由於核心班的學生都需要修讀「核心單元」與「校本單元」，課程發展團 隊或學校教師在處理這兩個不同性質（前者由中央所發展與編制，後者則更多 是學校課程發展團隊的產物）的單元時，如何在二者之間過渡與銜接，在處理 二者時態度與方法上的差異等，二者之間的關係，都是值得探討的議題。
163
!"#$
丁金松（2001）。國小「自然與生活科技」學習領域課程決定之行動研究。
國立臺北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。
王為國（1995）。國小教師專業自主：一所國小之個案研究。國立臺中師範 學院初等教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺中市。
王前龍（1995）。國民小學道德科課程決定之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育 學系碩士論文，未出版， 臺北市。
尹弘㩩、李子建（2008）。課程變革：理論與實踐。臺北市：高等教育。
白雲霞（2003）。學校本位課程發展理論、模式。臺北市：高等教育。
李元瑾（2006，12月）。新加坡大學華文教育的歷史與現狀：以南洋大學中 文系與研究中心為個案。論文發表於臺灣國立清華大學中國文學系主辦 之「全球化與中文研究的新方向」國際交流論壇，新竹市。
杜美智（1997）。國小社會科教師課程決定之研究。國立花蓮師範學院教育 學系碩士論文，未出版，花蓮市。
吳清山（1989）。課程決定的理論探討。教育與心理研究，12，199-299。
林佩璇（2004a）。學校本位課程－發展與評鑑。臺北市：學富文化。
祝新華、鍾竹梅（2007）。提高校本課程的效能的策略：以新加坡實施小 學華文校本課程早期經驗為例。華文學刊，10（2），22-31。
徐世瑜（1998）。課程與教學決定歷程中的要素分析。課程與教學，1（4）, 1-12。
郭生玉（2005）。心理與教育研究法（第十九版）。中和市：精華書局。
高新建（1991）。國小教師課程決定之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育系博士論 文，未出版，臺北市。
高新建（2008）。學校本位課程：發展、領導與評鑑。臺北市：國立臺灣師 範大學。
張連航（2007）。校本課程概念下的華文教材設計：以新加坡新華文課程為例。
載於陳之權、張連航（主編），理論、實踐與反思：新加坡華文教學論 文十三篇（頁111-123）。新加坡：南洋理工大學國立教育學院亞洲語言文 化部中文系 。
164
張嘉育（1999）。學校本位課程發展。臺北市：師大書苑。
張曉華（2010）。教育戲劇理論與發展。臺北市：心理。
游淑燕（1993）。國民小學教師課程決定權取向及其參與意願之研究。國立 政治大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，臺北市。
黃政傑（1999）。從課程的角度看教師專業發展。教師天地，83，13-17。
黃祖銘（2008）。發展特色教育的校本課程。2010年12月20日，取自
http://www.schoolbag.sg/archives/2008/09/learning_chinese_every_school.php 新加坡教育部（2004）。華文課程與教學法檢討委員會報告書。新加坡：教
育部。
新加坡教育部（2006）。小學華文課程標準 2007。新加坡：教育部。
新加坡教育部課程規劃與發展司（2009）。策劃、實踐、反思：小學華文校 本課程設計研究成果匯編。新加坡：教育部課程規劃與發展司。
新加坡教育部課程規劃與發展司、新劇團（化名）（2009）。我們的戲路（化 名）。新加坡：教育部課程規劃與發展司、新劇團。
新加坡教育部（2010）。小學華文校本單元之學校數據。未出版，新加坡。
歐怡雯（譯）（2006）。J. Neelands著。開始玩戲劇11-14歲（Beginning Drama 11-14）。臺北市：心理。
謝澤文（2003）。教學與測試。新加坡：新加坡華文教師總會。
簡良平、甄曉蘭（2001）。學校自主發展課程相關因素分析。教育研究集 刊，
46 (0)，53-80。
簡良平（2002）。中小學學校課程決定之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究 所博士論文，未出版，臺北市。
簡良平（2003）。學校課程決定：理論與實踐。臺北市：師大書苑。
譚光鼎（2010）。教育社會學。臺北市：學富文化。
Apple, M. W. (1990). Ideology and curriculum. New York: Routledge.
Apple, M. W. (1992). The politics of official knowledge: Does a national curriculum make sense? Retrieved January 20, 2010, from http://www.stanford.edu/class/
educ232b/Apple.pdf
Apple, M. W. (2003). The state and the politics of knowledge. New York:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Brady, L. (1987). Curriculum development. (2nd ed.). Sydney: Prentice Hall.
