國民中學語文（英語）學習領域課程綱要實施現況之調查研究

Abstract

本研究旨在了解國民中學課程綱要實施現況。為達成研究目的，本研究以自編之「國民中學語文（英語）學習領域課程綱要實施現況調查問卷」為調查研究工具，以台灣北區、中區、南區、東區及離島等142所抽樣學校語文（英語）學習領域教師999人作為正式問卷調查對象，回收608份有效問卷（回收率60.81%）。本研究針對所得的資料，以SPSS8.01 for Windows套裝軟體進行描述性統計、獨立樣本t考驗（Independent-Samples T Test），單因子變異數分析（One-Way ANOVA）、薛費法（Scheffe）事後比較分析、相關及卡方獨立性考驗等統計方法進行資料分析，期待透過上述設計，了解國民中學語文(本國語文)學習領域課程綱要的實施現況，進而提出相關建議。 依據資料分析發現，獲致以下結論： 一、學校課程規劃與推動方面： 1.語文（英語）學習領域教師對其「學校課程規劃與推動」之整體自評持正向肯定態度。 2.背景變項中以學校性別、最高學歷、教學型態對「學校課程規劃與推動」整體自評結果有顯著差異。 3.背景變項中，學校所在行政轄區、班級數、教學年資、修畢職前教育師資培育之機構及是否擔任課程發展委員會委員等對於「學校課程規劃與推動」自評結果無顯著差異。 二、語文（英語）學習領域課程實施 1.各國民中學語文（英語）學習領域教師對其「語文（英語）學習領域課程實施」的自評持正向肯定態度。 2.背景變項中，最高學歷，修畢職前教育師資培育之機構、是否擔任課程發展委員會委員、班級數、學校所在之行政轄區、教學型態等方面對「語文（英語）學習領域課程實施」自評結果無顯著差異。 3.不同背景變項中，性別、教學年資對「語文（英語）學習領域課程實施」自評分析有顯著差。 三、學校課程規劃與推動與語文（英語）學習領域課程實施，二者呈現中度正相關。

根據上述主要結論，本研究分別對教育行政機關、學校行政單位及語文（英語）學習領域教師提出具體建議。The purpose of this study was to inquire “The Guidelines of Language Arts ( English) Learning Area in Grade 1-9 Curriculum for junior high school levels of education implementation present situation.” The method of this study adopted a questionnaire survey. We composed the “Survey Questionnaire on The Guidelines of Language Arts( English) Learning Area in Grade 1-9 Curriculum for junior high school levels of education implementation present situation.” Our formal survey questionnaire respondents were 999 Language Arts( English) Learning Area teachers selected from 142 junior high school of the northern, central, southern Taiwan, and other islands. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS 8.01 for Windows to perform descriptive statistic, t-test, one-way ANOVA and Scheffe’s post-hoc comparison, Pearson’s product-moment correlation and Chi-square test, and so forth are proposed to analyze the data, and hopingly through the design above to realize the implementation conditions of curriculum guidelines of Language Arst( English) Learning Area in junior high school, and moreover to make the related proposals. Based on the data, the conclusions are as following: 1. School course plan and promotion: (1) Language Arts( English) Learning Area teachers have positive manner to “The plan and promotion of the school curriculum .” (2) Considering the teacher background variables, the gender, the best educational background, and teaching style cause marked differences in “The plan and promotion of the school curriculum.” (3) Considering the teacher background variables, the administrative district where the schools located, the number of classes, the training pre-vocational education institution where teachers graduated from, and the experience of being the member of the Committee of School Development don’t cause marked differences in “The plan and promotion of the school curriculum.” 2. Curriculum implementation of the Language Arts( English) Learning Area: (1) Language Arts( English) Learning Area teachers take positive attitude toward “The plan and promotion of the school curriculum .” (2) Considering the teacher background variables, the best educational background, the training pre-vocational education institution where teachers graduated from, the experience of being the member of the Committee of School Development, the number of classes, the administrative district where the schools located, teaching styles don’t cause marked differences in “Curriculum implementation of the Language Arts( English) Learning Area.” (3) Considering the teacher background variables, the gender, the teaching experience cause marked differences in “Curriculum implementation of the Language Arts( English) Learning Area.” 3. The correlation analysis found that there is moderate positive relationship between “The plan and promotion of the school curriculum” and “Curriculum implementation of the Language Arts( English) Learning Area.”

Based on the conclusions, the research offered concrete suggestions to government education departments, school executive departments, and Language Arts( English) Learning Area teachers.