從政策執行與政策評估視角分析《幼兒園教保活動暫行課程大綱》政策之施行

Analyzing the Conduction of ＂Pre-school Temporary Curriculum Guideline＂ in Light of Policy Execution and Assessment

10.7038/JETP.201612_(34).0002

林思騏(LIN, Si-Qi)

幼兒園教保活動課程大綱 ； 政策執行 ； 政策評估 ； Pre-school Temporary Curriculum Guideline ； Policy Execution ； Policy Assessment

教育理論與實踐學刊

34期（2016 / 12 / 01）

31 - 56

繁體中文

本研究以後實證政策執行研究途徑來瞭解《課程大綱》政策在實務面影響政策達成的關鍵要素，並融入回應建構評估的精神，檢視《課程大綱》政策在幼兒園現場的施行狀況。研究顯示對於《課程大綱》政策施行有贊成與反對二派說法，贊成者認為善用《課程大綱》內涵檢視自己的課程判斷，讓自己的課程有更加全面的想法是非常好的作法。持反對意見者並非對《課程大綱》政策本身有太大的意見。教育資源配置不公平、幼兒園本身營運穩定、面對新課程不確定、擔心工作量大增等外在因素，是不配合《課程大綱》政策融入教學的原因。本研究結果發現真正推動創新、造成課程改變的最大力量，已不是來自原本掌握詮釋權的那群學者，而是在不同的工作場域，關心怎樣才是為幼兒好的一般幼教工作者。

This paper attempts to understand the key factors for the actualization of the policy of ＂Pre- School Temporary Curriculum Guideline＂ in terms of ＂post-positivism of policy execution＂ and to examine the conduction of ＂Curriculum Guideline＂ in kindergartens with the analytical perspectives of responding, constructing and assessing. It shows that there are pros and cons of conducting this policy. Supporters claim that utilizing this curriculum guideline could be helpful to review their own decision of curriuclum design and to develop a more comprehensive vision of curriculum. Comparatively, the oppositions do not argue against the content of the policy. The unequal allocation of educational resource, the instability of the operation of kindergarten, the uncertainity of new curriculum and the potentially numerous increasing of workload are the main external factors of their unwilling to corporate with the integration of the policy into their teaching. This paper finds that the most powerful strength to innovate and transform curriculums are not no more from scholars with rhetoric power, but from those pre-school teachers and personnel in different fields who are all genuinely concerned about the well-being of children.

1. 教育部（2015）。幼兒教育及照顧法。全國法規資料庫。取自http://law.moj.gov.tw
2. 教育部（2012）。幼兒園教保活動課程暫行大綱。臺北：教育部。
3. Bardach, E.(1977).The implementation game. What happens after a bill becomes a Law.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
4. Bridges,W.,Mitchell, S.(2000).Leading transition: A new model for change.Leader to Leader,16,30-36.
5. DeLeon, P.(1999).The missing link revisited: Contemporary implementation research.Policy Studies Review,16(3),311-339.
6. Goggin, M.L.,Bowman, A.O.M.,Lester, J.P.(1990).Implementation theory and practice: Toward a third generation.Glenwood, IL:Scott Foreman/Little Brown.
7. Guba, E.,Lincoln, Y.(1989).Fourth generation evaluation.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
8. Kowalchuk, E. A.(1999).Perceptions of practice: What art student teachers say they learn and need to know.Studies in Art Education,41(1),71-82.
9. Mazmanian, D. A.,Sabatier, P. A.(1983).Implementation and public policy.Glenview, IL:Scott, Forssmann and Company.
10. Pressman, J.L.,Wildavsky, A.(1973).Implementation: How great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland.Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
11. Verweire, K.,Berghe, L. Van den(2003).Integrated performance management: Adding a new dimension.Management Decision,41(8),782-790.
12. White, J. D.、Adams, G. B.、劉亞平譯、高潔譯(2005)。公共行政研究—對理論與實踐的反思。北京:清華大學。
13. Wien, C. A.(2004).Negotiating standards in the primary classroom: The teacher's dilemma.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
14. Wilson, J. Q.(2000).Bureaucracy: What government agencies do and why they do it.New York, NY:Basic.
15. 余致力編(2006)。新世紀公共政策理論與實務。臺北:世新大學。
16. 吳佩瑾(2014)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，樹德科技大學。
17. 汪正洋(2015)。圖解公共政策。臺北:五南。
18. 幸曼玲、楊金寶、丘嘉慧、柯華葳、蔡敏玲、金瑞芝、林玫君(2015)。新課綱想說的事：幼兒園教保活動課程大綱的理念與發展。臺北:心理。
19. 邱吉鶴(2013)。政府績效管理工具與技術。臺北:秀威。
20. 翁福元(2007)。教育政策社會學。臺北:五南。
21. 張世賢(2011)。公共政策分析。臺北:五南。
22. 蔡克容(1998)。建構主義對教育改革的啟示。課程與教學，1(3)，47-60。
23. 鄭啟川、趙滿鈴、洪敏莉(2012)。贏在企業專業的起跑點。臺北:前程。
24. 羅清俊(2015)。公共政策—現象觀察與實務操作。臺北:揚智。

1. (2020)。芬蘭學前課程綱要修訂機制之探究。教育學刊，55，81-118。