165
Cohen, D. & Harrison, M. (1979). Curriculum decision-making in australian
education: What decisions are made with school? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 11(3), 257-262.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2009). Research methods in education. (6th ed.). New York: Routledge.
Compulsory Education Act (2003). Singapore.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. (3rd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2008). How to design and evaluate research in education. (7th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Goh, C. K. (1997). Shaping our future: Thinking schools, learning nation. Retrieved March 2, 2011, from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/speeches/1997/020697.htm Goh, K. S. (1979). Report on the ministry of education, 1978. Singapore: Singapore
National Printers.
Goodlad, J. I. (Ed.). (1979). Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice.
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Goodlad, J. I. (1991). Curriculum making as a sociopolitical process. In M. F. Klein (Ed.), The politics of curriculum decision-making: Issues in centralizing the curriculum (pp. 9-23). Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Gopinathan, S. & Deng, Z. (2006). Fostering school-based curriculum development in the context of new education [Electronic version]. Planning and changing, Vol.
37, No. 1&2, 2006, pp. 93-110.
Kelly, A. V. (2009). The curriculum: theory and practice. (6thed.). London: Sage.
Lee, H. L. (2004). Our future of opportunity and promise. National Day Rally 2004 Speech by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, at the University Cultural Centre, National University of Singapore. Retrieved January 28, 2011, from http://stars.nhb.gov.sg/stars/public/viewHTML.jsp?pdfno=2004083101
Leithwood, K. A. (1982). Implementing curriculum innovations. In K. A. Leithwood (Ed.), Studies in curriculum decision making (pp. 245-267). Toronto, Canada:
OISE Press .
Lim, L. C. (Ed.). (2007). Many pathways one mission: Fifty years of singapore education. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Marsh, C., Day, C., Hannay, L. & McCutcheon, G. (1990). Reconceptualizing school- based curriculum development. NY: Falmer Press.
166
Marsh, C. J. & Heng, M. A. (2009). Understanding commonalities between school- based curriculum development (SBCD) and curriculum differentiation (CD).
Retrieved December 10, 2010, from http://www.acsa.edu.au/pages/images/
Colin%20Marsh%20&%20Mary%20Anne%20Heng.pdf
McKenzie, P. N. (1990). Information needs for decision-making at school level. In Chapman, J. D. (Ed.), School-based decision-making and management. London:
The Falmer Press.
McKinsey & Co. (2010). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. Retrieved March 3, 2011, from
http://ssomckinsey.darbyfilms.com/reports/EducationBookNov23.pdf Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Quantitative and qualitative
approaches. (6th ed.). London: Allyn and Bacon.
Oberg, A. A. (1991). Curriculum decision. In A. Lewy (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of curriculum (pp. 302-303). New York: Pergamon.
Olssen, M., Codd, J., & O’Neil, A. (2004). Education policy: Globalization, citizenship and decmocracy. London: Sage.
Posner, G. F. (1998). Models of curriculum planning. In Beyer, L. E. & Apple, M.
(Eds.), The curriculum: Problems, politics, and possibilities (pp. 79-100).
Albany, NY: State University of New York.
Singapore Ministry of Education (2001). More career advancement opportunities for teachers. Retrieved April 15, 2011, from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/
2001/pr26092001.htm
Singapore Ministry of Education (2005). Transforming learning from quantity to quality. Retrieved March 26, 2011, from www.moe.gov.sg/about/yearbooks/
2005/teach.html
Singapore Ministry of Education (2006). Redefining how we deliver ability-driven education. Retrieved February 26, 2011, from http://www.moe.gov.sg/media/
press/2006/pr20060928.htm
Singapore Ministry of Education (2011). Organization structure: Schools division.
Retrieved March 17, 2011, from http://www.moe.gov.sg/about/org-structure/sd Skilbeck, M. (1984). School-based curriculum development. London: Harper & Row.
