B. Reimer「美感教育」與D. J. Elliott「實踐哲學」立論分析之研究
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2009
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
本研究旨在探討B. Reimer「美感教育」與D. J. Elliott「實踐哲學」立論之緣起背景、發展與立論之核心概念，以及兩種哲學派典間的思辯與批判，從中分析「美感教育」與「實踐哲學」立論之價值性與差異性，因此，音樂教育哲學文獻是本論文資料研究之主要來源，目的在探究音樂教育的本質與價值；此外，Reimer與Elliott將音樂教育哲學所探討的範圍涉獵到「權力」、「意識型態」、「社會正義」等議題，所以批判教育學文獻是本論文中另一個輔助資源，作為提供與Reimer及Elliott的立論之間關於「政治」議題的對話，最後就台灣未來學校音樂教育的實踐方向提出具體建議。本研究採取理論分析法，針對研究議題作深入剖析，依研究目的與研究結果發現，將本研究獲得結論分述如下：
一、「美感教育」哲學在1970年代是全盛期，Reimer「美感教育」思想之來源包括： Langer, Meyer, Mursell, Broudy, Leonhard& House, Schwadron等人，Reimer提出「美感教育」之後，北美音樂教育界中認為音樂對人文素養與生活品質有很大的影響；1980年代中期，批判「美感教育」哲學最為激烈的為Elliott，Elliott「實踐哲學」思想之來源包括：Sparshott, Dennett, Csikszentmihalyi等人，Elliott提出「實踐哲學」之後，北美音樂教育界更加重視教育中變動的脈絡議題。
二、Reimer「美感教育」的立論可以分成五個核心概念，包括「協同合作」的哲學、「美感的體驗」、「美感認知」、「音樂智能理論」、「課程模式」；Elliott「實踐哲學」的立論可以分成五個核心概念，包括「整合性的」與「反省性的」哲學、「音樂的體驗」、「音樂認知」、情境中的「音樂製作」與「音樂聆聽」、「課程理論」。兩人的論述足以提供音樂教育者從事教學實踐時的參考。
三、「美感教育」與「實踐哲學」兩個派典經過相互思辯之後，研究者發現它們各有其價值性，可並行不悖。音樂教育實踐時需兼具「美感教育」與「實踐哲學」的思維，才足以反映社會多元文化的價值觀，進而達到整合性的學校音樂教育目標。
四、本研究從音樂教育實務的三個基本議題去比較兩人之立論：（一）我們為何要教導音樂：Reimer主張音樂教育主要在於從聆聽中去加深人們情感生活的體驗；Elliott主張動態的多元音樂課程可以使學生達到「自我實現」的價值。（二）我們需要教導什麼音樂：Reimer主張要教導音樂的內涵要素，也就是要教導「內在認知」；Elliott主張「音樂製作」與「音樂聆賞」的教學應包含多面向的層面。（三）我們應該如何教導音樂：Reimer主張普通音樂課程計畫與特殊音樂教育課程計畫要並重以及實行；Elliott主張要反思性地去實行「音樂課程即是實驗課程」。
五、Reimer「美感教育」與Elliott「實踐哲學」的立論與批判教育學論述，對於台灣未來學校音樂教育實踐的重要蘊義為：（一）音樂教育主要在於從聆聽中去加深人們情感生活的體驗，這需要一種「內在認知」的深化教學；在動態的多元音樂課程中，教師亦應運用各種「音樂挑戰」方式以激發學生多元的「音樂素養」；（二）音樂內涵須以非語言的情感投注超越語言的「概念化教學」；「音樂製作」與「音樂聆聽」的教學應包含多面向的層面；（三）音樂教師除了規劃普通音樂教育課程，也要注重對音樂有較高層級學生認知的需求；因此，音樂教師的專業素養要具有反思性，才能幫助學生提昇「音樂素養」的層級。（四）音樂教師需對傳統音樂教育的實施提出質疑與反省；（五）音樂教師需以多元的「星叢式」（constellation）論述方式解說音樂作品；（六）音樂文化必須自律，不能被「文化工業」（cultural industry）所宰制；（七）個人應經由批判的反向思考能力以建立對音樂教育的價值觀。
關鍵字：B. Reimer、D. J. Elliott、美感教育、實踐哲學、音樂教育哲學、批判教育學
The research of B. Reimer’s“aesthetic education”and D. J. Elliott’s“praxial philosophy”argumentation ABSTRACT This study intended to inquire about the background, development, core concept in B. Reimer’s“aesthetic education” and D. J. Elliott’s“praxial philosophy” argumentation and probe into the debate between the two music education paradigms. So, music education philosophy literature is the main resource of the essay. In addition, Reimer and Elliott also discussed the topic of“power”,“ideology”, and“social justice”; therefore, the researcher inquired about the critical pedagogy literature to dialogize with the argumentation of Reimer’s and Elliott’s about the topic of “politics”. Finally, according to those analyses above, the researcher proposed some suggestions about the direction of future music education practice in Taiwan. The conclusion of this study included five aspects : 1) “aesthetic education”was flourishing in 1970, the original figures of “aesthetic education”included Langer, Meyer, Mursell, Broudy, Leonhard& House, and Schwadron. After Reimer proposed “aesthetic education”, the music education domain in North America thought that music had important effect on humanistic literacy and life quality of people. In 1980s, Elliott criticized “aesthetic education”severely, and then he proposed“praxial philosophy”. The original figures of “praxial philosophy”included Sparshott, Dennett, and Csikszentmihalyi. After Elliott proposed “praxial philosophy”, the music education domain in North America much moreemphasized on the context topic in education than before. 2) Reimer’s “aesthetic education”argumentation included five core concepts: synergic philosophy, aesthetic experience, aesthetic cognition, musical intelligence theory, and curriculum model; Elliott’s “praxial philosophy”argumentation included five core concepts: comprehensive and reflective philosophy, musical experience, musical cognition, musical making and musical listening in context, curriculum theory. 