【作者】 鲍道宏；

【导师】 杨小微；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 教育学原理， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 本研究以新课程语文实验为例,在福建、安徽、湖北、江苏和上海等部分省市大规模问卷调查,以及在福建、安徽等地中小学实地听课、访谈和座谈等基础上,综合分析问卷调查回收资料、教师教案、课堂实录和访谈、座谈资料,并参用其他学者一些相关研究成果,对“教师课程理解”进行了初步探究。研究表明,中小学教师在观念层面上基本认同新课程理念。即认同新课程提出的培养目标,认同包括与原有课程相比具有较大变革的目标,如要使学生“具有社会责任感,努力为人民服务;具有初步的创新精神、实践能力、科学与人文素养以及环境意识;具有终身学习的基础知识、基本技能和方法;具有健壮的体魄和良好的心理素质,养成健康的审美情趣和生活方式。”但是,具体到课程内部,教师课程理解状态又复杂多样。这其中,既有美国课程专家古德莱德揭示的常态变化,即从理想的课程,到正式的课程,领悟的课程,运作的课程,最终到经验的课程这样现象,更有当代中国社会状况下教师课程理解的独特变化。这种独特性,具体可以概括为:共时复杂的类的区分,历时丰富的阶段性差异。教师课程理解现状中出现的与新课程偏离的现象,不能简单归因于教师缺乏敬业精神或专业素养,归因于教师职业惰性,也不能简单归咎于课程理论或课程政策。在古德莱德意义上的课程形态转变,我们之所以称之为“常态”,是因为这是课程从理论到实践运作过程中不可避免的情况。但是,即使出现如本研究所揭示的教师课程理解状态,也要具体分析。课程理论、课程政策和课程实施,乃至教师,都有可能是出现偏离现象的因素。本研究表明,任何一个课程形态,对其实施条件都有相应的要求。不同形态课程的不同要求,不独表现在物质条件方面,同时也表现在制度、文化等方面。离开了这种必需的支持性条件,任何“完美的”课程也不过是空中楼阁,可望而不可即。同时,课程理论转变为改造课程实践的力量,也有待于课程实践者积极参与。缺乏双方的互动,理论与实践即使“鸡犬之声相闻”,也会“老死不相往来”。因此,本研究根据自己对当代中国“教师课程理解”的现状把握,在历史发展的时间纵轴上和中国社会转型及中小学学校变革当下境遇中,以国内外相关研究成果为基础,探究影响教师课程理解的复杂因素及其交互作用的深刻原因,把“课程”和“教师课程理解”这样的“教育问题”,放置到一个更为宽广的社会历史境遇中分析,以教育学原理视角,揭示其间错综复杂的关系,并最终提出课程专家、课程政策制定者与课程实践者,尤其是中小教师在“研究性变革实践”中共同发展的路径建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 This inquiry has been made on a sample of Chinese-education in "the New Curriculum" . The investigation, which involves the methods of survey research, survey interview, classroom observation, conversation analysis and teaching plans analysis into the teachers’ curriculum understanding, has been made in provinces and municipality including Fujian, Anhui, Hubei, Jiangsu and Shanghai. As it demonstrates, teachers in basic educational schools always agree with the ideas of "the New Curriculum", that is, they agree with the objectives advanced in "the New Curriculum", such as developing students into the ones who have social responsibilities and serve the people heart and soul; and have the spirit of innovation, practice abilities, scientific and humanistic quality and environment—protecting consciousness; and have basic knowledge, technical abilities and methods for lifelong learning; and have strong physique and excellent mentalities; have perfect aesthetic conceptions and life." On the other hand, they understand the curriculum in different ways when they work. Some of the ways belong to Professor J. Goodlad’s curriculum chain (ideal curriculum, formal curriculum, perceived curriculum, operational curriculum, experiential curriculum), and others belong to Chinese special change which involves positive and passive understanding. The former can be sub-divided into real understanding, formal understanding and misunderstanding. The latter can be sub-divided into conceptual agreement while disagreement in practice, and disagreement both in mind and practice.We can not simply draw the conclusion that such teachers’ understanding of curriculum occur because they lack professional vitalities and abilities, nor can we conclude that they have their own occupational laziness, or curriculum theory and policy. As mentioned above, it is called "normal behaviour" that patterns of curriculum change as professor Goodlad discussed, because any pattern of curriculum changes in this way. The curriculum pattern change as mentioned in this research should be discussed with the conditions in which the curriculum has been implemented. The theory, policy and implementation of curriculum, as well as teachers, would contribute to the deviation from "the New Curriculum". From this research, it can be concluded that any curriculum pattern needs its own condition. Different curriculum pattern needs different conditions that involve materials, system and culture. Without its necessary conditions, no "perfect" curriculum can work in educational practice. Meanwhile, the conversion of curriculum theory into the power to change practice depends on the active participation of curriculum practitioners. Without interaction, theory and practice would never contact each other, even if they are actually close together.Therefore, based on the knowledge of the present situation of Chinese teachers’ curriculum understanding and the related research home and abroad, this research explores the complicated influencing factors of teachers’ curriculum understanding and the causes of their interaction. Also, it is done in the light of the development of teachers’ curriculum understanding, and in the context of China’ social transformation and educational reform in primary and secondary schools.In the research, the issues of education such as curriculum and teachers’ curriculum understanding are analyzed in the historical social background, and the complicated relationship between them is revealed in the perspective of educational principles. Finally, it suggests a way, namely "research-and-reform-oriented practice", to promote the mutual development of curriculum experts, curriculum policy makers, teachers in primary and secondary schools who implement the curriculum.更多还原