博碩士論文 88542011 詳細資訊




以作者查詢圖書館館藏 以作者查詢臺灣博碩士 以作者查詢全國書目 勘誤回報 、線上人數:11 、訪客IP:3.209.80.87
姓名 莊益瑞(Yih-ruey Juang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 資訊工程學系
論文名稱 以學校本位課程教案增進教師發展學科教學知識之模式及其效能支援系統之研究
(Computer Support for Teacher Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge through Developing Lesson Plans for School-Based Curriculum)
相關論文
★ 一個適用於解題領域的模擬多重學習同伴之方法★ 亞卓市全民學校系統設計與初步使用成果
★ 網路學習資訊護照系統★ 全民學校之團隊教學與團隊學習設計
★ 電腦支援問答競爭學習遊戲設計之探索★ 亞卓期刊系統之設計與實作
★ 網路上目標設定環境的建置網路上目標設定環境的建置 以閱讀網站為例★ 亞卓合作觀察實驗站之研究
★ 使用 EduClick 當作遠端遙控互動評量系統★ 出題與同儕評題支援系統之設計及評估
★ 支援不同解題練習遊戲活動之雙人學習系統★ 亞卓市多重學習系統之黏合機制
★ 激發使用動機之網路個人學習平台★ 一個設計結構化網路學習社群之方法
★ 線上社群系統上可客製化機制之設計與實作★ 無線環境下支援高互動學習之通訊伺服器設計
檔案 [Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [相關文章]   [文章引用]   [完整記錄]   [館藏目錄]   [檢視]  [下載]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
  3. 請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。

摘要(中) 學科教學知識 (Pedagogical Content Knowledge) 是教師職業生涯發展的必備知識,近來對教師學科教學知識發展之研究著重在以研究為基礎的活動,如行動研究 (Action Research) 和授業研究 (Lesson Study) ,這類研究特別重視利用課堂教學實務、資訊科技和合作學習模式。然而,大多數的發展模式把焦點放在個別教師或教師群組上,甚少將學校領導和資源納入支持與參與的角色。本研究提出一個教師學科教學知識的發展模式 (稱為3C-model) ,並藉以設計一個支援系統稱為EDUPLAN。此模式融合了學校裡三個不同階層的教師和課程發展相關人員發展學校本位課程,共同合作創作與分享以教案為基礎的知識庫。透過學校本位課程發展的過程,此模式能增進教師學科教學知識與合作,且該支援系統能夠強化教案設計與修訂的效率,並藉以提升學科教學知識發展的成效。
摘要(英) Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) is essential to career development for teachers. The recent emphasis in research on teacher development in PCK has been on research-based activities such as action research and lesson study, with a particular emphasis on the employment of classroom practice, information technology, and collaborative learning. Most of these models focus on individual teachers or teacher groups, and there is less chance of receiving support from the school leadership and institutional resources. This study proposes a development model for PCK known as the 3C-model and implements a supporting system for it, known as EDUPLAN. The model engages teachers in collaboratively constructing and sharing a knowledge-base of lesson plans with the involvement of different levels of school members for their school’s curriculum. Through the process of school-based curriculum development, the model was found to increase teacher PCK and collaboration. Finally, the supporting system is found to be capable of enhancing performance in lesson plan construction and revision and thus the efficiency of PCK development.
關鍵字(中) ★ 效能支援系統
★ 教師專業發展
★ 學校本位課程發展
★ 學科教學知識
★ 教學計畫(教案)
關鍵字(英) ★ Performance Support System (PSS)
★ Teacher Professional Development
★ School-Based Curriculum Development (SBCD)
★ lesson plan
★ Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK)
論文目次 TABLE OF CONTENTS I
INDEX OF FIGURES III
INDEX OF TABLES V
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
CHAPTER 2 RATIONALE 4
2.1. The Nature and Importance of Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) 5
2.2 Research-Oriented Activities for PCK Development 8
2.3 Developing PCK through School-Based Curriculum Development 11
2.4 Computer Support for Teachers’ Development in PCK 14
CHAPTER 3 DEVELOPMENT OF 3C-MODEL 17
3.1. Three Levels of School-Based Curriculum Development 18
3.2. Lesson Plan-Centered Knowledge-Base Framework 20
3.3. The 3C-model and Web Based Supporting System EDUPLAN 22
3.3.1. Creation Mechanism 23
3.3.2. Collaboration Mechanism 25
3.3.3. Communication Mechanism 29
CHAPTER 4 DEVELOPMENT OF THE PERFORMANCE SUPPORT SYSTEM EDUPLAN 32
4.1. Electronic Performance Support System for Curriculum Development 32
4.2. Main Task of School-Based Curriculum Development 37
4.3. The Design of System Modules 41
4.3.1. Analysis module 42
4.3.2. Design module 43
4.3.3. Implementation module 47
4.3.4. Evaluation module 48
4.3.5. Communication module 50
CHAPTER 5 EVALUATION 52
5.1. Evaluation questions 52
5.2. Participants 53
5.3. Methodology 55
5.4. Results and discussions 57
5.4.1. The 3C-model can improve teacher performance in developing PCK effectively 57
5.4.2. The 3C-model can substantially facilitate teacher collaboration in developing curriculum and PCK 63
5.4.3. The supporting tools constructed based on the three mechanisms enhance the performance of the PCK development of teachers 68
5.5. A case for observing teachers’ PCK development 75
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED STUDIES 92
REFERENCES 96
參考文獻 Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is – or might be – the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6-8 &14.