3) the researcher found that Reimer’s“aesthetic education”and Elliott’s “praxial philosophy”argumentation both had values, the two music education paradigms could work together to achieve the comprehensive goals of school music education. 4) three differences between the argumentation of Reimer’s and Elliott’s are: a) why do we teach music: Reimer proposed that music education must deepen the feel experience of people. Elliott proposed that dynamic and multiple music curriculum could help students to achieve the value of self-actualization. b) what music do we teach: Reimer proposed that teachers must teach the intrinsic elements of music. Elliott proposed that the instruction of “music making”and “music listening”must include multidimensional aspects. c) how do we teach music: Reimer proposed that music educators must equally stress general music curriculum plan and specialized music education plan. Elliott proposed that music educators must reflectively implement“music curriculum as practicum”. 5) Reimer’s “aesthetic education”, Elliott’s “praxial philosophy”argumentation, and the discourse of critical pedagogy had some implications for school music education practice in Taiwan: a) if music educators wanted to deepen the feel experience of people, they needed the instruction of “knowing within”. In a dynamic and multiple music curriculum, music educators must make use of“musical challenge”to arouse the multiple“musicianship”of all students. b) if music educators wanted to teach the intrinsic elements of music, they must notice that the nonverbal feeling engagement must transcend the verbal“conceptual teaching”. c) in addition to planning general music education curriculum, music educators must notice the cognitive need of some students who had advanced music literacy. So, music educators must reflectively possess professional musicianship and educatorship, then they could have the ability to help students to raise their musicianship level. d) music educators must propose query and reflection to traditional music education practice. e) music educators must make use of the discourse of multiple“constellation”to explain the musical works. f) musical culture couldn’t be controlled by “cultural industry”. g) music educators must become a reflective practitioner through critical thought. Keywords: B. Reimer, D. J. Elliott, aesthetic education, praxial philosophy, philosophy of music education, critical pedagogy
The research of B. Reimer’s“aesthetic education”and D. J. Elliott’s“praxial philosophy”argumentation ABSTRACT This study intended to inquire about the background, development, core concept in B. Reimer’s“aesthetic education” and D. J. Elliott’s“praxial philosophy” argumentation and probe into the debate between the two music education paradigms. So, music education philosophy literature is the main resource of the essay. In addition, Reimer and Elliott also discussed the topic of“power”,“ideology”, and“social justice”; therefore, the researcher inquired about the critical pedagogy literature to dialogize with the argumentation of Reimer’s and Elliott’s about the topic of “politics”. Finally, according to those analyses above, the researcher proposed some suggestions about the direction of future music education practice in Taiwan. The conclusion of this study included five aspects : 1) “aesthetic education”was flourishing in 1970, the original figures of “aesthetic education”included