Walker, D. F. (1990). Fundamentals of curriculum. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
167
%&' ()*+,-./0
'12.3456789:;<=>?@AB
1. C.DEFGHIJK/LMNO9:2.3456P2. C.QRST=UVWHI@.X=/LYZ[B\]^9:2.34 56P
3. _`!@789:=abQcGdI=Pefghijkl=mn\QJK opT=qrstuOvwP
4. !@789:=abxyz={|QopP}~x=!@8ÄÅÇÉPÑ ÖÜsHIáàÅÇÉP
5. !@789:=abâ2.3456=9:QäÅ'ã=åçPéèêÅë í\ìîtï=ñóòô*Pöõ~úQcGùHûîü†=P
6. °â-.@.X/LYZ[B9:2.3456=tuÅop¢çP°£F û§[Bj•QäŶ߮v=©tPêÅ\™_cG®vP
´12.3456=78HI
7. C.QcGr¨2.3456=≠Æ1/-ç1Ø∞±≤1≥¥tuµPF G∂B∑ûîHIP
8. C.Q_opÆ∏Oπ∫789:=?ª@äP
9. °âºΩæø¿=ûî78HIÅop¢çPk¡¢OQäÅ'îHIQ¬
√ƒå=PêÅ\ö~¡OQäÅùHûîü†P
≈178HI=ÑÖ∆«
10. Rö~gh=K8»\â78HI…ô*ÑÖ=∆«ÅìîP°ºj sÀ Ã=QopP
11. âöÕŒ\°£F789:=K8»º*=œ–QopP 12. ° ≠»ƒå=2.3456—“QST=P
13. °£F-.”‘’#2.3456=≠=GRP÷◊»ÿ78Åopj•P
168
%&´ ()*+,.Ÿ⁄€/0
'12.3456789:;<=>?@AB
1. ‹ü°DEQRopUVW!@›fifl-2.3456=789:PHI!
@=‡∆QopP
2. °R›fifl-2.3456=789:K8»!@ìî·‚\„‰opP 3. efghijkl=mn\ö~QJKopT=qrstuOvwP
4. !@789:=Â}abëÊyz={|QopP}~x=!@8ÄÅÇ ÉPÑÖÜsHIáàÅÇÉP
5. °â2.3456=789:ƒÁ◊Â}abQä'ãPéèêÅëí\ì îtï=ñóòô*Pöõ~úQcGùHûîü†=P
6. °â-.@.X/LYZ[B9:2.3456=tuÅop¢çP°£F û§[Bj•sqrQäŶ߮v=©tPêÅ\™_cG®vP
´12.3456=78HI
7. ö~QcGr¨2.3456=≠Æ1/-ç1Ø∞±≤1≥¥tuµPF G∂B∑ûîHIP
8. ö~Q_opÆ∏Oπ∫789:=?ª@äP
9. °âºΩæø¿=ûî78HIÅop¢çPk¡¢OQäÅ'îHIQ¬
√ƒå=PêÅ\ö~¡OQäÅùHûîü†P
≈178HI=ÑÖ∆«
10. Rö~gh=K8»\â78HI…ô*ÑÖ=∆«ÅìîõËc-È⁄
Í1/0⁄͵úP°ºj sÀÃ=QopP
11. âöÕŒ\°£F789:=K8»º*=œ–QopP 12. ° ≠»ƒå=2.3456—“QST=P
13. °£F’#2.3456=≠=GRP÷◊»ÿ78Åopj•P°ƒå»
=2.3456ÎÏop5«P
169
%&≈ ()*+,/LÌ78ÓÔb
'12.3456789:;<=>?@AB
1. ‹ü°DEQRopUVW!@›fifl-2.3456=789:PHI!
@=‡∆QopP
2. ö~DEFGHIJK/LMNO9:2.3456P
3. °R›fifl-2.3456=789:K8»!@ìî·‚P„‰opP 4. !@789:=Â}abëÊyz={|QopP}~x=!@8ÄÅÇ
ÉPÑÖÜsHIáàÅÇÉP
5. efghijkl=mn\ö~QJKopT=qrstuOvwP 6. °â2.3456=789:ƒÁ◊Â}abQä'ãPéèêÅëí\ì
îtï=ñóòô*Pöõ~úQcGùHûîü†=P
7. °â-.@.X/LYZ[B9:2.3456=tuÅop¢çP°£F û§[Bj•QäŶ߮v=©tPêÅ\™_cG®vP
´12.3456=78HI
8. ö~QcGr¨2.3456=≠Æ1/-ç1Ø∞±≤1≥¥tuµPF G∂B∑ûîHIP
9. ö~Q_opÆ∏Oπ∫789:=?ª@äP
10. °âºΩæø¿=ûî78HIÅop¢çPk¡¢OQäÅ'îHIQ¬
√ƒå=PêÅ\ö~¡OQäÅùHûîü†P
≈178HI=ÑÖ∆«
11. Rö~gh=K8»\â78HI…ô*ÑÖ=∆«ÅìîõËc-È⁄
Í1/0⁄͵úP°ºj sÀÃ=QopP
12. âöÕŒ\°£F789:=K8»º*=œ–QopP 13. ° ≠»ƒå=2.3456—“QST=P
14. °£F’#2.3456=≠=GRP÷◊»ÿ78Åopj•P°ƒå»
=2.3456ÎÏop5«P
170
%& ()*+,MNÒÚ
'12.3456789:;<=>?@AB
1. ‹ü°DEQRopUVW!@›fifl-2.3456=789:PHI!
