【作者】 吴支奎；

【导师】 靳玉乐； 吕达；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 课程与教学论， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 20世纪70年代以来,西方教育科学领域发生了重要的“范式转换”:开始由探究普适性的教育规律转向寻求情境化的教育意义。这种“范式转换”在课程与教学研究领域表现为由“课程开发范式”转向“课程理解范式”,课程被视为一种多元“文本”而加以解读。课程理论研究范式的转换在实践领域产生了强烈的震荡,课程实践随之做出积极的回应:由“接受式课程实践”转向“参与式课程实践”。课堂中参与式课程实践以“理解”和“参与”为精神内核,其语境下的课程不再是僵死的“学习材料”,而是充满各种意义的“文本”,是丰富的教育意义的载体,是教师和学生在具体情境下随着教育过程的展开而不断生成与建构的;课堂教学强调学生的参与,尊重参与者主体的既有视界,鼓励学生以认知主体身份参与对课程的意义建构,通过理解、对话、体验、感悟和批判等形成共识,达成“视界融合”。全文共分七个部分:导论。该部分交代了论文选题的背景和缘由,对相关研究文献进行梳理、归纳和评价,从理论和实践两个层面阐释本研究的意义,明晰研究的思路与方法。第一章:学生参与课程发展的意义。本章对论文中的核心概念进行了界定,在解析学生参与课程发展内涵及特征的基础上,揭示课堂中学生参与课程发展的本质——意义建构。最后探讨了学生参与课程发展的意义,即彰显主体性,提升学生在课程中的地位和作用;重建课程知识的意义,推动课程的创生;促进课堂情境中课程与教学的变革。第二章:学生参与课程发展的基础。论文首先对以“泰勒原理”为代表的科学主义课程开发范式进行批判,指出该范式衍生“防学习者”课程,导致学习者的“缺席”并因此割裂了儿童与课程的事实关联,僭越了课程对儿童的意义关照。在此基础上,解析课程观的转变,从实践/过程课程观、现象-诠释学课程观、建构主义课程观及后现代课程观等来探寻学生参与课程发展的理论基础。第三章:课堂中学生参与课程发展的层次。本章借鉴古德莱德有关课程运行层次的理论,将课堂中学生参与课程发展划分为正式课程、师构课程和体验课程三个内容层次。通过分析每一层次课程的知识规定、文本表征、学生参与及影响因素来具体阐述课堂中学生参与课程发展的内容。第四章:学生参与课程发展的课堂实现(一)。课堂中学生参与课程发展的本质是意义建构,本章从课堂微观层面探讨意义建构的方式、条件和机制。研究认为,意义建构的主要方式有理解-对话、体验-感悟、批判-反思等。意义建构的条件有内、外两方面,内部条件包括:课程主体意识与创生意识的增强是前提、已有知识和经验的“先在”是基础、课程能力的提升是保障等;外部条件包括:凸显学生的中心地位、创设情景、搭建“脚手架”、加强协作与会话、合理利用各种教育资源等。论文进一步剖析了意义建构的内在机制,揭示意义建构的内驱力是问题、心理机制是同化和顺应、社会内化机制是协商。第五章:学生参与课程发展的课堂实现(二)。本章通过实证研究,采用案例分析、访谈及非参与式课堂观察等研究方法对课堂中学生理解和重构课程的具体过程进行探究。论文结合案例阐释了学生理解课程的过程:整体感知、具体理解、切己深悟、理性评判;阐明教师在其中的作用。从学生自主建构意识的增强、课程文本转换与知识转化的要求、教材“召唤结构”的待补之需等方面剖析学生重构课程的原因;从记笔记、做作业及课堂探究、研讨等活动阐述学生重构课程,实现课程知识和意义创生与转化的过程。最后,论文探讨了课堂中意义建构的组织策略、精加工策略和概念图策略三种认知策略。第六章:学生参与课程发展的反思与展望。本章对学生参与课程发展的课堂实现进行了检视,剖析意义建构中存在的突出问题:意义建构的有效性问题、多元建构与价值引导问题、学生建构课程的限度问题等;阐释学生参与课程发展的深层张力。论文最后展望了基于学生参与的课程发展愿景。结语:该部分简要归纳本研究的新意及贡献之处,指出研究的不足及有待进一步研究的问题。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the domain of Western education science, an important "paradigm shift" has been taking place since 1970s, that is, from the probing of general educational rules to the seeking of contextualized meaning of education. In the field of curriculum and instruction research, this "paradigm shift" represents itself from the paradigm of curriculum development to that of curriculum understanding, curriculum is thus seen a "text" that can be interpreted in multi-factors. The shift of the study on curriculum theory has great impact upon the curriculum practice. It responds positively with a shift from receptive curriculum practice to the participatory one. The participatory curriculum practice takes "understanding" and "participation" as its core. Under this context, curriculum is no longer seen as frozen learning material, but as a "text" full of a variety of meanings, a carrier rich in educational meanings, and with the deepening of educational process, it can be generated and constructed by teachers and students under specific situation. Accordingly, the classroom instruction places emphasis on student’s participation, respect the participator’s established horizons, encourage students to participate the construction of meaning as a subject of knowledge, thus the "fusion of horizons" can be reached by means of comprehension, dialogue, experience, perception and criticism.This dissertation consists of seven parts. Part one is the introduction. The background and reason for choosing the subject of this dissertation are discussed. Then the relevant literature is reviewed, summarized and evaluated, the significance of this study is interpreted both theoretically and experimentally, to clarify the train of thoughts and the methodology.Chapter one deals with the meaning of student’s participation in curriculum development. Firstly, the core concepts in this dissertation are defined. Then based on the connotation and features of student’s participation in curriculum development, the essence, namely, the meaning-construction is revealed. The significance is discussed as well, that is, to reveal the subjectivity by promoting students’ position and role in curriculum; to reconstruct the meaning of curriculum knowledge, to accelerate the generation of curriculum; and to facilitate reforms of curriculum and instruction in classroom context.Chapter two is the foundation of students’ participation in curriculum development. The scientific-oriented paradigm of curriculum development represented by "Tyler rationale" is firstly criticized, and it is pointed out that this paradigm may generate "learner-proof