美國新社會科運動及其有關教材改革計畫評析（1950－1970年代）

Critical Analysis of New Social Studies Movement and its Reform of Teaching Materials in the United States during 1950s-1970s

10.6481/JTR.201904_12(1).03

單文經(Wen-Jing Shan)

美國社會科史 ； 新社會科運動 ； 教材改革 ； 社會領綱 ； History of social studies in the United States ； New Social Studies movement ； teaching materials reform ； Curriculum Guidelines for the Social Studies Learning

教科書研究

12卷1期（2019 / 04 / 15）

69 - 109

繁體中文

鑒於新近公布之中小學社會領綱強調學習者表現、以探究與實作的活動激發學習者參與，並鼓勵其自主學習等作法，與1950－1970年代發生於美國的新社會科運動之精神相近，本文乃以此一以社會科教材改革為核心的運動為對象，據適當的文獻進行歷史研究。本文先敘述其於美蘇冷戰與太空競賽，以及眾社會科學爭入中小學課程等情況下起始，在時勢遞移、思潮轉變而逐漸消衰之外，並以三個教材改革計畫舉隅評析其特色、成敗原因與傳承。次則以各項佐證說明該運動代有傳人，以及以審慎樂觀社會領綱變革成功之緣由。文末除總結大要、指陳未來研究方向外，並反思本文有言說多於實例，與夫事例偏於歷史一科之不足，當於日後再作他文時注意及之。

The recently promulgated Curriculum Guidelines for the Social Studies Learning in Taiwan-which emphasize learner performance, activities that encourage inquiry, and hands-on learning to facilitate learner participation and independent study-bear many similarities to the New Social Studies movement in the United States between 1950s and 1970s. This study analyzed the reform of teaching materials that occurred during this movement through a thorough review of the literature. In addition to examining the movement's origins in the Cold War and Space Race between the United States and Soviet Union alongside the fight for social science content on the school curriculum and its subsequent gradual decline caused by changes in the social trends and attitudes, this paper describes the characteristics of the New Social Studies movement, reasons for its successes and failures, and its legacy by exemplifying three selected teaching materials reform projects. The findings show that the movement has continued through several generations to the present day, indicating that cautious optimism is warranted regarding the early successes of the reform brought by the Curriculum Guidelines for Social Studies Learning in Taiwan. Finally, this paper discusses directions for possible future research and the present study's limitations, such as the reliance on discourse over examples. Future studies on this topic should attempt to improve on these limitations.

