迎接21世紀的來臨與世界各國之教改脈動，自1997年起，台灣政府致力教育改革，以期提升國民素質及國家競爭力。因此，教育部依據行政院核定之「教育改革行動方案」，進行國民教育階段課程與教學改革。隨著「九年一貫課程綱要」的公佈，台灣正式開啟一連串的教育革新。而對岸的中國，也於2001年啟動第八次基礎教育課程改革。兩國教育改革的內容皆涉及到課程目標、課程內容、課堂教學、學生學習等各層面，因此教科書、教材教法皆產生了巨大的變化。現有關於兩岸教育相關研究相當多，但兩岸課程的比較研究多停留在國小階段；且針對教科書的研究多半是以教科書的制度、審定為主，幾乎未有針對兩岸國中階段教科書的內容比較。
本研究先簡略介紹兩國教育背景並進行九年義務教育課程目標的分析，再對台灣康軒版、中國人教版國中數學課本、習作、教師手冊做出比較，得出結果如下：
一、在課程目標方面，兩者都強調數學與生活、其他學科的連結，也強調學生創新能力的培養；不同的是，中國人教版較強調數學各主題中的深耕，台灣康軒版則偏向各主題間的橫向連結；而中國人教版也較注重傳統的數學運算能力，台灣康軒版則較重視數學在生活中的運用。
二、在數學課本課程內容中，台灣課程偏向主題集中學習，而中國課程則偏向主題分散學習，每一學年課程都有代數、幾何、資料統計與機率。除此之外，中國人教版不論是代數或幾何，習題數約是台灣康軒版的三倍，但台灣康軒版在代數部份，課程較為流暢；中國人教版在幾何部份題目題材較多元。
三、在課本編輯方面，兩者架構都相當類似，皆具備章前圖、多元正文欄目、重點整理、補充知識等，但台灣康軒版部分章節，列中字數過多，且沒有數學名詞的中英文對照
四、在習作排版方面，中國人教版像是一本濃縮參考書，但台灣康軒版全版彩色，計算空間大，版面整齊，但中國人教版排版密集，閱讀上較為辛苦。
基於以上結論，針對台灣教科書提出以下建議：
1.幾何部份可以增加動手操作的機會，如折紙。
2.可以增加課本中的習題數，讓學生有多一點練習的機會。
3.增加數學史課程，適當說明前人在解決日常問題中的數學智慧。
4.增加統整課程的題型，題目的題材可以結合理化、美術等，增加多
元類型，提供學生思考的空間。 / To welcome the 21st century and catch up with other countries’ educational efforts, the government in Taiwan has engaged itself to educational reform since 1997. The purpose is to enhance the quality of its people and the ability to compete with other countries. Hence the Ministry of Education has tried to reform the compulsory education curriculum and teaching according to the “Action Proposal for Educational Reform,” authorized by the Executive Yuan. After the publication of “Grade 1-9 Curriculum Guidelines,” Taiwan has formally initiated a series of educational reforms. Similarly, Mainland China has started its eighth reform on Basic Education Curriculum. The reforms in both countries include the curriculum target, the curriculum content, classroom teaching, and students’ learning. They unavoidably exert a huge impact on the textbooks and teaching materials. Related researches on the education in both countries abound. However, the comparison of curriculum in both countries basically focuses on elementary school curriculum. Also, most researches on textbooks focus on the system or authorization. Seldom do we find research that focuses on the textbooks in junior high school.
This research will first briefly introduce the education background in both countries and then analyze the target of compulsory education curriculum. The Kang Xuan version of Taiwan and the People’s Education version of China are taken as examples. We get the following conclusion after comparing their mathematics textbooks, workbooks, and teacher’s manuals.
First, in terms of curriculum target, both versions emphasize the connection between mathmatics and life or other subjects. Both aim to cultivate the students’ creativity, too. Differently, People’s Education version goes deeper within one single topic, while Kang Xuan version focuses on the horizontal connection between different topics. People’s Education version puts more emphasis on the traditional arithmetic, while Kang Xuan version puts more emphasis on the application of math in everyday life.
Second, according to the content of these two versions, when a new topic is introduced, the curriculum in Taiwan prefers concentrative learning, while the other version favors learning at different phases. Take People’s Education for example, every school year students have to learn algebra, geometry, data statics, and probability. Besides, in terms of algebra or geometry, People’s Education version provides exercises three times than Kang Xuan version does. Kang Xuan version, however, has a smoother curriculum design in terms of algebra. As for geometry, People’s Education version offers more different types of exercises.
Third, speaking of the editing, both versions have similar curriculum structure. We can find in both versions pictures before each chapter, multiple columns presenting the main idea, arrangements of important points, and appended knowledge. However, some chapters of Kang Xuan version have too many words in one line, and it lacks Chinese-English terminology of math.
Fourth, in terms of the workbooks, People’s Education version looks like a condensed reference book, while Kang Xuan version is bigger and more colorful. Kang Xuan version provides space for calculation and has neater arrangement, while People’s Education version is too wordy and takes more time to read the questions.
Based on the conclusion above, this study offers some suggestions for future compilation of the Taiwanese mathematics textbooks:
1. For geometry, a good mathematics textbook should provide students with more opportunities to have hands on experiences, for example, by way of paper folding.
2. There should be more exercises in the textbook, hence giving the students more chances to practice.
3. History of mathmatics can be added. Students may have a better idea how ancient people used their wisdom to solve everyday mathmatics problems.
4. Exercises related to integrated curriculum should be added, too. Different subjects like science, art, etc…, can be combined together to provide multiple elements and a wider space for students’ ideas.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0096972005 |
| Creators | 謝佩珍 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds