國際學校裡的IBDP與AP華語習得規劃之比較

A Comparison of Language Acquisition Planning on IBDP and AP Chinese at International Schools

鍾鎮城(Chen-Cheng Chun)

國際學校 ； 習得規劃 ； 學校本位 ； AP華語 ； International schools ； acquisition planning ； school-based ； IBDP ； AP Chinese

高雄師大學報：人文與藝術類

39期（2015 / 12 / 01）

43 - 56

繁體中文

研究者觀察到，亞洲區域的國際學校在以華語為第一、第二或是外語的語言習得 規劃上，都會存有學校本位的觀點。本研究的目的，即是比較IBDP(International Baccalaureate Diploma Program)與AP(Advanced Placement)華語課程在國際學校得到 施行的原因，以及這兩種課程對於國際學校在華語習得規劃上的影響。此研究採行多重地點民族誌(multi-sited ethnography)，以三所國際學校為研究場域。研究參與者共有15位，其中包含語言規劃者與華語老師。訪談、問卷、正式文件與課堂觀察是資料的收集來源；而資料分析的依據在於訪談逐字稿、問卷的統計數據以及文件及觀察日誌所內蘊的官方統計數字、語言決策、歷史及課室語言使用線索。研究發現：(一)IBDP華語被視為是一種教育國際化的指標，而AP華語則被視為一種教育美國化的象徵；(二)IBDP華語重視學生整體能力的發展，而AP華語重視學生的華語學科能力養成；(三)IBDP與AP華語均呈現了語言教育國際化及全球化的語言習得規劃意識型態。因此，所謂的教育國際化雖不等於教育美國化或全球化，但在國際學校IBDP與AP華語教學發展生態裡，此兩類語言觀點是動態並存的。而最終選擇及接受並存的根本原因，則在於國際化與全球化的華語習得規劃，需奠基於學校所處地域的語言、文化、學習需求以及其他各類影響面向的全球在地化思考。

The researcher observes that international schools in Asian countries implement language acquisition planning for Chinese as a first, second or foreign language, depending upon their school-based contexts. The purpose of this study is to draw a comparison of the reasons on implementing Chinese programs in IBDP (International Baccalaureate Diploma Program) and AP (Advanced Placement) at international schools and their influences on language acquisition planning. A multi-sited ethnographic approach is taken for the study methodology. Three international schools were chosen to be the cases. Fifteen participants, including language planners and Chinese teachers, were invited to participate in this study. Interviews, questionnaires, official documents, and classroom observation fieldnotes were the data sources. Data analysis was taken from interview transcripts, questionnaires, official documents, and the numbers, language decisions, and clues of historical and classroom language use from the fieldnotes. Research results are as follows: 1) IBDP Chinese is considered as a norm for internationalization of an educational institute, whereas AP Chinese is a symbol of an Americanized education; 2) IBDP Chinese values the integraded capacity of students while AP Chinese builds up language proficiency of Chinese as subject matter; 3) The implementation of IBDP Chinese and AP Chinese both shows an internationalized education and globalized ideology in language acquisition planning at international schools. To conclude the above three points, the concept of an internationalized education is not the same as an Americanized or globalized education. Yet these two language concepts are mingled dynamically in IBDP and AP Chinese programs at international schools. However, the glocalized mind-set at the international schools, influenced by languages, cultures, learning needs and other factors, is based on internationalized or globalized Chinese acquisition planning and on how the schools choose and accept those two mixed language concepts, internationalized and globalized.

1. International Baccalaureate Organization. (2015d). Diploma Programme. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/en/programmes/diploma-programme/curriculum/
2. College Board. (2015b). 2015 AP Exam Score Distributions. Retrieved from http://www.totalregistration.net/AP-Exam-Registration-Service/2015-AP-Exam-Score-Distributions.php
3. International Baccalaureate Organization. (2015b). Annual Review, 2014. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/about-the-ib/facts-and-figures/ib-annual-review/
4. College Board. (2015a). AP Students. Retrieved from https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/home?navid=ap-ap
5. International Baccalaureate Organization. (2015c). Mission. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/en/about-the-ib/mission/
6. International Baccalaureate Organization. (2015a). Programmes. Retrieved from http://www.ibo.org/en/programmes/
7. (1991).World yearbook of education, 1991: International schools and international education.London:Kogan Page.
8. Adams, K. L.(Ed.),Brink, D. T.(Ed.)(1990).Contributions to the sociology of language.New York, NY:Mouton de Gruyter.
9. Ager, D.(2001).Motivation in language planning and language policy.Tonawanda, New York:Multicultural Matters.
10. Cooper, R. L.(1989).Language planning and social change.New York, NY:Cambridge.
11. Eastman, C. M.(1983).Language planning: An introduction.San Francisco, CA:Chandler & Sharp.
12. Hayden, M.(2006).Introduction to international education.London:Sage.
13. Hayden, M.,Thompson, J.(1995).International Schools and International Education: A Relationship Reviewed.Oxford Review of Education,21(3),327-345.
14. Heller, M.,Pujolar, J.(2009).The political economy of texts: A case study in the structuration of tourism.Sociolinguistic Studies,3(2),177-201.
15. Hill, I.(1994).University of Tasmania.
16. Kaplan, R. B.,Baldauf, R. B., Jr.(1997).Language planning-from practice to theory.Bristol, PA:Multicultural Matters.
17. Marcus, G.(1995).Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography.Annual Reviews of Anthropology,24,95-117.
18. Paulston, C. B.(Ed.),Tucker, G. R.(Ed.)(2003).Sociolinguistics.Malden, MA:Blackwell.
19. Ruiz, R.(1984).Orientations in language planning.NABE Journal,8,15-34.
20. Spolsky, B.(2004).Language policy.New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
21. 施正鋒(2005)。台灣客家族群政治與政策。臺中市:新新台灣文化教育基金會。
22. 夏誠華(2004)。海外台北學校的現況與展望。玄奘人文學報，2，73-128。
23. 張學謙(2005)。從「中國化」到「多元化」的台灣語文政策：語言生態的觀點。2005年「中華文化」與「台灣本土化」研討會
24. 曾妙芬(2007)。推動專業化的AP 中文教學。北京:北京語言大學。
25. 鍾鎮城(2011)。,臺灣:國科會。
26. 鍾鎮城(2009)。華語教學的轉變：全球在地化的觀點。2009 應用語言學暨語言教學國際研討會論文集，臺北市:
27. 鍾鎮城(2012)。移民華語教學：全球在地化的語言民族誌研究。臺北市:新學林。
28. 鍾鎮城編(2015)。第二語言習得與教學。臺北市:新學林。
29. 鍾鎮城、王萸芳(2007)。台灣華語政策與教學規劃之前瞻與展望。教育研究月刊，163，27-35。

1. 楊傳蓮(2020)。臺灣教育機構於大陸設校經營運作現況與未來挑戰。教育研究與實踐學刊，67(2)，1-24。