| 摘要(英) |
This study will explore how students cultivate the core competencies in the Freshmen Chinese Curriculum, and which are the aspects them lack of. To non-Chinese major students, Freshman Chinese is their last formal Chinese education in the college years. The importance of Freshman Chinese encompasses a better understanding and realization of Chinese literature and culture rather than standard linguistic knowledge and examination skills even though freshmen no longer encountered the pressure of college entrance exams.
Studies on students’ learning outcomes in the past were mostly conducted through questionnaires. However, the information gathered is oftentimes fragmented because learning behavior becomes overly simplified when made into variables of measurement for questionnaires. Apparently, such simplification overlooks the complexity and context of a learning process and the in-depth understanding of the process about how students acquire their core competencies. In addition to interviewing students, researchers observed the classes for one semester in order to witness how these freshmen developing their core competencies and to explore students’ learning outcomes in Freshman Chinese.
After analyzing the interview, the results show that the most rewarding aspects they received from Freshman Chinese curriculum are the logical thinking skills and cultural literacy. Regarding their logical thinking, students have learned to: 1) find the answers through the questions, historical background and the context the of the readings, 2) think more deeply about the purpose and significance of classical works, 3) learn how to brainstorming through group discussion, 4) understand the cause and effect of things, and 5) see things from multiple perspectives. In terms of their cultural literacy, students have learned to: 1) understand who they really are during the process of composing an autobiography, 2) reflect upon themselves by reviewing their past experiences, and 3) contemplate their own self-worth by exploring the writers’ attitude about life. In addition, this study also discovered that there existed a cognitive gap between the teacher and the students regarding the starting point of the background knowledge prior to the class. Finally, based on the implications of the finding, this study proposed constructive suggestions to improve the learning outcomes of Freshman Chinese in the near future.
|
| 參考文獻 |
王妙純、羅文苑(2010)。親愛的，我把大一國文 Live 秀了!── 以戲劇表演融入國文課程之教學活動設計，新竹教育大學教育學報，27(1)，161-191。
王秀珊(2013)。[輔仁大學國文課程推動與革新計畫]之個人教學實踐與分析─ 試以100學年度上學期大一國文課程為例，全人教育學報，11，45-76。
王保進（2011）。以學生學習成效品質保證為核心之第二週期系所評鑑作業規範。評鑑雙月刊，33，7-11。
王保進（2011）。以學生學習成效品質保證為核心之第二週期系所評鑑作業規範。評鑑雙月刊，33，7-11。
王靖婷 (2009)。大學國文教學面面觀:相關研究之回顧與展望。通識學刊:理念與實務，1(4):139-171。
王靖婷(2006)。大一國文多元智能取向教學策略。通識學刊:理論與實務， 1(2)，101-136。
史美瑤(2012)。21 世紀的教學:以「學生學習為中心」的教師發展，評鑑雙月刊，36，42-44。.
吳心楷、宋曜廷、簡馨瑩(2010)。錄影分析在教育研究的應用，教育科學研究期刊，55(4)，1-37。
吳懷晨(2011)。通識化國文課程的教學理念與實施-以 [國文: 花東文學地景] 為例。臺東大學人文學報，1(2)，45-79。
李大偉(1993)。大學科技人文科系學生對人文科技知識需求之研究，教育研究資訊，1(3)，31-33。
李坤崇(2009)。成果導向的課程發展模式。教育研究月刊，186，39-58。
李坤崇(2011)。成果導向的大學校務與課程評鑑，教育研究月刊，205，79-91。
李政賢(譯)(2007)。質性研究導論(原作者Uwe Flick)，台北：五南。
李玲珠(2003)。大學國文教育的人文精神與實踐的省思。中山通識教育學報，3，67-83。
李玲珠(2003)。大學國文教育的人文精神與實踐的省思。中山通識教育學報，3，67-83。
周昱翔(2015)。從語言邏輯培養思辨能力，國立臺灣大學教學發展中心電子報，83。
林從一(2014)臺灣通識教育發展歷程，長庚人文社會學報，7(2)，191-253。
胡幼慧(1996)。質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北:巨流。
孫貴珠(2013)。大學國文通識化課程規劃與教材取向之商榷反思，通識學刊: 理念與實務，2(2)，27-50.
高敬文(1999)。質化研究的「另類思考」。高雄：麗文。
高敬堯(2013)。大學應用文讀寫結合模式教學成效研究(博士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。
張春興(2013)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐 重修二版。臺北:東華。
張鈿富. (2012). 大學生學習投入理論與評量實務之探討. Evaluation in Higher Education, 41-62.
