生命教育課程方案評鑑之研究--以彰化縣文青國小為例

• Main Author: 吳怡青
• Other Authors: 詹惠雪
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2005
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/11950949078856587889

碩士 === 國立新竹教育大學 === 進修部課程與教學碩士班 === 93 === The purpose of this research is to evaluate the Life Education curriculum of Wen-Chin primary school in 2004 by means of case study and to propose a modified program for further improvement base on the research result. To achieve the purpose, this research adopts and consolidates the previous documentary retrospect and uses the method of Focus Group to build Life Education curriculum evaluation scheme. The evaluation tools used in this research includes Life Education curriculum evaluation proposal, check list for purposes of Life education curriculum, Life Education teaching strategy evaluation list, and interview outlines, Evaluation is implemented internally by teacher himself (herself) and peers between. The data is analyzed and discussed by the methods of Documentary Analysis, Interview, and Professional Judgment. While evaluating the purposes of curriculum, research found: “Recognition”、“ Skill”, and “Emotion” have been included, and the first two ones are emphasized particularly. Most of the purposes have horizontal and vertical connections along with the closed relationship to Integration field, Health and Sport field, Life field, Society field, and Natural field, and they are distributed to each grade equally. Based on the findings, suggestions are keeping the levels from the first to the fourth, modification of the levels from the fifth to seventh and 19 indecis. Regarding the teaching program, research findings are summarized as following: Part of the program exceeds six learning hours, and it’s hard to be accomplished in one week. The purposes are duplicated , in addition, the content of program has not been coordinated between each grade. The program is compliant with standard rules, but the personal differentiation is not considered. Resource allocation is appropriate, and multiple evaluation method is easy to implement. The suggestions for further modifications are: Learning- hour should not be limited, and Life Education Week can be integrated into teaching. Prevent program purposes from omission and using them across grades. Program purposes should be transferred as teaching purposes, and the purposes of seven levels should be distributed to every semester. Program architecture and teaching process should be included in each program in detail. Personal differentiation should be considered while we planning the Death Education program. Resources should be appropriate to students. The growth of students in attitude with respect to life should be realized via evaluations. In conclusion, suggestions of this research help Wen-Chin primary school and the others to apply the result of evaluation to modify and plan its program purposes and teaching program. In addition, it also suggests the educational authorities how to provide resources and professional support to carry out Life Education evaluation.