課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準之設計與實施

Abstract

本研究主要目的是：一、分析現有綜合活動學習領域課程評鑑規準的內涵及特性；二、編製「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」；三、撰寫「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」的補充說明；四、評估「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」的有效性。為達到上述的研究目的，研究者採用內容分析、訪談、問卷以及統計分析等四種研究方法進行研究。以下分為四個部分加以說明。 第一部分主要針對研究目的一，首先研究者閱覽相關文獻，分析現有的綜合活動課程評鑑規準，整理歸納出它們的內涵與特性，並且瞭解各評鑑規準的差異。 第二部分主要針對研究目的二，先進行第一次的綜合活動教師訪談，瞭解教師對綜合活動的理解程度，並且整理歸納教師對於綜合活動課程評鑑規準的看法及建議。之後參考教師意見，及第一部分所歸納出的現有綜合活動課程評鑑規準的特色，進行本研究評鑑規準的編製；完成本研究之評鑑規準後，進行問卷資料的蒐集，以瞭解本研究之評鑑規準的信效度結果，此外，也從問卷的開放式問題中蒐集教師的意見，作為本研究之評鑑規準補充說明的依據。 第三部分主要針對研究目的三，研究者綜合歸納問卷回收的教師意見，以及整理分析第二次綜合活動教師訪談的結果，撰寫成「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」的補充說明。 第四部分主要針對研究目的四，研究者邀請綜合活動教師利用本研究之「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」評審三篇參賽的自編教材，瞭解教師利用本研究之評鑑規準進行教材評鑑的結果，是否與由專家學者進行評審的比賽結果意見大致相同，以瞭解本研究之評鑑規準的有效性。 綜合研究結果，本研究的主要發現如下— 一、現有綜合活動學習領域課程評鑑規準的內涵及特性： 1、現有綜合活動課程評鑑規準內容多從「課程理論」建構而來。 2、現有綜合活動課程評鑑規準較忽略「教學活動」與「教學評量」的重要。 3、現有綜合活動課程評鑑規準部分內容未能符合綜合活動理念。 4、現有綜合活動課程評鑑規準均缺乏信效度資料。 二、本研究「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」的內涵及特性： 1、本研究之評鑑規準的功能包括：（1）提供教師選用教科書的評鑑指標。（2）提供教師自編教材的評鑑依據。（3）提供量化的評鑑結果。 2、本研究之評鑑規準的特色包括：（1）突顯出綜合活動學習領域的特色。（2）同時重視「課程內涵」與「教學策略」的評鑑。（3）評鑑指標同時具有評鑑教科書及自編教材的功能。（4）提供「使用建議」給教師參考。（5）各項評鑑規準均提供「補充說明」讓教師瞭解評鑑內容。（6）具有教導教師瞭解綜合活動課程理念的功能 三、本研究之「課程內涵與教學策略並重的綜合活動課程評鑑規準」實際應用的結果： 1、可提供教師作為評鑑教材的指標 2、可幫助教師瞭解其自編教材是否達到基本水準 3、符合綜合活動教師的實際需求且使用方便

最後，研究者歸納研究結論，並提出研究結果應用及未來相關研究之建議，作為學校教師教學實務以及未來研究之參考。The purposes of this study were：(1) to analyze the contents and characters of the current evaluation criteria of Integrative Activity Course curriculum；(2) to compile the “Curriculum Evaluation Criteria of Integrative Activity Course Containing the Curriculum Contents and Teaching Strategy”；(3) to make the epexegesis of the “Curriculum Evaluation Criteria of Integrative Activity Course Containing the Curriculum Contents and Teaching Strategy” ；(4) to expertise the efficiency of the “Curriculum Evaluation Criteria of Integrative Activity Course Containing the Curriculum Contents and Teaching Strategy”. In order to accomplish these purposes, the researcher adopted the content analysis ,interview, questionnaire, and statistics analysis methods. The whole study could be described in four parts： The first part was mainly for the first purpose of this study. The researcher surveyed the correlate Literature. The researcher analyzed the present curriculum evaluation criteria of Integrative Activity Course, and induced the characters and differences of them. The second part was mainly for the second purpose of this study. The researcher began the first interview of Integrative Activity Course’s teachers. The researcher realized teachers’ perception toward Integrative Activity Course, and made some suggestions. The third part was mainly for the third purpose of this study. The researcher inducted the teachers’ opinions from the questionnaire, and analyzed the opinions of the second interview of Integrative Activity Course’s teachers. After that, the researcher made the epexegesis of the “Curriculum Evaluation Criteria of Integrative Activity Course Containing the Curriculum Contents and Teaching Strategy”. The fourth part was mainly for the fourth purpose of this study. The researcher invited Integrative Activity Course’s teachers and scholars to use the“ Curriculum Evaluation Criteria of Integrative Activity Course Containing the Curriculum Contents and Teaching Strategy” to evaluate, and analyze whether their opinions were the same. Finally the researcher understood the efficiency of the “Curriculum Evaluation Criteria of Integrative Activity Course Containing the Curriculum Contents and Teaching Strategy”. The results of this study were as follows： 1.The contents and characters of the current Integrative Activity Course curriculum evaluation criteria：(1)They were almost designed from “curriculum theory”.(2)They almost ignored the importance of the “ teaching activities” and “Instructional Assessment”. (3)Some of them didn’t match the concepts of Integrative Activity Course. (4 )They lacked the Reliability and Validity data. 2. The contents and characters of the“ Integrative Activity Course curriculum evaluation criteria”： (1)The functions were：Ⅰ.It afforded teachers the curriculum evaluation criteria for choosing text books.Ⅱ. It afforded teachers the basis to evaluate the self-made teaching materials. Ⅲ. It afforded the quantitative evaluation result. (2)The characters were：Ⅰ.It made the characters of Integrative Activity Course outstanding. Ⅱ.It both considered the evaluation of curriculum contents and teaching strategy important. Ⅲ. It could both evaluate textbook and self-made teaching materials. Ⅳ. It afforded “ user suggestions” for teachers. Ⅴ. It offered the epexegesis of each evaluation criteria for teachers. Ⅵ. It could teach teacher to understand the concepts of Integrated Activity Course. 3.The applications were：Ⅰ.It afforded teachers the curriculum evaluation criteria. Ⅱ. It could help teachers to realize whether the self-made teaching materials achieve the basic level. Ⅲ. It could meet Integrative Activity teachers’ need ,and be easy to use. Finally, the researcher discussed the results and provided some suggestions for application and future research.