課程研究的「第三勢力」:美國「再概念化」學派課程理論的評介

課程研究自六十年代後期以來，已逐漸懷疑傳統「實證主義」〈Positivism〉研究典範的適切性。在教學歷程的研究方面：早先認為教學是從「預先決定」好的知識加以「轉化」〈transaction〉的過程，並且強調教學的控制和效果的提昇，不過最近的研究已轉變為注重共同參與意義詮釋和價值創造的相互影響的過程。至於課程發展的探究方面，則從影響課程發展諸因素的「系統」研究，走向課程本質和其基本問題，〈例如知識選擇、分配和評鑑與社會權力結構、意識型態的關係〉的解析。換言之，課程研究已從「實務改進」的「技術模式」走向較為完整理論系統的建立；從「有計畫」〈planned〉的「正式課程」，走向非正式的「潛在課程」〈hidden curriculum〉的研究，並企圖將此二者加以結合，以確定課程研究的範疇。

Until the last decade， the ”Reconceptualist” movement was not characterized as an important camp of curriculum studies in the United States. It grounded in the diverse theoretical traditions of Continental philosophies---hermeneutics， phenomenology， existentialism， as well as psychonalysis， Marxism and Crital Theory---which were different from the dominant Anglo ─ America context with strong empiricist paradigm. Being a significant movement to investigate both the scope of its concerning and the question its raising， it provides the basis for the establishing of a critical pedagogy which was dissatisfied with the static and mechnical quality of works of the earlier criticism on schooling in 1970s and with the positivist analysis of 1956s and 60s. Above all， it’s getting more influential in the fields of curriculum studies by serving alternative conceptual frameworks and methodologies addressed both with conciousness and structure (economic， political， cultural etc.)through the dialectical process of “theory/practice””fact/value”，”subjectivity/objectivity”，”action/order”. It has become the ”Third Force” in curriculum studies distinquished from the other two schools—the Traditionalist and the Conceptual─Empericism.The “Reconceptualist” inquiry does not exist as a cohesive， unified curriculum theory. There are two distinct groups: the first group describes the “ life—word” of teachers and students in classrooms and schools， in name of the quality of educational experiences through ongoing unconcealing existential meaning. The method which they used are aesthetic critique， psychoanalyztic autobibliography， participation observation and so forth. The second camp pays attention on the social─economic─cultural context of schools and the meaning of hidden curriculum through the “ideologiekritik” and structural analysis.To grasp its comprehensive picture of what it is， this paper is first to analyze its theoretical background and its developmental stages. Then， the works of three important figures，〈M. Greene， W. Pinar， M. Apple〉are interpreted and criticized. Their contributions and implications to the establishing of curriculum theory are presented at the third part of this paper. Finally， some comments on the conceptual frameworks and methodologies are offered.