學校本位課程評鑑的知識基礎

Abstract

學校課程是一個不斷建構、更新的過程，九年一貫課程革新強調課程不再只是固定的教科書，而是活化的內容。如果要因應學生、學校、以及社會變遷的需求，提升課程品質，以學校為主體的評鑑-學校本位課程評鑑，成了課程發展中一體兩面的必然機制。過去，學校教師的聲音在課程發展和評鑑中是隱而不顯的，甚至被忽略，久而久之，教師也懷疑自己是否擁有足夠的知識能夠改進課程。然而在參與評鑑過程中，教師必須討論課程的適切性，呈現自己的觀點和論述，教師不僅要知道自己擁有什麼知識可進行課程改進，也要課解這上些知識是如何建構出來的，以作為下一個行動的依據。參與課程評鑑也正是教師藉以展現教師實踐知識，進行專業判斷的契機。目前學校進行課程發展多流於呈現課程內容的書面作業，對課程目標、內容、實施等適切性的問題並未更進一步探析。較之歐美國家，如美國、英國、澳大利亞、以色列等國教育人員對學校本位課程評鑑及教師專業知識的研究上，臺灣有關學校本位課程評鑑的系統研究相當有限，更缺少對教師知識深入探討。本文旨在探討教師如何透過學校本位課程評鑑展現其實踐知識。首先說明，學校本位課程評鑑是對傳統由上而下強調績效取向評鑑的一種反思，主張課程評鑑是一協商、行動研究、和學習的歷程，不僅要注意總結的功能，更應發揮形成性和啟蒙的功用。其認，分析在傳統評鑑中，教師實踐知識易被忽略致使評鑑不能滿足學校課程和改進需求。學校本位課程評鑑主張教師的實踐知識在學校課程發展上是不可或缺的基礎，如此方可發揮教師自主決策的角色，提高資源的有效應用，以增加課程實用程度。第三部分，除探討教師知識的義涵外，並從靜態及動態兩個層面分析教師如何使用和建構其實踐知識於學校本位課程評鑑的運作過程中。最後，作者認為教師應學習將參與課程評鑑的知識和經驗作一有力的宣稱，以反省自己的專業角色，重視課程評鑑的重要義涵，透過實踐者的自省和對話，發揮評鑑的積極功能，為學校課程建立一個更紮實的改進空間。

This study aims to investigate how teachers hold and demonstrate their practical knowledge when participating in school-based curriculum evaluation(SBCE). Traditionally, under a centralized educational structure, curriculum evaluation has not been included in teachers' professional activities. Most ofthe researchers pay much attention on static curriculum products; less work has been done to investigate the dynamic process of curriculum evaluation and refinement.The new Nine-year Curriculum policy emphasizes that curriculum should build on the needs of each particular school. To ensure curriculum quality, internal evaluation system, SBCE has become a major concern in schools. In SBCE, teachers must discuss the appropriateness of curriculum, to express their own opinions and ideas. In other words, teachers must be aware of the foundations and structure of their own practical knowledge in order to lead future curriculum actions. The main contents of this study include four sections. Firstly, it proposes that the origin of SBCE is based on dissatisfactions with traditionaltop-down evaluation model. The basic functions of SBCE schould not only focuson summative, but also on formative and enlightenment functions. Then, it analyzes the significance, nature and orientations of teachers' practical knowledge in SBCD. Thirdly, it explores both the static and dynamic dimensions to interpret how teachers hold and construct their practical knowledge in particular SBCE context. Finally, this study encourages teachers to make claims to their practical knowledge as a way of reflecting on their professional roles and as a way of generating local knowledge to validate given knowledge about evaluation for curriculum development and improvement.