解釋過去/瞭解現在/預測未來
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2006-09-??
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
本文首先探究周愚文在2004年所發表〈教育史研究方法上的四個概念性問題〉中的四個問題：（一）究竟有無歷史研究；（二）歷史研究有無研究假設；（三）研究歷史是否只有一種方法；（四）歷史研究是否為「質性研究」。經分析後，對於前兩點的看法提出質疑，但贊同後兩點的說法；其次，藉由指出西方史學的發展與典範轉移，深入探討「分析史學」與「敘事史學」對於歷史研究中「推論」、「預測」的不同主張，以及兩派背後所支持的信念；最後，從歷史研究的典範轉移提出對教育史研究的啟示。本文認為，臺灣的教育史研究傳統上較偏向以「敘事史學」的方式撰寫，筆者建議擇採其他社會科學方法，並從「分析史學」的角度切入，藉以開創新局。
This study consists of three parts. First, several questions are raised after a careful analysis of Yu-Wen Chou's thesis, presented in 2004 and entitled Four Conceptual Questions on Research Methods in Educational History. Second, the different viewpoints and beliefs of analytic and narrative history, as well as their respective beliefs are elaborated after a discussion of the development of, and paradigm shift in, western historiography. Finally, on the basis of the above arguments, the author suggests that we use the research methods of social science and analytic history to approach the study of educational history.
This study consists of three parts. First, several questions are raised after a careful analysis of Yu-Wen Chou's thesis, presented in 2004 and entitled Four Conceptual Questions on Research Methods in Educational History. Second, the different viewpoints and beliefs of analytic and narrative history, as well as their respective beliefs are elaborated after a discussion of the development of, and paradigm shift in, western historiography. Finally, on the basis of the above arguments, the author suggests that we use the research methods of social science and analytic history to approach the study of educational history.