1. 單文經(2017)。19、20 世紀之交美國中學歷史單獨設科與社會合科演變的歷史分析。教科書研究，10(2)，33-66。
   連結：
2. 楊國揚,張茂桂,張懿婷,陳亭潔,黃春木,楊秀菁(2018)。論壇：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：
3. 楊國揚,張茂桂,張懿婷,陳亭潔,黃春木,楊秀菁(2018)。論壇：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. 十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型、技術型、綜合型高級中等學校──社會領域（2018）。
5. (1962).Announcement for project social studies.Social Education,26(3),300.
6. Barr, R. D.,Barth, J. L.,Shermis, S. S.(1970).Defining the social studies: An exploration of three traditions.Social Education,34(7),743-751.
7. Bestor, A. E.(1953).Educational wastelands: The retreat from learning in our public schools.Urbana, IL:University of Illinois Press.
8. Beyer, B. K.(1994).Gone but not forgotten reflections on the New Social Studies Movement.The Social Studies,85(6),251-255.
9. Brown, R. H.(1996).Learning how to learn: The Amherst Project and history education in the schools.The Social Studies,87(6),267-273.
10. Bruner, J. S.(1966).Toward a theory of instruction.New York, NY:W. W. Norton.
11. Bruner, J. S.(1962).On knowing: Essays for the left hand.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University.
12. Bubaker, D. L.,Simon, L. H.,Williams, J. W.(1977).A conceptual framework for social studies curriculum and instruction.Social Education,41(3),201-205.
13. Conlan, J. B.(1975).MACOS: The push for a uniform national curriculum.Social Education,39(6),388-392.
14. Cuban, L.(2016).Teaching history then and now: A story of stability and change in schools.Cambridge, MA:Harvard Education Press.
15. Dow, P. B.(1991).Schoolhouse politics: Lessons from the Sputnik era.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
16. 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.
17. Evans, R. W.(2006).The social studies wars, now and then.Social Education,70(5),317-321.
18. 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.
19. Evans, R. W.(2004).The social studies wars: What should we teach the children?.New York, NY:Teachers College.
20. Fenton, E(1991).Reflections on the "New Social Studies".The Social Studies,82(3),84-90.
21. Fenton, E.(1967).The new social studies.New York, NY:Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
22. Fenton, E.,Good, J. M.(1965).Project Social Studies: A progress report.Social Education,29(4),206-208.
23. Fitzgerald, F.(1979).America revised: History schoolbooks in the twentieth century.Boston, MA:Little, Brown & Company.
24. Flesch, R.(1955).Why Jonny can't read: And what you can do about it.New York, NY:Harper & Row.
25. Geortz, W. W.(1994).The New Social Studies: The memoir of a practitioner.The Social Studies,85(3),100-106.
26. Gross, R. E.(1977).The status of the social studies in the public schools of the United states: Facts and impressions of a national survey.Social Education,41(3),194-200+205.
27. Haas, J. D.(1977).The era of the New Social Studies.Boulder, CO:Social Science Education Consortium.
28. Haley, F.(1972).Introduction to project materials analyses.Social Education,36(7),718-771.
29. Hertzberg, H. W.(1981).Social studies reform: 1880-1980.Boulder, CO:Social Science Education Consortium.
30. Hickman, L.(Ed.).The collected works of John Dewey, 1882-1953.Charlottesville, VA:Intelex.
31. Hickman, L.(Ed.).The collected works of John Dewey, 1882-1953.Charlottesville, VA:Intelex.
32. Hiner, N. R.(1973).Professions in process: Changing relations among social scientists, historians, and educators, 1880-1920.History Teacher,6(2),201-218.
33. Jones, P. S.(Ed.),Coxford, A. F.(Ed.)(1970).A history of mathematics education in the United States and Canada.Washington, DC:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
34. Kliebard, H. M.(Ed.)(2002).Changing course: American curriculum reform in the 20th century.New York, NY:Teachers College.
35. Link, A. S.(1985).The American Historical Association, 1884-1984: Retrospect and prospect.American Historical Review,90(1),1-17.
36. Lynd, A.(1953).Quackery in the public schools.New York, NY:Grosset & Dunlap.
37. Lynn, L.,Walmsley, E.(2003).A history of the "new mathematics" movement and its relationship with current mathematical reform.Lanham, MD:University Press of America.
38. Massialas, B. G.(2009).The "New Social Studies": Retrospect and prospect.The Social Studies,100(6),246-250.
39. Novick, P.(1988).That noble dream: The "objectivity question" and the American historical profession.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
40. Orrill, R.,Shapiro, L.(2005).From bold beginnings to an uncertain future: The discipline of history and history education.The American Historical Review,110,727-751.
41. Oswald, J. M.(1993).The social studies curriculum revolution: 1960-1975.The Social Studies,84(1),14-19.
42. Penna, A.(1995).The new social studies in perspective: The Carnegie-Mellon slow-learner project.The Social Studies,86(4),155-182.
43. Pratt, R. P.(1972).Man: A course of study.Social Education,36(7),742-744.
44. Ravitch, D.(1987).Tot sociology: Or what happened to history in the grade schools.The American Scholar,56(3),343-354.
45. Rice, M. J.(1992).Reflections on the New Social Studies: The memoir of a practitioner.The Social Studies,83(5),224-231.
46. Ross, D.(1991).The origins of American social science.Cambridge, MA:Cambridge University Press.
47. Sanders, N. M.,Tanck, M. L.(1970).A critical appraisal of twenty-six national social studies projects.Social Education,34(4),383-388.
48. Schneider, D. O.,Sickle, R. L.(1979).The status of the social studies: The publishers’ perspective.Social education,43(6),461-4655.
49. Senesh, L.(1981).The New Social Science Movement of the 1960s.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,3(5),63-73.
50. Shaver, J. P.(1992).The new social studies, textbooks, and reform in social studies.Publishing Research Quarterly,8(4),23-32.
51. Shaver, J. P.,Davis, O. L.,Helburn, S. W.(1979).The status of social studies education: Impressions from three NSF studies.Social Education,43(2),150-153.
52. Smith, M. (1949). And madly teach: A layman looks at public school education. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery.
53. Stern, B. S.(Ed.)(2010).The new social studies: People, projects, and perspectives.Charlotte, NC:Information Age.
54. Switzer, T. J.(1993).In retrospect: Sociological resources for the social studies curriculum project.The Social Studies,84(5),224-229.
55. Trace, A. S.(1961).What Ivan knows that Johnny doesn't.New York, NY:Random House.
56. Tyack, D.,Tobin, W.(1994).The "grammar" of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change?.American Educational Research Journal,31(3),453-479.
57. Wald, M. L. (1983). Dr. Douglas Bush, 86, author and former Harvard teacher. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1983/03/06/obituaries/dr-douglas-bush-86-author-and-former-harvard-teacher.html
58. White, H.(Ed.)(1978).Tropics of discourse, essays in cultural criticism.Baltimore, MD:John Hopkins University Press.
59. 王振寰（編）,瞿海源（編）(2014).社會學與臺灣社會.臺北市:巨流圖書.
60. 王曉玲(2016)。東吳大學歷史學系碩士班。
61. 石蘭梅(2016)。數位融入歷史教學的嘗試。教育研究月刊，262，37-52。
62. 李涵鈺（2019，1 月）。在高中歷史課堂教歷史閱讀之問題及因應。國家教育研究院電子報，179。取自 https://epaper.naer.edu.tw/index.php?edm_no=179&content_no=3148&preview
63. 林逢祺（編）,洪仁進（編）(2013).教育哲學──隱喻篇.臺北市:學富.
64. 陳伯璋（2000）。國防教育法案（美國）。取自 http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1309302/?index=3
65. 詹美華（編）,宋家復（編）(2018).歷史閱讀素養：教學設計之理念與實例.臺北市:國家教育研究院.
66. 盧珊(2010)。上海市，上海師範大學教育學系。

1. 單文經(2020)。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。課程與教學，23(2)，153-183。
2. 單文經(2021)。美國新新社會科運動及其有關課程與教學革新作法評析（1968年－1970年代）。課程與教學，24(3)，113-144。
3. (2023)。從教育社會學視角探察Hilda Taba社會科課程發展理論。臺灣教育社會學研究，23(1)，37-82。