本研究旨在探討幼兒園品質與幼兒課程經驗之關係。在幼兒園品質衡量的部分採用兩份量表「幼兒學習環境評量表修訂版中文本」(ECERS-R)、「幼兒園品質量表」，在課程經驗的部分使用自編之「幼兒課程經驗觀察表」進行結構式觀察，觀察對象為台北縣市六間幼托園所中各一班大班班級，每班各六位幼兒，共36位。幼兒園品質之觀察時間為每間園所一到兩次，每次兩小時，共12次，並於觀察結束後與園所進行訪談，而幼兒課程經驗之觀察時間為上午九點到下午四點，每次觀察同一個班級中的兩位幼兒，共18天。 本研究結論如下: 壹、幼兒園品質層面：一、幼兒園品質以中等居多；二、ECERS-R與幼兒園品質量表各有優缺點，可互相輔助使用。 貳、幼兒課程經驗層面：一、活動內容，「生活層面」占幼兒一天中大部分時間。「學習層面」中顯示活動種類繁多，且活動進行時間短；占最高比例之學習活動為英語，另外有發現幼小銜接課程提早從中班開始，課程內容以國字讀寫與注音為主；在下午時間仍有安排教師主導之團體學科活動，與公幼下午課程安排的情形不同；二、活動主導者，各層面皆以教師為活動主導者，其中自然科學的部份是由幼兒為主導，推測與教師自然科學之專業知能有關；三、共同參與者，「學習層面」與「生活層面」較常以團體方式進行；「轉銜時間」之共同參與者為同儕占最高比例，與公幼中參與者為教師與同儕的研究結果不同。 參、幼兒園品質與幼兒課程經驗層面: 不同品質園所之幼兒課程經驗有差異，須深入觀察分析才能發現。 一、活動內容:高低品質園所間，在各活動層面之時間分配比例相差不大，但仔細比較活動項目發現，「學習層面」中高品質園所中較多非結構、幼兒自由選擇的課程活動，而低品質園所中則較多結構性由教師主導的活動。「生活層面」中低品質園所較高品質園所花更多時間在整理方面。「轉銜活動」低品質園所中等待時間為高品質園所的兩倍。 二、活動主導者:不論品質高低，「學習層面」與「生活層面」皆以教師為活動主導者，但仔細比較活動項目發現，「學習層面」中的美術活動，在高品質園所中是由幼兒為活動主導者，而在低品質園所中則是由教師為活動主導者。「轉銜活動」在高品質園所中，以教師、幼兒為活動主導者，而在低品質園所中轉銜活動皆以教師為活動主導者。 三、共同參與者:不論品質高低，「學習層面」與「生活層面」以同儕與教師為共同參與者，但仔細比較活動項目發現，「學習層面」高品質園所有較多同儕共同參與的活動，低品質園所則較多獨自進行的活動；「生活層面」與「轉銜活動」也發現高品質園所中有許多同儕互動的機會，而低品質園所中則較常獨自進行各種活動。 最後，研究者根據結論，對幼兒園園所與教師之實務面與後續研究提出具體建議，以期對未來幼教發展有所助益。 / The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between program quality and children’s experienced curriculum in kindergartens. This research uses “Chinese version of Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition “(ECERS-R) and “Early Education Program Quality Evaluation Scale (EEPES)” to evaluate the quality of the program in kindergartens. The research also uses “Children’s experienced curriculum record” to do the structural observation on children’s experienced curriculum. The objects of observation are thirty-six of five years old kindergarteners who were chose from six kindergartens located in Taipei city and Taipei County. Researcher observed each program once or twice, every section is two hours, and interviewed teachers after the observations. Total is twelve sections. The time to observed children’s experienced curriculum is from nine o’clock in the morning to four o’clock in the afternoon, and observed two children in the same class each time. Total is eighteen days. The conclusion is as following： 1. In aspect of program quality: (A) the program quality of the evaluated six samples(kindergartens) is medium, (B) EEPES is more discriminative than ECERS, while ECERS offers a more detailed description of program quality, especially at process quality. It is concluded that they are complementary in evaluating and improving program quality. 2. In aspect of children’s experienced curriculum :(A)curriculum，daily routine occupies most of children’s time during a day. There are many kinds of Learning activities but the period of the activities is short. The most of the Learning activities is English. In addition, the study found that the content of school readiness is read and write, and it’s not appropriate to begin from preschool. The curriculum in the afternoon of the six samples(kindergartens) is different from the public centers’. The learning activities at afternoon of the six samples(kindergartens) are led by the teachers. (B)The main leader of daily routine ,Learning activity and transition time are the teachers.(C)The co-participants of Learning activity and daily routine are also teachers and peers. But the co-participants of transition time is peers. That is different from the public centers’(teachers and peers). 3. In aspect of both program quality and children’s experienced curriculum：We can find out there is difference in children’s experienced curriculum between kindergartens with different program quality if we observe carefully. (A) Curriculum：The time distributed for each activity domain is almost the same in kindergartens with different program quality. Learning activity：High-quality kindergartens have more non-structure activities and activities of children’s free choice. Low-quality kindergartens have more structure and teacher-directed activities. Daily routine：Low-quality kindergartens spend more time in arrange than high-quality kindergartens. Transition time：The empty duration is twice as much low-quality kindergartens as high-quality kindergartens. (B) The leader of activity：Despite of the quality, both learning activity and daily routine are teacher-directed activities. But we can see the difference by advanced observation. Learning activity：The leader of artistic activity in high-quality kindergartens is child, but the leader is teacher in low-quality kindergartens. Transition time：Both teachers and children are the leaders in high-quality kindergartens, but teachers are the leaders in low-quality kindergartens. (C) The co-participants：Despite of the quality, the co-participants are peers and teachers in learning activity and daily routine. But we can see the difference by advanced observation. They have more opportunity to interactive with peers and teachers in high-quality kindergartens than low-quality kindergartens. Finally, based on the results, this study proposes some suggestions for kindergartens, administrations, teachers and researchers.