curriculum, resulting in learners’ "absence" and thus it separates the actual correlation between children and the curriculum, overstepping the meaningful care curriculum granted to children. Basis on the perspective of practical or procedural curriculum paradigm, phenomenon-hermeneutics curriculum paradigm, constructivism curriculum paradigm and post-modern curriculum paradigm, the theoretical background for the students’ participation in curriculum development is discussed.Chapter three discusses the levels of students’ participation in curriculum development in classroom. By referring to Goodlad’s theory on levels of curriculum operation, students’ participation in curriculum development is divided into three levels, namely, formal curriculum, teacher-constructed curriculum and experiential curriculum. The contents of students’ participation in curriculum development are specified through the analysis of knowledge regulations in the curriculum of all levels, text representation, students’ participation and its contributing factors.Chapter four is the first half of classroom realization of students’ participation in curriculum development. Because the essence of students’ participation in curriculum development is meaning-construction in classroom, the ways, conditions and mechanism of meaning construction are thus discussed from the micro perspectives. It is believed that meaning construction includes the following major ways such as understanding-dialogue, experience-perception and criticism-reflection. The conditions for meaning construction can be both interior and exterior. The interior conditions include that the strengthening awareness of curricular subjectivity and that of generation is the precondition, the learnt knowledge and the pre-existence of experience is the foundation, with the enhancement of curriculum ability being the guarantee. On the other hand, the external conditions include the salience of students’ central role, the creation of situations, the establishment of the "scaffold", the emphasis on negotiation and dialogue, and the rational distribution of various educational resources and so on. The inner mechanism is further analyzed, it is revealed that the interior motivation is problems; the psychological mechanism is assimilation and accommodation, while the internalized mechanism is negotiation.Chapter five is the second half of the classroom realization of students’ participation in curriculum development. The specific process of students’ understanding and reconstruction of curriculum is probed by means of case study, interviews and non-participative classroom observation. The process of students’ understanding curriculum is thus put forward: integral perception, substantial understanding, and rational criticism. Teachers’ contribution in this process is illustrated. The reasons for students’ reconstruction of curriculum are analyzed from the aspects such as the strengthening awareness of students’ self-construction; the demand coming from the shift of curriculum text and knowledge transformation, and the need that the incompleteness of the course-book structure calls up to be perfected. In addition, Students’ reconstruction of curriculum is explained from the aspects of note-taking, homework-doing, classroom exploration and seminars, to realize the generation and transformation of curriculum knowledge and meaning. In the end, three strategies such as organizing strategies, refining strategies and the strategy of conceptual schema in the construction of meaning in the classroom are discussed.Chapter six discusses the retrospect and prospect of students’ participation in curriculum development. The classroom realization of students’ participation in curriculum development is reviewed, and the major problems existed in the process of meaning construction are analyzed, such as the problem of effectiveness in meaning construction, the problem of multi-construction and value-inducement, the problem of limit on students’ construction of curriculum and so on. The deep incentive of students’ participation in curriculum development is also probed. At last, the prospect of students’ participation in curriculum development is predicted.The last part is the conclusion. The innovation and contributions of the present study are summarized, and the limitations and suggestions for further study are also pointed out.更多还原