三位六年級教師數學課程實施之比較

The Implementation of Mathematics Curriculum: A Case Study of Three Sixth-grade Teachers

10.6910/BER.201106_(57-2).0003

徐偉民(Wei-Min Hsu)

課程實施 ； 國小教師 ； 數學課程 ； curriculum implementation ； elementary school teacher ； mathematics curriculum

教育研究集刊

57:2期（2011 / 06 / 30）

85 - 120

繁體中文

本研究以三位不同背景的國小六年級教師為對象，探討個案教師於教室內實施數學課程的情形。本研究採用個案研究法，透過教學觀察、訪談和文件來蒐集資料，從教師使用數學任務的來源、類型和實施方式等三個面向來了解教師實施數學課程的情形。結果發現，三位教師使用的數學任務，雖然大多來自於教科書，但一位偏向調整內容以符合學生的生活經驗，另外兩位偏向忠實使用教科書的內容;三位教師使用的數學任務類型，雖然都以「有意義連結」的任務居多，但一位以小組開放討論的方式來實施，使學生大多以高認知的方式來學習數學任務， 另外兩位採封閉式對話的方式來實施，使學生大多以低認知的方式來進行學習。三位教師在數學課程實施時，主要考量的因素分別是個人數學教學的信念、學校評量的政策和教學進度，以及學生的學習特性，因而呈現出不同數學課程實施的樣貌。

This study was aimed to understand how elementary school teachers implemented mathematics curriculum in their classroom, and to explore factors which influenced such processes. A case study methodology was used to compare three sixth-grade teachers with different teaching experiences and backgrounds. The primary data sources were classroom observations, teacher interviews, and documents recorded all collected during the 2009-10 school year. Data analyses indicated that most mathematics tasks which the three teachers used were from textbooks. One of the teachers usually adjusted tasks to match students ' life experience, and the other teachers usually followed textbooks. Although most tasks they used were classified as 'procedure with connection,' one teacher let her students learn mathematics tasks in a high cognitive way, because she often used teamwork and open-ended questions. The other teachers had their students learn mathematics in a low cognitive way, because they used close-ended questions. When the three teachers implemented mathematics curriculum, they had different considerations, including personal mathematics teaching beliefs, school policy related to achievement tests and scheduled progress, and students' learning habits, respectively. Thus, they presented different pictures of implementing mathematics curriculum.