Langer, Meyer, Mursell, Broudy, Leonhard& House, and Schwadron. After Reimer proposed “aesthetic education”, the music education domain in North America thought that music had important effect on humanistic literacy and life quality of people. In 1980s, Elliott criticized “aesthetic education”severely, and then he proposed“praxial philosophy”. The original figures of “praxial philosophy”included Sparshott, Dennett, and Csikszentmihalyi. After Elliott proposed “praxial philosophy”, the music education domain in North America much moreemphasized on the context topic in education than before. 2) Reimer’s “aesthetic education”argumentation included five core concepts: synergic philosophy, aesthetic experience, aesthetic cognition, musical intelligence theory, and curriculum model; Elliott’s “praxial philosophy”argumentation included five core concepts: comprehensive and reflective philosophy, musical experience, musical cognition, musical making and musical listening in context, curriculum theory. 3) the researcher found that Reimer’s“aesthetic education”and Elliott’s “praxial philosophy”argumentation both had values, the two music education paradigms could work together to achieve the comprehensive goals of school music education. 4) three differences between the argumentation of Reimer’s and Elliott’s are: a) why do we teach music: Reimer proposed that music education must deepen the feel experience of people. Elliott proposed that dynamic and multiple music curriculum could help students to achieve the value of self-actualization. b) what music do we teach: Reimer proposed that teachers must teach the intrinsic elements of music. Elliott proposed that the instruction of “music making”and “music listening”must include multidimensional aspects. c) how do we teach music: Reimer proposed that music educators must equally stress general music curriculum plan and specialized music education plan. Elliott proposed that music educators must reflectively implement“music curriculum as practicum”. 5) Reimer’s “aesthetic education”, Elliott’s “praxial philosophy”argumentation, and the discourse of critical pedagogy had some implications for school music education practice in Taiwan: a) if music educators wanted to deepen the feel experience of people, they needed the instruction of “knowing within”. In a dynamic and multiple music curriculum, music educators must make use of“musical challenge”to arouse the multiple“musicianship”of all students. b) if music educators wanted to teach the intrinsic elements of music, they must notice that the nonverbal feeling engagement must transcend the verbal“conceptual teaching”. c) in addition to planning general music education curriculum, music educators must notice the cognitive need of some students who had advanced music literacy. So, music educators must reflectively possess professional musicianship and educatorship, then they could have the ability to help students to raise their musicianship level. d) music educators must propose query and reflection to traditional music education practice. e) music educators must make use of the discourse of multiple“constellation”to explain the musical works. f) musical culture couldn’t be controlled by “cultural industry”. g) music educators must become a reflective practitioner through critical thought. Keywords: B. Reimer, D. J. Elliott, aesthetic education, praxial philosophy, philosophy of music education, critical pedagogy
Description
Keywords
美感教育, 實踐哲學, 音樂教育哲學, 批判教育學, B. Reimer, D. J. Elliott, aesthetic education, praxial philosophy, philosophy of music education, critical pedagogy