Barab, S., Makinster, J. G., Moore, J. A., Cunningham, D. J., & The ILF Design Team. (2001). Designing and Building an On-line Community: The Struggle to Support Sociability in the Inquiry Learning Forum. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(4), 71-96.
Barker, P. and Banerji, A. (1995). Designing electronic performance support systems, Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(1), pp. 4-12.
Barnett, M (2002). Issues and trends concerning new technologies for teacher professional development: A review of the literature. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
Borko, H. & Putnam, R. T. (1995). Expanding a teacher’s knowledge base: A cognitive psychological perspective on professional development. In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices. New York: Teachers College Press.
Borko, H., Livingston, C., McCaleb, J., & Mauro L. (1988). Student teachers’ planning and post-lesson reflections: patterns and implications for teacher preparation. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Teachers’ Professional Learning. New York: The Falmer Press.
Bullough, R. V., & Gitlin, A. D. (1991). Educative communities and the development of the reflective practitioner. In B. R. Tabachnick & Zeichner (Eds.), Issue and practices in inquiry-oriented teacher education. New York: The Falmer Press.
Cochran, K. F, DeRuiter, J. A., & King R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: an integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(4), 263-272.
Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers’ learning. The Elementary School Journal, 103(3), 227-331.
Confrey, J. (1990). A review of the research on student conceptions in mathematics, science, and programming. In C. B. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research in education, Vol. 16, Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Corno, L. & Snow, R. E. (1986). Adapting teaching to individual differences among learners. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. (2004). Systematic design for instruction (6th ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Fernandez, C. (2002). Learning from Japanese approaches to professional development: The case of lesson study. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(5), 390-405.
Fernandez, C., & Chokshi, S. (2002). A practical guide to translating lesson study for a US setting. Phi Delta Kappan, 84, 128-134.
Fernandez, C., Cannon, J., & Chokshi, S. (2003). A U.S.-Japan lesson study collaboration reveals critical lenses for examining practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(2), 171-185.
Fisher, T., Higgins, C., & Loveless, A. (2006). Teachers learning with digital technologies: a review of research and projects. FutureLab Series Report 14, FutureLab press. Accessed from: http://www.futurelab.org.uk/research/reviews/14_01.htm on Dec. 14, 2006.
Frost, D. (1996). Integrating enquiry into teachers’ professional lives. In McBride, R. (Ed.), Teacher education policy: Some issues arising from research and practice. London: Falmer Press.
Gery, G J (1991). Electronic performance support systems – How and why to remake the workplace through the strategic application of technology. Ziff Communications Company, Cambridge: MA.
Grossman, P. L. (1989). A study in contrast: Sources of pedagogical content knowledge for secondary English teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 24-31.
Gustafson, K., & Branch, R. (1997), Survey of instructional development models (3rd ed.). Syracuse University, NY: Eric Clearinghouse on Information Resource.
Gustafson, K., & Branch, R. (1997). Survey of instructional development models (3rd ed.). Syracuse University, NY: Eric Clearinghouse on Information Resource.
Heaton, R. M. (2000). Teaching mathematics to the new standards: Relearning the dance. New York: Teacher College Press.
Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. (1989). Analysis and use of a task for identifying conceptions of teaching science. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15(3), 191-209.
Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: what would it look like and how can we get one? Education Researcher, 31(5), 3-15.
Lampert, M., & Ball, D. L. (1998). Teaching, multimedia, and mathematics: Investigations of real practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
Lederman, N. G., & Latz, M. (1993). Emergence and Interactions of knowledge structures in the preservice teacher. Paper resented at the Annual meeting of the National association for Research in Science Teaching. Atlanta, Georgia.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2, 34-46.
Lewis, C., & Tsuchida, I. (1998). A lesson is like a swiftly flowing river: How research lessons improve Japanese education. American Educator, Winter, 12-17, 50-52.
Lewis, C. (2002). Does lesson study have a future in the United States? Nagoya Journal of Education and Human Development, January 2002, No. 1, 1-23.
Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2003). Lesson study and teachers’ knowledge development: Collaborative Critique of a research model and methods. Report on Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in Chicago, IL, Apr. 2003. ERIC: ED478172.
Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 3-14.
Liu, T. C., & Juang, Y. R. (2002). IPASS - Teacher’s Knowledge Management Platform for Teachers Professional Development, Proceeding of International Conference on Engineering Education.