1. 王玉品、徐偉民(2009)。一位國小教師面對數學教學改革的抗拒和改變。科學教育學刊，17(3)，233-253。
   連結：
2. 徐偉民、徐于婷(2009)。國小數學教科書代數教材之內容分析：臺灣與香港之比較。教育實踐與研究，22(2)，67-94。
   連結：
3. 陳仁輝、楊德清(2010)。臺灣、美國與新加坡七年級代數教材之比較研究。科學教育學刊，18(1)，43-61。
   連結：
4. 黃毓芬、張靜嚳、曾志華(2008)。學佈脈絡數學問題：探討一位國中數學教師課室佈題實務的改變。科學教育學刊＝Chinese Journal of Science Education，16(3)，255-280。
   連結：
5. Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2005). Creating mathematical futures through án equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside school. Retrieved August 15, 2008, from http://www.stanford.edu/~jobolar/equitable.pdf
6. Bishop, A. J.(Ed.),Clements, K.(Ed.),Keitel, C.(Ed.),Kilpatrick, J.(Ed.),Laborde, C.(Ed.)(1996).International handbook of mathematics education.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
7. Brown, M.(2002).Teaching by design: Understanding the interactions between teacher practice and the design of curricula innovation.Evanston, IL:Northwestern University Press.
8. Cohen, D. K.,Peterson, P. L.,Wilson, S.,Ball, D.,Putnam, R.,Prawat, R.(1990).Effects of state-level reform of elementary school mathematics curriculum on classroom practice.
9. Curriculum Planning and Development Division(2006).Mathematics syllabus primary.Singapore, Singapore:MOE.
10. Goodlad, J.(1979).Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice.New York:McGraw-Hill.
11. Grouws, D. A.(2008).Opportunity to learn: Three indices.conference of Investigating the relationship between mathematics teaching and development of curriculum,Chiayi, Taiwan:
12. Gutstein, E.(2003).Teaching and learning mathematics for social justice in an urban, Latino school.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,34(1),37-73.
13. Harwell, M. R.,Post, T. R.,Maeda, Y.,Davis, J. D.,Cutler, A. L.,Andersen, E.(2007).Standards-based mathematics curricula and secondary students' performance on standardized achievement tests.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,38(1),71-101.
14. Henningsen, M.,Stein, M. K.(1997).Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhabit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,28(5),524-549.
15. Jackson, P. W.(Ed.)(1992).Handbook of research on curriculum.New York:Macmillan.
16. Kloosterman, P.(Ed.),Lester, F.(Ed.)(2004).The 1990 through 2000 mathematics assessments of the National Assessment of Educational Progress: Results and interpretations.Reston, VA:NCTM.
17. Lester, F. K., Jr.(Ed.)(2007).Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning.Charlotte, NC:Information Age.
18. Lincoln, Y. S.,Cuba, E. G.(1985).Naturalistic inquiry.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
19. Lloyd, G.(2008).Curriculum use while learning to teach: One student teacher's appropriation of mathematics curriculum materials.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,39(1),63-94.
20. Martin, M. O.,Mullis, I. V. S.,Gonzales, E. J.,Chrostowski, S. J.(2004).TIMSS 2003 international science report: Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades.Chestnut Hill, MA:TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
21. McDougall, D. E.(Ed.),Ross, J. A.(Ed.)(2004).The importance, nature and impact of teacher questions.Proceedings of the 26th conference of the Psychology of Mathematics Education,Toronto, Canada:
22. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(1989).Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics.Reston, VA:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
23. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(2000).Principles and standards for school mathematics.Reston, VA:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
24. Nicol, C.,Crespo, S.(2006).Learning to teach with mathematics textbooks: How preservice teachers interpret and use curriculum materials.Educational Studies in Mathematics,62,331-355.
25. Post, T. R.,Harwell, M. R.,Davis, J. D.,Maeda, Y.,Cutler, A. L.,Andersen, E.(2008).Standards-based mathematics curricula and middle-grades students' performance on standardized achievement tests.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,39(2),184-212.
26. Raymond, A.,Leinenbach, M.(2000).Collaborative action research on the learning and teaching of algebra: A story of one mathematics teacher's development.Educational Studies in Mathematics,41(3),283-307.
27. Remillard, J.(1999).Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development.Curriculum Inquiry,29(3),315-342.
28. Remillard, J.(2005).Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricular.Review of Educational Research,75(2),211-246.
29. Remillard, J.,Bryans, M.(2004).Teachers' orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,35(5),352-388.
30. Sierpinska, A.(Ed.),Kilpatrick, J.(Ed.)(1998).Mathematics education as a research domain: A search for identify.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
31. Silver, E. A.,Mesa, V. M.,Morris, K. A.,Star, J. R.,Benken, B. M.(2009).Teaching mathematics for understanding: An analysis of lessons subḿitted by teachers seeking NBPTS certification.American Educational Research Journal,46(2),501-531.
32. Stein, M.,Smith, M.,Henningsen, M.,Silver, E.(2000).Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development.New York:Teacher College.
33. Tarr, J.,Reys, R.,Reys, B.,Chavez, O.,Shih, J.,OsterIind, S.(2008).The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement.Journal of Research in Mathematics Education,39(3),247-280.
34. The Finnish National Board of Education(2004).National core curriculum for basic education 2004: National core curriculum for basic education for intended pupils in compulsory education.Helsinki, Finland:The Finnish National Board of Education.
35. 林碧珍(2000)。在職教師數學教學專業發展方案的協同行動研究。新竹師院學報，13，115-148。
36. 教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要：數學學習領域。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education。
37. 許瀞方(2002)。臺南市=Tainan, Taiwan，國立臺南師範學院初等教育學系課程與教學碩士班=National Tainan Teacher College。
38. 連安青(1999)。小學數學新課程之實施：一位小學教師的實作與反省。課程與教學季刊，2(1)，35-48。
39. 黃政傑(1995)。教科書的正用與誤用。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:師大書苑=Shih-Ta。
40. 鄭章華、邱守榕、王夕堯(2001)。影響國中數學教師進行建構式教學改變之因素：合作協助者之立場作為與成效分析。科學教育學刊，12，127-146。
41. 鍾靜(2005)。論數學課程近十年來之變革。教育研究月刊，133，124-134。

1. 蔡桂芳、陳佳萍、徐偉民(2016)。國小資優資源班數學課程實施之個案研究。課程與教學，19(2)，129-160。
2. 曾于珏、徐偉民(2013)。臺灣、芬蘭、新加坡國小數學教科書代數教材之比較。教科書研究，6(2)，69-103。
3. 黃皇元、徐偉民(2012)。臺灣與芬蘭國小數學教科書分數教材內容之分析。課程與教學，15(3)，75-108。
4. 劉曼麗、徐偉民(2015)。國小攜手計畫數學補救教學課程決定與教學實施之探究。當代教育研究季刊，23(1)，113-147。
5. 徐偉民(2013)。國小數學教科書數學問題類型與呈現方式之比較分析─以臺灣、芬蘭、新加坡為例。科學教育學刊，21(3)，263-289。
6. 徐偉民(2019)。原住民文化融入數學課程的發展：以一所實驗小學為例。教育研究集刊，65(4)，77-116。
7. 徐偉民、柯富渝(2014)。臺灣、芬蘭、新加坡國小數學教科書幾何教材之比較。教科書研究，7(3)，101-141。
8. 趙珮晴,曾建銘,吳慧珉(2019)。臺灣學生數學學習內容表現之探討：來自TASA和TIMSS的跨資料庫比較。測驗學刊，66(1)，27-50。