芬蘭一間學校的現象為本學習課程統整設計與學生學習表現

A Finnish School's Phenomenal-based Learning Curriculum Integration Design and Students' Learning Performance

10.3966/102887082021036701004

陳玟樺(Wen-Hua Chen)；劉美慧(Meihui Liu)

立體學習 ； 芬蘭教育 ； 現象為本學習 ； 課程統整 ； pop-ups learning ； Finland education ； phenomenon-based learning ； curriculum integration

教育研究集刊

67:1期（2021 / 03 / 31）

107 - 156

繁體中文

芬蘭新課綱於2016年上路，赫爾辛基地區學校實施的現象為本學習引起諸多關注。現象為本學習以主題或議題為教學核心，其蘊含課程統整特質有助於發展學生二十一世紀所需能力。緣此，本研究進入一公立中小學進行田野研究，試圖探索現象為本學習課程統整設計基本原則和學生學習表現。採個案研究法，以赫爾辛基一間具10年國際文憑（International Baccalaureate, IB）課程實施經驗的公立學校為研究場域，以觀察、訪談及文件分析等方法蒐集資料。結果發現有三：一、個案師生於現象為本學習週之課程統整設計的基本原則主要在透過概念來探究現象、學生參與課程設計、統整在自己身上；二、學生於現象為本學習週之統整學習表現富立體學習效果；三、現象為本學習週之評量目的在引導和鼓勵跨領域學習及發展自我評估能力。本研究最後提出幾點建議，供有興趣發展現象為本學習者參考。

The approach of phenomenon-based learning in Helsinki has drawn the international attention since Finland implemented new core curriculum guidelines in 2016. Phenomenon-based learning uses themes or issues as the core of teaching and learning and entails curriculum integration characteristics that may help develop the 21st-century competencies. This study conducted a field study in a public school with ten years experiences of International Baccalaureate programs, exploring the fundamental principles of the curriculum integration of phenomenon-based learning and students' learning performance. The study applied observations, interviews, and document analysis in a seventh-grade classroom from mid-February to early June 2018. Several key findings emerged from this study. First, the fundamental principles of the curriculum integration of the Phenomenon-based learning Week include exploring phenomena through concepts, student involvement in curriculum design, and integration in oneself. Second, students' integrated learning performance during Phenomenon-based learning Week seems to highlight the effect of pop-ups learning. Finally, the purpose of the Phenomenon-based learning Week assessment is to guide and encourage cross-disciplinary learning and develop self-assessment capabilities. This study also provides several suggestions for designers who intend to develop the teaching and learning of phenomenon-based learning.

1. 方德隆=Fang. D.-L.(2000)。九年一貫課程學習領域之統整。課程與教學季刊，3(1)，139-156。
   連結：
2. 吳怡瑄, S.-Y.,葉玉珠, Y.-C.(2003)。主題統整教學、年級、父母社經地位與國小學童科技創造力之關係。師大學報，48(2)，239-260。
   連結：
3. 單文經, W.-J.(2001)。解析Beane對課程統整理論與實際的主張。教育研究集刊，47，57-89。
   連結：
4. 游家政, C.-C.(2000)。學校課程的統整及其教學。課程與教學季刊，3(1)，19-38。
   連結：
5. Anderson, L. W.,Krathwohl, D. R.(2001).A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.New York, NY:Longman.
6. Beane, J. A.(1997).Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
7. Bernstein, B.(1971).Class, codes and control theoretical studies towards a sociology of language.London, UK:Routledge & Kegan Paul.
8. Bloom, B. S.(1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook: The cognitive domain.New York, NY:David McKay.
9. Blumenfeld, P.,Soloway, E.,Marx, R.,Krajcik J,Guzdial, M.,Palincsar, A.(1991).Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning.Educational Psychologist,26(3),369-398.
10. City of Helsinki. (2017). Helsinki Design Award granted to phenomenon-based learning-Helsinki as the model city. Retrieved from https://www.hel.fi/uutiset/en/kasvatuksen-ja-koulutuksen-toimiala/award-phenomenon-based-learning
11. Danielson, C.,Abrutyn, L.(1997).An introduction to using portfolios in the classroom.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
12. Drake, S. M.(1998).Creating integrated curriculum: Proven ways to increase student learning.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
13. Drake, S. M.(2007).Creating standards-based integrated curriculum: Aligning content, standards, instructional strategies and assessment.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin.
14. Drake, S. M.(1991).How our team dissolved the boundaries.Educational Leadership,49(2),20-23.
15. Drake, S. M.,Burns, R.(2004).Meeting standards through integrated curriculum.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
16. Earl, L.(2003).Assessment as learning: Using classroom to maximize student learning.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
17. Erickson, H. L.(2007).Stirring the head, heart and soul: Redefining curriculum, instruction, and concept-based learning.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
18. Farr, R.,Tone, B.(1994).Portfolio and performance assessment: Helping students evaluate their progress as readers and writers.Fort Worth, TX:Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
19. Finnish National Board of Education. (2014). Irmeli Halinen: General Aspects of Basic Education Curriculum Reform 2016 Finland. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY_LZJkEo28
20. Finnish National Board of Education(2016).National core curriculum for basic education 2014.Helsinki, Finland:Next Print Oy.
21. Fogarty, R.(1991).The mindful school: How to integrate the curricula.Palatine, IL:Skylight.
22. Grady, J. B.(1994).,未出版
23. Guido, M. (2017). Inquiry-based learning definition, benefits & strategies. Retrieved from http://www.prodigygame.com/blog/inquiry-basedl-learning-defintiion-benefits-strategies/
24. Han, S.,Capraro, R.,Capraro, M. M.(2015).How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,13(5),1089-1113.
25. Hebrank, M. (2000). Why inquiry-based teaching and learning in the middle school science classroom? Retrieved from www.biology.duke.edu/cibl/inquiry/why_inquiry_in_ms.htm
26. International Baccalaureate Organization. (2015). What is an IB education? Retrieved from https://www.ibo.org/contentassets/dd8041e9f17042ea87db944c136129d1/christine-amiss-what-is-an-ib-education.pdf
27. Jacob, E.(1997).Context and cognition: Implications for educational innovators and anthropologists.Anthropology & Education Quarterly,28(1),3-21.
28. Jacobs, H. H.(1989).Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
29. Kokotsaki, D.,Menzies, V.,Wiggins, A.(2016).Project-based learning: A review of the literature.Improving Schools,19(3),267-277.
30. Lawton, E.(1994).Integrating curriculum: A slow but positive process.Schools in the Middle,4(2),27-30.
31. Lipson, M. Y.,Valencia, S. W.,Wixson, K. K.,Peters, C. W.(1993).Integration and thematic teaching: Integration to improve teaching and learning.Language Arts,70(4),252-263.
32. Lonka, K.,Makkonen, J.,Berg, M.,Talvio, M.,Maksniemi, E.,Kruskopf, M.,Lammassaari, H.,Hietgjärvi, L.,Westling, S. K.(2018).Phenomenal learning from Finland.Helsinki, Finland:Edita.
33. Mattila, P.(Ed.),Silander, P.(Ed.)(2015).How to create the school of the future: Revolutionary thinking and de sign from Finland.Oulu, Finland:University of Oulu, Center for Internet Excellence.
34. Niemi, H.(Ed.),Toom, A.(Ed.),Kallioniemi, A.(Ed.)(2016).Miracle of education: The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools.Rotterdam, Netherlands:Sense.
35. Pettus, A. M.(1994).Models for curriculum integration in high school.Annual Meeting of the Southeastern Regional Association of Teacher Educators
36. Schubert, W. H.(1986).Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility.New York, NY:Macmillan.
37. Steffe, L. P.(Ed.),Gale, J.(Ed.)(1995).Constructivism in education.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
39. Vygotsky, L. S.,Cole, M.(Ed.),John-Steiner, V.(Ed.),Scribner, S.(Ed.),Souberman, E.(Ed.)(1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
40. 中華民國課程與教學學會（編）=Association for Curriculum and Instrucation(Ed.)(2000).課程統整手冊—理論篇（1）.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education.
41. 吳璧純, P.-C.(2008)。找回統整的生活課程：九年一貫生活課程研修及97生活課綱的特色。教育研究月刊，175，22-34。
42. 周淑卿（編）, S.-C.(Ed.)(2002).課程統整模式原理與實作.嘉義市=Chiayi, Taiwan:濤石=Waterstone.
43. 徐美玉, M.-Y.,范信賢, X.-S.,陳思玎, S.-J.,李佳穎, J.-Y.(2010)。生活課程統整教學的活化：「綠魔毯」案例探討。教育研究月刊，192，87-97。
44. 張美玉, M.-Y.(1995)。歷程檔案評量的理念與實施。科學教育，231，58-63。
45. 郭重吉, C.-J.,江武雄, W.-H.,王夕堯, S.-Y.(2000)。從理論到實務談建構主義。台中縣國中教師建構主義合作學習研討會，臺中縣=Taichung, Taiwan:
46. 陳毓凱, Y.-K.,洪振方, J.-F.(2007)。兩種探究取向教學模式之分析與比較。科學教育，305(3)，4-19。
47. 黃政傑, J.-J.(1991).課程設計.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:東華=Tung Hua.
48. 詹志禹（編）, J.-Y.(Ed.)(2002).建構論：理論基礎與教育應用.臺北縣=New Taipei, Taiwan:正中=Cheng Chung.
49. 甄曉蘭, H.-L. S.(2008)。促進學習的課堂評量—概念分析與實施結果。中等教育，59(1)，92-109。

1. 符碧真,李冠穎(2023)。面對108新課綱的「探究與實作」：師資培育「雙實作」的教育實踐課程。教育科學研究期刊，68(3)，239-273。
2. 廖婉雯(2023)。以偏遠地區國小高年級自助旅行發展統整課程之敘事探究。教育理論與實踐學刊，47，61-92。
3. 劉美慧,陳玟樺(2022)。芬蘭赫爾辛基一間學校的現象為本學習個案研究。當代教育研究季刊，30(1)，39-84。
4. 羅藝方,楊淑晴,林佳弘,周坤億(2022)。永續發展教育架構下STREAM跨領域教育之探究。課程與教學，25(2)，87-127。