國小一二年級國語教科書比較研究--以八二課程標準與九年一貫課程綱要為準

• Main Authors: Chang Su Pi, 張素碧
• Other Authors: 林于弘
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2006
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/87122984540906111213

碩士 === 國立臺北教育大學 === 語文教育學系碩士班 === 94 === In this research, we adopt content analysis, by means of quantitative and qualitative analysis, analyzing qualified Grade 1-2 Chinese textbooks examined by the Ministry of Education, which are compiled by Kang Hsuan Educational Publishing Group based on the “Elementary School Curriculum Standard” in 1993 or the “Grade 1-9 Curriculum Guidelines” in 2003, in aspects of numbers of words of the texts, numbers of vocabulary, units & topics, literary style arrangements, types of exercises and contents of teaching guidelines (Teacher’s Manual). In this research we found out that regarding textbooks, 10 sets of units & topics are identical or similar in the two terms; 10 selections of articles are identical or so similar that the overall texts are quite similar; the two terms both pay much attention to selections of vocabulary, regardless of word frequency or strokes. However, in Grade 1-9 Curriculum textbooks, the difference of amount of word recognition between Grade 1 and Grade 2 is very large; this should be considered more carefully. In addition, the repetition of recognized vocabulary and exercised vocabulary are both not high, which shows a lack of coherence in vocabulary arrangement. As for 1993 edition, the proportion of each kind of literary form can tally with standards for curriculum of Year 1993; the difference of literary form between Grade 1 and Grade 2 is very big in the Grade 1-9 curriculum edition In aspect of exercises, although the total number of lessons is smaller in the Grade 1-9 curriculum edition, the amount of exercises is more than in the Year 1993 edition. About the types of exercises, the two terms both lay equal emphasis on all kinds of exercise types, and the arrangements of contents both include types such as vocabulary, phrasing, sentences, composition, text discussion, etc. However, exercises for punctuation marks and listening are obviously insufficient. In aspect of teaching guidelines (Teacher’s Manual), the two terms use different names for items in teaching procedures, but the contents are not very different. As for the writing methods of teaching objectives, the Year 1993 edition uses behavior-objective wording, while the Grade 1-9 curriculum edition states item by item in accordance with six kinds of capability indexes. Based on the above research results, a few suggestions are proposed to the educational authorities, publishers and future researchers. First of all, the educational authority should propose a concrete standard for compilation of Chinese teaching materials applying the Grade 1-9 Curriculum Guidelines to guide the publishers, and they should regularly hold teaching material forums to promote professional conversations between textbook editors and users. Second, the publishers should widely accept opinions from all perspectives and modify the contents of textbooks; new editors shall participate in editing to assure the vigor and creativity. As for teaching material editing, the advantages of Year 1993 edition should be kept and flaws in Grade 1-9 curriculum edition should be corrected to make teaching material editing more complete. Moreover, the future researchers may focus on Kang Hsuan’s other volumes, other editions, or even analyze the early unified system to understand the developments and differences of textbooks in different periods. As for research methodology, they may make use of observation, interview, questionnaire, etc. to collect more data with diversified perspectives from all perspectives and probe the current status in language teaching.