批判的教育政策分析
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2003-06-??
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立台灣師範大學教育學系
Department od Education, NTNU
Department od Education, NTNU
Abstract
自1980年代，批判教育學之雛形漸具以來，其用於指引教師的教學，已有相當的歷史與成果，然對於教育政策與行政領域的啟發，卻猶待深耕。事實上，教育政策與行政大抵革與國家政體、典章制度脫離關係，尤其是教育政策，更猶如批判的政策分析論者之聲稱，多半是政治、經濟、文化等結構力量的化身，長期代表優勢群體的意義與論述，壓迫或宰制處於弱勢地位的群體，以保障或再製其利益與權力。有鑑於此，本文首?概述批判教育學的發展歷程與理論內涵，指出權力、知識、意識型態、文化、歷史文本乃其主要的探究議題；其次再分別從結構與主體之抗衡、意識型態與文化之滲透、歷史文本脈絡之框限等面向，援引政策分析的相關理論，鋪敘教育政策的批制論述分析；最末則依循前述論證脈絡，批判我國的高等教育整併政策，牌揭露其隱而未顯的不合理權力關係，增益其整全考量。
Since the 1980s, critical pedagogy has gradually established its academic status and guided teachers' teaching. It has still had little influence, however, in the field of educational policy and administration. In fact, educational policies barely diverge grom state politics, economics, or culture-they serve the advantaged and oppress the disadvantaged. To apply critical pedagogy to policy analysis, the first part of this article surveys the development and the major concepts of critical pedagogy. The second part presents a critical discourse analysis of educational policy with the rivalries between structure and individual, ideology and cultural hegemony, and the limits of history, contexts, and text. In the hope of broadening the scope of policy makers, administrators, and teachers, the last part criticizes the consolidation policy of higher education in Taiwan and exposes the illegitimate power relationship hidden behind it.
Since the 1980s, critical pedagogy has gradually established its academic status and guided teachers' teaching. It has still had little influence, however, in the field of educational policy and administration. In fact, educational policies barely diverge grom state politics, economics, or culture-they serve the advantaged and oppress the disadvantaged. To apply critical pedagogy to policy analysis, the first part of this article surveys the development and the major concepts of critical pedagogy. The second part presents a critical discourse analysis of educational policy with the rivalries between structure and individual, ideology and cultural hegemony, and the limits of history, contexts, and text. In the hope of broadening the scope of policy makers, administrators, and teachers, the last part criticizes the consolidation policy of higher education in Taiwan and exposes the illegitimate power relationship hidden behind it.