课程研究领域中概念重建运动的新近发展与趋势被引量：1

The Latest Development and Tendency of the Reconceptualization in Curriculum Research Area

下载PDF

导出

摘要从20世纪60年代末至今,概念重建运动大致经历了兴起、发展和反思三个重要的历史阶段,它推动了现代课程开发范式向课程理解范式的转变,并彻底改变了课程研究领域的原始面貌。从某种程度上说,概念重建运动为课程研究领域注入了新鲜的活力,也为其可持续发展提供了机遇与挑战。本文从概念重建运动发展的历史视角出发,重新审视了概念重建运动的基本立场与理念,并指出了未来概念重建运动发展的可能趋势。 Since the late 1960s, the Reconceptualization has gone through three historical periods： beginning, development and reflection. These processes have propelled the transformation from the modem curriculum development paradigm to curriculum understanding paradigm and injected the fresh vitality into the curriculum research area. This article reflects on the basic thoughts of the Reconceptualization from the historical perspective and points out its possible tendencies.

作者徐文彬孙玲

机构地区南京师范大学课程与教学研究所

出处《比较教育研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2007年第10期65-69,共5页 International and Comparative Education

基金 2005年度全国教育科学"十五"规划重点课题教育部重点课题(项目批号为DHA050116) 江苏省教育厅2005年度高校哲学社会科学基金项目(项目批号为05SJB880021)的阶段性成果。

关键词课程概念重建研究范式 curriculum the reconceptualization research paradigm

分类号 G423 [文化科学—课程与教学论]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献8

1McGill,Jon.The Sloth and the Pace of Curriculum Development.Independent School,2004,(Fall),74. 被引量：1
2Jeasik Cho & Allen Trent."Backward" Curriculum Design and Assessment:What Goes Around Comes Around,Or Haven't We Seen This Before?.Taboo,2005.(Fall-Winter),105-114. 被引量：1
3William G.Wraga & Peter S.Hlebowitsh.Toward a Renaissance in Curriculum Theory and Development in the USA.Journal of Curriculum Studies,2003,(4),425-437. 被引量：1
4Patrick Slattery.Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era.New York & London:Garland Publishing,Inc.,1995,54-64,33-68. 被引量：1
5汪霞.概念重建课程研究的后现代本质与评价[J].比较教育研究,2005,26(10):68-72. 被引量：12
6Maria Morris.Back Up Group:Here Comes the (post)Reconceptualization.Journal of Curriculum Theorizing,2005.(Winter),3-11. 被引量：1
7Keith R.B.Morrison.The Poverty of Curriculum Theory:a Critique of Wraga and Hlebowitsh.Journal of Curriculum Studies,2004,(4),487-494. 被引量：1
8古克礼,刘兵.全球化与多样性[J].读书,2006(11):107-113. 被引量：1

二级参考文献12

1Giroux, H., Penna,A., & Pinar, W. (Eds.). Curriculum and Instruction. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1981.99-102. 被引量：1
2See Slattery, P. Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era [ M ]. New York & London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1995. 263-264; Wraga, William G. Toward a Curriculum Theory for the New Century. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 1996. (4): 463-474. 被引量：1
3Slattery, P. Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. New York & London: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1995. 55-62. 被引量：1
4Thomas, P. T. & Schubert, W. H. Recent Curriculum Theory. Educational Theory, 1997.(2): 267. 被引量：1
5Glanz, J. & Behar-Horenstein, L. S. Paradigm Debates in Curriculum and Supervision: Modern and Postmodern Perspectives. Westport CT: Bergin & Garvey, 2000. 17-18. 被引量：1
6Pinar, W. Curriculum Studies: The Reconceptualization.Troy, NY: Educator's International Press, Inc., 2000. 359. 被引量：1
7Eagleton, T. Literary Theory: An Introduction. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 1981. 133. 被引量：1
8Pinar, W.F. Autobiography, Politics and Sexuality. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.,1994. 104. 被引量：1
9Flinders, D. J. & Thornton, S. J. The Curriculum Stud ies Reader. New York and London: Routledge, 1997. 137. 被引量：1
10Schubert, W. Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm, and Possibility. New York: Macmillan, 1986. 33. 被引量：1