我國普通高級中學實施課程分級可行模式研究
Abstract
中文摘要
本研究以關於普通高中課程是否應該進行課程內容分級之議題，期望能由藉由問卷調查方法研析目前高中的課程安排，釐清高中課程是否有必要實施課程分級，提供學生符合興趣、性向及能力，進行生涯規劃探索之基礎與專業課程。具體之研究目的為：一、瞭解我國普通高中實施課程分級的現況。二、瞭解普通高中校長、教務主任、行政人員、課程發展委員會成員及學科教師等對未來實施課程分級的模式看法。三、分析實施普通高中課程分級措施優先考量因素與推動事項研析。
本研究分析之主要結論如下：一、現況有實施課程分級學校，採行將學生法定應修讀課程列為基礎課程，大家都應修習，另外由學校或任課教師依學生學習能力及需求提供加深、加廣之課程學習方式，比例最高。並以國文、英文及數學為主要實施科別。二、未來如果實施課程分級，學校人員亦對於上述「將學生法定應修讀課程列為基礎課程大家都應修習另外由學校或任課教師自行依學生學習能力及需求提供加深加廣之課程學習」修習模式較為支持。三、實施課程分級措施，以「學生學習成就表現」為大家所共同認定最應優先考量因素。四、推動課程分級制度，以因應學生適性發展，但應規劃完善措施並作好宣導說明後再穩建實施。
關鍵字：普通高級中學、課程分級、分級模式。
Abstract This study aimed at examining the topic of whether general high school curriculums should be classified according to their contents. By analyzed the current arrangement of high school curriculums via questionnaire survey, this study hoped to clarify whether it is necessary to implement curriculum classification, and also to provide both fundamental and advanced courses for students based on their interests, aptitudes, and abilities, in order to help them plan and explore their future careers. The objectives of this study were: (1) to understand the current status of general high schools’ curriculum classification in Taiwan; (2) to understand the viewpoints of general high school principals, academic affairs directors, administrative personnel, members of the Committee of School Curriculum Development, as well as course teachers concerning the future implementation of the curriculum classification model; and (3) to analyze the priorities in implementing the classification measures of general high school curriculum and other promotional affairs. The conclusions were as follows: (1) for schools already practicing curriculum classification, students’ compulsory curriculums are listed as fundamental curriculum, that is, all students are compelled to take these courses. In addition, provisions of reinforcement and broadening learning courses by schools or teachers, based on students’ learning ability and requirements, have the highest proportion. (2) If curriculum classification is implemented in the future, school personnel will also show greater support for the afore-mentioned learning model, that is, to list students’ compulsory curriculum as fundamental curriculums, as well as having the schools or teachers provide reinforcement/broadening learning courses based on students’ learning ability and requirements. (3) With the implementation measure of curriculum classification, “Students’ learning achievements” is the commonly recognized factor to be given priority consideration. (4) Promotion of the curriculum classification system should correspond to students’ adaptive development, and should also be implemented only after sound and proper planning, measures, and educational promotions have been laid out. Keywords: General high school, curriculum classification, classification model
Abstract This study aimed at examining the topic of whether general high school curriculums should be classified according to their contents. By analyzed the current arrangement of high school curriculums via questionnaire survey, this study hoped to clarify whether it is necessary to implement curriculum classification, and also to provide both fundamental and advanced courses for students based on their interests, aptitudes, and abilities, in order to help them plan and explore their future careers. The objectives of this study were: (1) to understand the current status of general high schools’ curriculum classification in Taiwan; (2) to understand the viewpoints of general high school principals, academic affairs directors, administrative personnel, members of the Committee of School Curriculum Development, as well as course teachers concerning the future implementation of the curriculum classification model; and (3) to analyze the priorities in implementing the classification measures of general high school curriculum and other promotional affairs. The conclusions were as follows: (1) for schools already practicing curriculum classification, students’ compulsory curriculums are listed as fundamental curriculum, that is, all students are compelled to take these courses. In addition, provisions of reinforcement and broadening learning courses by schools or teachers, based on students’ learning ability and requirements, have the highest proportion. (2) If curriculum classification is implemented in the future, school personnel will also show greater support for the afore-mentioned learning model, that is, to list students’ compulsory curriculum as fundamental curriculums, as well as having the schools or teachers provide reinforcement/broadening learning courses based on students’ learning ability and requirements. (3) With the implementation measure of curriculum classification, “Students’ learning achievements” is the commonly recognized factor to be given priority consideration. (4) Promotion of the curriculum classification system should correspond to students’ adaptive development, and should also be implemented only after sound and proper planning, measures, and educational promotions have been laid out. Keywords: General high school, curriculum classification, classification model
Description
Keywords
普通高級中學, 課程分級, 分級模式, General high school, curriculum classification, classification model