@=‡∆QopP
2. °R›fifl-2.3456=789:K8»!@ìî·‚\„‰opP 3. !@789:=Â}abëÊyz={|QopP}~x=!@8ÄÅÇ
ÉPÑÖÜsHIáàÅÇÉP
4. efghijkl=mn\ö~QJKopT=qrstuOvwP
5. °â2.3456=789:ƒÁ◊Â}abQä'ãPéèêÅëí\ì îtï=ñóòô*Pöõ~úQcGùHûîü†=P
6. °â-.@.X/LYZ[B9:2.3456=tuÅop¢çP°£F û§[Bj•sqrQäŶ߮v=©tPêÅ\™_cG®vP
´12.3456=78HI
7. ö~QcGr¨2.3456=≠Æ1/-ç1Ø∞±≤1≥¥tuµPF G∂B∑ûîHIP
8. ö~Q_opÆ∏Oπ∫789:=?ª@äP
9. °âºΩæø¿=ûî78HIÅop¢çPk¡¢OQäÅ'îHIQ¬
√ƒå=PêÅ\ö~¡OQäÅùHûîü†P
≈178HI=ÑÖ∆«
10. Rö~gh=K8»\â78HI…ô*ÑÖ=∆«ÅìîõËc-È⁄
Í1/0⁄͵úP°ºj sÀÃ=QopP
11. âöÕŒ\°£F789:=K8»º*=œ–QopP 12. ° ≠»ƒå=2.3456—“QST=P
13. °£F’#2.3456=≠=GRP÷◊»ÿ78Åopj•P°ƒå»
=2.3456ÎÏop5«P
14. °!@ÛûÙıˆ˜¡\â¯/Lõs78ú=¢çQäÅæ®˘P
171
%&˙ ()˚‹¸
Request for Research Interview: Xinya Primary School’s Chinese School-Based Module (Drama-in-Education)
Dear Mr ＿＿＿
Greetings! I am a Masters student from the Department of Education, National Taiwan Normal University. I am currently doing a research on how primary schools in Singapore develop their Chinese Language school-based modules within the context of a national curriculum, with particular focus on curriculum decisions taken along the way and their factors of influence.
During my stint as a CL curriculum planning officer with CPDD back in 2006-2009, I had the privilege of being acquainted with Xinya Primary School's project in Drama-in-Education. Not only was it a novel approach in terms of Singapore’s CL pedagogy and curriculum, it was also an endeavour which sought to involve the participation of stakeholders from various fields, which provides both a strong impetus and a rich platform for the study of how multi-agencies work in tandem in the development of a school-based curriculum. I would therefore like to adopt Xinya Primary School's approach as a case study, and leverage upon the school's invaluable experience as a base for further research.
As such, I am writing in to request for your kind permission to enter the school for the following purposes: (i) observation (of relevant departmental meetings or discussions, if any); (ii) collation of relevant curriculum-related documents for analysis, as well as (iii) interview you and 1 to 2 select CL teachers. Should the school be willing to accommodate my request, I would be in Singapore from Aug - early Sep 2011 and could visit the school then. Please be assured that the interviews would be kept as short as possible, approximately 1-2 hours per interviewee, to be arranged at the school’s convenience.
To avoid interpretation errors or misunderstandings, the interviews would be recorded and noted.
However, please be assured that all interview content would only be used in this study and not published further. For confidentiality purposes, all sensitive information and identities would also be made anonymous.
Attached herewith is the main outline of the interview questions, for your reference. Thank you for your attention, and I sincerely hope that you would allow me the opportunity to document a part of how the school-based module has been developed as part of the primary CL curriculum, especially in terms of engaging education partners.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Thank you!
PS: As I understand that some of the personnel involved in the inception of the CL school-based module have already left the school, it is also my intention to contact them for further interviews.
Besides that, as the contribution of the school’s external stakeholders (such as Master Teachers, curriculum planning officers, drama consultant, etc.) to the module is crucial to the study, I also plan to interview them in due time. Nonetheless, please be assured that existing school personnel and sustenance or changes to the module would also be important to the research.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Tay Yuan Zhuang Department of Education,
National Taiwan Normal University