H. M. Kliebard的課程史研究及其啟示
H. M. Kliebard's Curricular History Studies and Their Implications
- 關鍵字：
- 克立巴德、課程、課程史 / H. M. Kliebard、Academic curriculum、Curricular history、Spiral model
第五十輯．第ㄧ期 - 2004-03-31
繪本教學在師資培育上的應用--以「班級經營」為例王千倖
Using Picture Books to Teach Prospective Teachers How to Manage Their ClassroomsChien-Hsing Wang
中小學教師資訊融入教學發展模式及檢核工具之研究 徐新逸、林燕珍
A Study of the Developmental Model and Practical Guidelines for Technology-Integrated Instructional Design for Elementary and High School TeachersHsin-Yih Shyu Yen-Chen Lin
國民小學九年一貫課程試辦成效之綜合評鑑--以桃竹苗地區為例謝金青
An Evaluation Study of the Grade 1-9 Coherent Curriculum Program Employed by Elementary Schools in Northern TaiwanKing-Ching Hsieh
從新馬克思主義到後結構主義--課程社會學研究的再概念化卯靜儒
From Neo-Marxism to Post-structuralism: Reconceptualizing Sociological Studies of CurriculumChin-Ju Mao
H. M. Kliebard的課程史研究及其啟示鍾鴻銘
H. M. Kliebard's Curricular History Studies and Their ImplicationsHorng-Ming Jong
課程連結理論之探究：課程標準、教學與評量之關係賴志峰
An Analysis of Curriculum Alignment Theory: The Relationship among Curriculum Requirements, Instruction and AssessmentChih-Feng Lai
課程領域中應用範式概念之爭議霍秉坤、黃顯華
The Debate over the Application of “Paradigm” in Curriculum Studies Ping-Kwan FOK Hin-Wah Wong
論革新課程實驗之難成 單文經
On the Problems in Experimenting with Curricular TransformationWen-Jing Peter Shan
- 摘要
- 英文摘要
- 參考文獻
- 全文下載
早期課程研究具有「非歷史的」現象。60年代後，課程的歷史研究才逐漸受到教育學者的重視，而Kliebard正是課程歷史研究的重要奠基人之一。Kliebard認為課程史研究旨在培育吾人批判慎思的習性；而課程作為一種選擇之文化財，其選擇過程應是課程史研究的重點所在。Kliebard的論述中實有民主與博雅教育兩個核心議題。且其認為隱喻可幫助吾人理解課程理論。Kliebard課程史研究的範圍，主要集中於19世紀末以迄20世紀中這段期間。在此時期，實係四股力量為著主導美國課程發展的爭鬥期。取資Kliebard的觀點省思吾人的現況，吾人的課程研究實亦有著非歷史的現象，因此有改變之必要。其次，從事課程的歷史研究可補充教育史研究。再者，課程史研究有助於瞭解課程改革失敗的因由。最後，吾人應以螺旋觀代替鐘擺觀來從事課程問題的解析，以掌握其本質。
Academic curricula had seldom been the object of historical studies until Kliebard emphasized the study of curriculat history. This article presents his curricular history studies and their implications for education. Kliebard’s studies focus on two interrelated themes， democracy and liberal education. He argues that the best way to understand curriculum theory is by way of metaphor. His studies mainly examine curricular development from the 1890s to the 1950’s， a period in which four groups struggled for the control of curriculum development in the USA. Kliebard shows how curricular history studies may increase our critical sensitivity to phenomena which we normally take for granted. Current curriculum studies in Taiwan should also be examined “historicized.” The author suggests that the study of curricular history can provide a more comprehensive understanding of educational history and clarify the problem of educational reform. He finally urges the adoption of a “spiral” model of curricula to replace the so-called “pendulum swing” curricular model.