Liu, T. C. (2005). Web-based Cognitive Apprenticeship Model for Improving Pre-service Teachers’ Performances and Attitudes towards Instructional Planning: Design and Field Experiment. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 136-149.
Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3-11.
Marsh, C., Day, C., Hannay, L., & McCutcheon, G. (1990). Reconceptualizing School-based Curriculum Development, London: Falmer.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1998). New technologies for teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 33–52.
Matoba, M., & Arani, M. R. S. (2005). Transnational Learning: A Review of Lesson Study in Japan. Paper presented in 1st Annual Conference on Learning Study. Retrieved Aug. 8, 2006 from http://www.ied.edu.hk/clasp/lsconference/1st/abstract.html.
McDiarmid, G. W., Ball, D. L., & Anderson, C. W. (1989). Why staying one chapter ahead doesn’t really work: Subject-specific pedagogy. In M. Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge base for the beginning teacher. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
McEwan, H., & BuIl, B. (l991). The pedagogical nature of subject matter knowledge. American Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 316-334.
McGraw, K. (1994). Performance support systems: Integrating AI, Hypermedia, and CBT to enhance user performance, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 5(1), 3-26.
McKenney, S. E. (2001). Computer support for science education materials developers in Africa: Exploring potentials, Doctoral dissertation. Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
McKenney, S., Nieveen N., & van den Akker J. J. H. (2002). Computer support for curriculum developers: CASCADE, Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(4), 25-35.
Nieveen, N., & Akker, J., van den (1996). Computer-supported curriculum development. In Tj. Plomp, & D.P. Ely (Eds.), International encyclopedia of educational technology (pp. 153-158). Oxford: Pergamon.
Nieveen, N.M. (1997). Computer support for curriculum developers: A study on the potential of computer support in the domain of formative curriculum evaluation. Doctoral dissertation. Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
Raybould, B. (1995). Performance support engineering: An emerging development methodology for enabling organizational learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 8(1), 7-22.
Reigeluth, C.M. (1999) Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reigeluth, C.M. (1999). Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(3), 315-342.
Reynolds, A. (1992). What is competent beginning teaching? A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 62(l), 1-35.
Rudduck, J. (1992). Practitioner research and programs of initial teacher education. In T. Russell & H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection. London: The Falmer Press.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professional think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Schratz, M. (1993). Through the looking glass: The use of associative methods to enhance teacher thinking. In J. Elliott (Ed.), Reconstructing Teacher Education: Teacher Development. London: The Falmer Press.
Shulman, L. S., & Shulman, J. H. (2004). How and what teachers learn: a shifting perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(2), 257-271.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.
Skilbeck, M. (1984). School-based curriculum development. London: Harper & Row.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1999) Instructional design (2nd ed.). NY: Wiley.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional design (2nd ed.). NY: Wiley.
Somekh, B. (1991). Collaborative action research: Working together towards professional development. In C. Biott (Ed.) Semi-Detached teachers: Building support and advisory relationships in classrooms. London: The Falmer Press, 1991.
Somekh, B. and Davis, N. (eds) (1997). Using information technology effectively in teaching and learning. London: Routledge.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.
Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J., (1999). The teaching gap. New York: The Free Press.
Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 99-110.
Tamir, P. (1990). Teachers knowledge. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education. Supplementary Vol. Two. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on Instructional Strategies for Teaching Science. In Gabel, D. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York: Wacmillan Publishing company.
Van Schaik, P., Pearson, R., & Barker, P. G. (2002). Designing electronic performance support systems to facilitate learning, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(4), 289-306.
Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: an international review of the literature. Paris: UNESCO: International Institute for Educational Planning.
Visibility Platform, LessonLab, a division of Pearson Education, http://www.lessonlab.com/visibilityplatform/overview.cfm
Wang, Q. (2001). Computer support for multimedia curriculum design, Doctoral dissertation. Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
Watanabe, T. (2002). Learning from Japanese lesson study. Educational Leadership, March, 36-39.
Wideen, M. F. (1992). School-based teacher development. In Fullan, M. & Hargreaves, A. (Eds), Teacher development and educational change. London: The Falmer Press.
Wild, M. (2000). Designing and evaluating an educational performance support system, British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 5-20.
Willis, S. (2002). Creating a knowledge base for teaching: a conversation with James Stigler. Educational Leadership, 59(6), 6-11.
Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., & Richert, A. E. (1987). “150 different ways” of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teacher’s thinking. Eastbourne, England: Cassell.
Wiske, M. S., Sick, M., & Wirsig, S. (2001). New technologies to support teaching for understanding. International Journal of Educational Research, 35, 483-501.
Zulkardi, (2002). Developing a learning environment on realistic mathematics education for indonesian student teachers, Doctoral dissertation. Enschede, The Netherlands: University of Twente.
指導教授 陳德懷(Tak-wai Chan) 審核日期 2007-5-8
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明