本研究旨在探討團隊式、主從式、輪流式之合班教學類型其教師課堂經驗與幼兒課程經驗之內涵。本研究使用自編之「幼兒課程經驗記錄表」與「教師課堂經驗記錄表」進行結構式之觀察，觀察對象為台北市公立幼稚園「團隊式」、「主從式」、「輪流式」班級之教師及幼兒，各兩班；觀察時間從早上九點至下午四點，共18天，並於觀察結束後進行教師訪談。 分析結果發現，教師課堂經驗層面，(一)團隊式教師之合作方式以「共同主導」為主，工作內容以「教學相關內容」為主。而「共同討論」比例最高，深度亦是最深，「常規」管理之時間最少。(二)主從式教師合作方式以「一主一協」為主，除中午生活活動時段「獨自帶領」比例提升；工作內容以「教學相關內容」為主。(三)輪流式教師合作方式以「獨自帶領」為主，除中午生活活動時段以「共同主導」為主；工作內容以「照料幼兒」為主，由於獨自帶領比例高，因此「常規」比例最高。 幼兒課程經驗層面，(一)三種合班教學類型皆以「生活活動」比例最高，「學習活動」次之，「轉銜活動」最少。其中上午時段以「學習活動」為主，中午以「生活活動」為主。(二)「學習活動」以「團隊式」、「主從式」之比例最高；「生活活動」以「輪流式」比例最高；「轉銜活動」以「主從式」、「輪流式」比例最高。(三)下午時段，「團隊式」、「主從式」以「學習活動」為主，但主從式多為角落與各類遊戲活動；「輪流式」則以「生活活動」為主。(四)三種合班教學類型之共同參與者皆以「教師與同儕」為主；活動主導者皆以「教師主導」為主；目標明確度以「團隊式」最高。 本研究亦發現，(一)三種合班教學類型其個別指導比例皆偏低，其與研究者進班觀察時間有關。(二)「團隊式」、「主從式」教師間會交流資訊；影響教師參與專業成長活動因素為教師時間與體力、研習內容等。(三)教師兼任行政工作之影響為中斷教學、增加教師負擔、提升教師獨自帶領比例等。(四)公幼並非完全無注音教學，原因為幼小銜接、因應家長需求。(五)自然科學比例較低，美術活動多為繪畫，素材多為彩色筆、蠟筆，缺乏多元性。 最後根據以上之結論，研究者針對幼稚園教師、幼稚園所、教育行政機關及後續研究提出建議。 關鍵字：合作教學、教學類型、課堂經驗、課程經驗、幼稚園 / The main purpose of this study is to discuss teachers' experiences and young children's experienced curriculum in three co-teaching types of classrooms, including “team work type”, “teach- assist type”, and “ rotation type”. This study uses “children's experienced curriculum record” and “teachers' experiences in the classroom record” to do the structural observation. Researcher observed three co-teaching types of classrooms choosing from Taipei city public kindergartens, two classrooms for each co-teaching type, totally six classrooms, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., totally 18 days, and interviewed teachers after observation. Following are the results of this study: First, on the part of teachers' experiences, (A) The primary cooperation way of team work type is “leading together”, and the primary work of team work type is about teaching. Besides, the percentage of discussion is the most, and the classroom- rule management is the least. (B) The primary cooperation way of teach- assist type is “one teach and one assist”, but the percentage of “leading alone” is increased only in the period of noon, and the primary work is about teaching. (C) The primary cooperation way of rotation type is “leading alone”, the percentage of “leading together” is increased only at the time of daily routine in the period of noon, and the primary work is about taking care of children. Besides, the percentage of classroom- rule management is the most. Second , on the part of children's experienced curriculum, (A) In all three types of co-teaching, “daily routine ” has the highest percentage of the context of curriculum, the “learning time” has the second most percentage, and the “transition time” has the least. And the primary activity in the period of morning is “learning”, while the primary activity in the period of noon is “daily routine ”. (B) “Learning time” in the team work type and teach-assist type classrooms is the most, and the “ rotation type” classrooms have the most “daily routine ” time. The teach-assist type and “rotation type” classrooms have the most percentage of “transition time” (C) In the period of afternoon, the primary activity in the team work type and teach- assist type classrooms is “learning time”, but teach- assist type classrooms have more learning corner and play time. And the primary activity in the “rotation type” classrooms is “daily routine ”. (D) The co-participants in all three types of co-teaching classrooms are teachers and peers, and teachers are the main leaders in the activities. And the goal of team work type is most explicit. This study also found, (A) The reason that the percentage of “individual instruction” in the three types of co-teaching classrooms is low, is because of the researcher’s observation time. (B) Teachers belong to team work type and teach-assist type usually exchange information. The factors affect teachers on attending professional development activities are their time, energy, and training programs. (C) The effects that teachers participate in administrative works are interrupting teaching, increasing teachers’ burden, and the percentage of “leading alone”. (D) Owing to the demand of transition from kindergarten to primary school, and the expectations of parents, there still be Chinese phonetic symbol teaching in public kindergartens. (E) The percentage of science curriculum is low. The art activities are mainly drawing, and the materials of art are mostly crayons or color pens, which are lack of varieties. On the basis of the results, this study proposes some suggestions for kindergarten managers, administrations, teachers, and researchers. Key words: co-teaching, teaching type, teachers' experiences, young children's experienced curriculum, kindergarten