梁佩雲(2013)。成果導向學習與大學教學的品質提升:以中文學科的實踐為例，教育科學研究期刊，58(4)，1-35。
許維蓉(2007)。大學工科教師對成果導向認證制度之態度研究(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。
郭伯佾、李宗定、朱心怡、張錦瑤、黃東陽、黃雅琦(2008)。實踐大學高雄校區學生國文素養與學習成果評估，實踐博雅學報，9，1-30。
陳向明（2007），社會科學質的研究。臺北：五南圖書出版公司。
陳秋虹、張世娟(2006)。互動式教學在科技大學國文課之運用-以正修科技大學四技大一國文教學為例，正修通識教育學報，3，247-273。
彭森明(2010)。大學校院如何推展學生學習成果評量，評鑑雙月刊，24，28-34.
黃俊傑(2006)。轉型中的大學通識教育：理念、現況與展望。高雄:中華民國通識教育協會。
黃淑玲(2010)。學其所做，做其所學-以CHEA傑出校院學生學習成效執行獎爲例，評鑑雙月刊，25，36-39。
楊淑華、葉憲峻(2009)。大一通識國文課程定位與精進方案─以先秦諸子篇章的選讀與應用為例，臺中教育大學學報:人文藝術類，23(1)，19-53。
詹千慧(2009)。大學國文單元教學設計芻議，全人教育學報，5，27-66。
詹海雲（1994）〈大學國文教學的回顧與前瞻〉，人文及社會學科教學通訊，5 (3)。
劉杏元、張家臻、于桂蘭、何英奇、曾銀貞、吳曉明(2010)。最後一哩課程對四技護生學習成效之探究。教育科學研究期刊，55(4)，131-155。
Adamson, L., Becerro, M., Cullen, P., González-Vega, L., Sobrino, J., & Ryan, N. (2010). Quality Assurance and Learning Outcomes. In ENQA Workshop Report (Vol. 17).
Besterfield‐Sacre, M., Gerchak, J., Lyons, M. R., Shuman, L. J., & Wolfe, H. (2004). Scoring concept maps: An integrated rubric for assessing engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 105-115.
Brody, D. S., Ryan, K., & Kuzma, M. A. (2004). Promoting the development of doctoring competencies in clinical settings. FAMILY MEDICINE-KANSAS CITY-, 36(1; SUPP), S105-S109.
Eaton, J. S. (2003). Is Accreditation Accountable? The Continuing Conversation between Accreditation and the Federal Government. CHEA Monograph Series 2003, Number 1. Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
Harden, R. M. (1999). AMEE Guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: Part 1-An introduction to outcome-based education. Medical teacher, 21(1), 7-14.
Kaliannan, M., & Chandran, S. D. (2012). Empowering students through outcome-based education (OBE). Research in Education, 87(1), 50-63.
Ko, E. (2011). Five faces of innovation in higher education: Enhancing student learning with outcome based approaches.Workshop conducted by Higher Education Evaluation and Accreditation Council of Taiwan, Taipei.
Lai, N. M., & Ramesh, J. C. (2006). The product of outcomes-based undergraduate medical education:Competencies and readiness for internship. Singapore Medical Journal, 47, 1053–1062
Lattuca, L. R., Terenzini, P. T., and Volkwein, J. F. (2006). Engineering Change: A Study of the Impact of EC2000. Final Report. Philadelphia PA: ABET.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Malan, S. P. T. (2000). The′new paradigm′of outcomes-based education in perspective. Journal of Family Ecology and Consumer Sciences= Tydskrif vir Gesinsekologie en Verbruikerswetenskappe, 28, p-22-28.
Postman, N. (2011). The end of education: Redefining the value of school. Vintage.
Spady, W. G. (1982). Outcome-Based Instructional Management: A Sociological Perspective. Australian Journal of Education, 26(2), 123-43.
Spady, W. G. (1994). Outcome-Based Education: Critical Issues and Answers. American Association of School Administrators, 1801 North Moore Street, Arlington, VA 22209 (Stock No. 21-00488; $18.95 plus postage).
Suskie, L. (2010). Assessing student learning: A common sense guide. John Wiley & Sons.
The University of Hong Kong (2011).OBASL & the relationship with learning outcomes, learning activities and assessment.Retrieved October 3, 2011, from http://ar.cetl.hku.hk/obasl.htm
UCLA. (2009). UCLA report for the WASC educational effectiveness review. Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://www.wasc.ucla.edu/EER_Final.pdf
Willis, S., & Kissane, B. (1995). Outcome-based education: A review of the literature. Education Department of Western Australia.
|
[Endnote RIS 格式]
[相關文章]
[文章引用]
[完整記錄]
[館藏目錄]
[檢視]
plurk
funp
live
udn
HD
myshare
netvibes
friend
youpush
delicious
baidu
Google bookmarks
del.icio.us
hemidemi
facebook
twitter
google
reddit