宋明娟2014-10-272014-10-272007-12-??http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/18905課程史如何被撰作之起始、過程與結果，皆受撰作者的觀點所左右，如能加以釐析，則可期以充盈有關課程問題的思考範疇。本文旨在解析D. Tanner與L. Tanner二氏和H. Kliebard的課程史研究觀點，首先探討渠等治課程史的意圖，以及論課程史的價值，其次以渠等之美國課程史專著進行具體分析，最後則綜合比較並延伸所論。本文於結論中指出，課程史學者的研究觀點或暗或明，皆寓含於著作當中，因之在引述或探究其主張，抑或逕自從事課程史研究時，皆宜提升研究觀點之敏銳度，發為嚴謹的立論。The main purpose of this article was to analyze Daniel and Laurel Tanner's and Herbert Kliebard's perspectives on curriculum history. First of all, their views on inten-tion, values and the significance of historical inquiry for the development of curricula were discussed. Second, selected topics from their work concerning American curricu-lum history were further explored. Then, the author synthesized their key points and concluded that as a researcher in this field, one should enhance his or her awareness, so as to be sensitive enough to the hidden or apparent perspectives of curriculum history.課程史Tanner二氏Kliebard史觀Curriculum historyD. Tanner ＆ L. TannerH. KliebardPerspectives on history