The practice of masculinity in humanity and social science programs will experience ＂denied and re-constructed＂ process. On one hand, it resists and denies masculinity value in natural science programs. On the other hand, it will build multiple masculinities of boys in humanity and social science programs. However, single gender study environment makes it hard for them to get rid of traditional patriarchal culture and value bondage, and think their academic performances and achievements are better than girls. It is expected through this study that more students can get rid of gender consciousness bondage and carry out gender equality so as to further build a gender friendly learning environment.

1. 王雅各(2007)。新世紀的男性研究。女學學誌，24，135-173。
   連結：
2. 陳婉琪(2013)。高中生選組行為的原因與結果：性別、信念、教師角色與能力發展。台灣社會學，25，89-123。
   連結：
3. Campbell, K.,Evans, C.(1994).Gender issues and the math / science curricula: Effects on females.People and Education,2,284-295.
4. Connell, R. W.(1995).Masculinities.Berkeley, LA:The University of California Press.
5. Connell, R. W.(2002).Gender.Oxford, UK:Blackwell.
6. Connell, R. W.,Messerschmidt, J. W.(2005).Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept.Gender and Society,19(6),829-859.
7. Ghaill, Mac an(Ed.)(1996).Understanding masculinities.Philadephia, PA:Open University Press.
8. Harvey, G.,Hergert, L. F.(1986).Strategies for achieving sex equity in education.Theory into Practice,25(4),290-299.
9. Kessler, S.,Ashenden, D. J.,Connell, R. W.,Dowsett, G. W.(1982).Ockers and disco-maniacs.Sydney, Australia:Inner City Education Center.
10. Lo, A.,Shieh, V.(1992).A study form an education perspective to investigate sex equity in the classroom between teacher and student at elementary school level in Kaohsiung, Taiwan.the World Council for Curriculum and Instruction, the WCCI Triennial Conference,Cairo, Egypt:
11. Mac an Ghaill, M.(1994).The making of men: Masculinities, sexualities and schooling.Philadelphia, PA:Open University Press.
12. Moje, E. B.(Ed.),O'Brien, D. G.(Ed.)(2001).Constructions of literacy: Studies of teaching and learning in and out of secondary schools.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
13. Sadker, M.,Sadker, D.(1982).Sex equity handbook for school.New York, NY:Longman.
14. Strauss, A. L.,Corbin, J. M.(1998).Basic of qualitatwe research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
15. Vockell, F. L.,Lobanc, S.(1981).Sex role stereotyping by high school females in Science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,18(2),209-219.
16. 方剛(2009)。男公關：陽剛氣質研究。桃園市:國立中央大學性別研究室。
17. 馬國勳、伊慶春(2008)。誰是你的重要他人？探討家庭、學校對於青少年教育期望的影響與變化。2008年台灣社會學年會，台北市:
18. 張盈堃編、吳嘉麗編(2013)。陽剛氣質：國外論述與台灣經驗。台北市:巨流。
19. 陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。台北市:五南。
20. 黃淑玲編、游美惠編(2007)。性別向度與台灣社會。台北市:巨流。
21. 黃鴻文、王心怡(2010)。教育分流與性別再製：二班高中女生學生文化之民族誌研究。台灣教育社會學研究，10(1)，127-174。
22. 楊巧玲(2005)。性別化的興趣與能力：高中學生類組選擇之探究。台灣教育社會學研究，5(2)，113-153。
23. 楊龍立(1993)。我國高中學生主修科別與性別的關係之研究。教育研究資訊，1(3)，64-75。
24. 謝小芩、林大森、陳佩英(2011)。性別科系跨界？大學生的性別與科系選擇。台灣社會學刊，48，95-149。