課程決定的賦權迷思--集中化與離中化的探討   全文下載 更多文章

The Myth of Teacher Empowerment in Curriculum Decision-making--A Discussion on Centralization and Decentralization

英、美、紐、澳等英語系國家在90年代藉由全國課程與測驗的架構，加強中央的控制權；其課程政策顯現出課程權力集中化的趨勢。然而在學校管理方面，則遵行私有化、市場化原則，強化學校自主管理，以促進其服務品質，表現出「離中化」的傾向。然而，全國測驗成績提供家長選校的依據，市場機制促使學校遵行國定課程。於是象徵離中化的自由市場與代表集中化的國定課程（及全國測驗），共同加強了中央政府的課程集權，間接造成教師的去專業化。我國的九年一貫課程提倡「學校本位課程發展」，使我國的課程呈現出權力離中化的傾向，象徵我國的教師「賦權」時代來臨。但我國與前述國家的課程架構近似，不宜簡單地宣稱：離中化等於賦權。本文指出在九年一貫課程下，教師並未增加一些前所未有的課程決定權；由其課程決定的層次看來，也難以跳脫課程執行者的角色；受限於績效責任的要求，而使教師的責任多於權力。與其說在目前的課程改革中產生了「教師賦權」，不如說中央藉此政策要求「教師增能」。然而，若教師未能充分發展其專業知能，擴權只會適得其反；目前有限的賦予權責，未必不宜。賦權（empowerment）非但是讓教師「擴權」，更須「增能」。政策上對教師授權的多寡，應依教師能力而調整，方有利於教師成為真正的專業人員。

In the 1990s， the centralization in curriculum policy was strengthened in some English-speaking countries， such as the United Kingdom， America， New Zealand and Australia. National curriculum and national testing became the common means to control school curriculum. In addition， the decentralization trend is observed from privatization， marketization and site-based management. However， parents usually choose schools for children according to the performance indicators such as “examination league tables”. Consequently the schools must follow the national curriculum. The marketization signifying decentralization and the national curriculum representing centralization altogether strengthen the state authority over schools and result in teacher de-professionalization.In Taiwan， school-based curriculum development has become the symbol of decentralization and teacher empowerment. However， the real power of curriculum decision-making is not granter to teachers. The teacher role is still the executer. It is not appropriate to claim that school-based curriculum development results in teacher empowerment.This paper asserts that the real empowerment should involve growing of professional competence and increase of power.