資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158775
|
| 題名: | 從學科整合的專題導向教學中探索協同教學合作關係 : 兩位老師的個案研究
Collaborative Teaching Relationship in a CLIL Project-Based Learning Experience: A Case Study on Two Teachers |
| 作者: | 王苡倫
Wang, Yi-Lun |
| 貢獻者: | 招靜琪
Chao, Chin-Chi
王苡倫
Wang, Yi-Lun |
| 關鍵詞: | 內容和語言的整合學習教學法
專案導向教學計畫
跨領域合作
合作關係
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)
Project-Based Learning (PBL)
cross-disciplinary collaboration
collaborative teaching relationship |
| 日期: | 2025 |
| 上傳時間: | 2025-08-04 15:40:39 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要: | 為了厚植國人英語力，全方位提升國家整體競爭力，以2030年為目標打造臺灣成為雙語國家，近十年來臺灣的公私立中小學參加雙語教育課程已逐年攀升，而採用CLIL更成為雙語教學的趨勢。儘管多數文獻提倡跨領域的合作能有效地達到學生在學科知識與語言學習上的雙重目標，然而，學科老師和語言老師之間的合作關係仍存在著許多挑戰。本文以質性個案研究的方式，聚焦於一所公立國中，兩位本土老師，即資訊科技老師和英語老師如何在一次成功的專案導向教學計畫中，建立起正向的協同教學合作關係。資料來源為兩位老師透過2022年為期3個月的專案文件資料，包含兩位老師線上對話紀錄、教學計畫書、學生成果、師生以及家長回饋等，共同回憶並重新建構兩人的合作過程。經由跨領域合作五個階段的理論框架與關鍵事件的分析，探討兩人在專題導向教學計畫中正向合作關係的建立以及可能影響兩人成功合作的重要因素。研究發現，兩位老師的合作關係隨著開始的媒合、課程共備、共同教學，到指導學生產出專案成果而不斷進化，和學生間逐漸建立起的信任關係也更加強了此次跨領域合作的成功。根據此個案，本研究提出正向合作關係的七個重要特質，希望可以提供給學校以及教學現場的老師們，於未來執行以及評估有效的跨領域合作時的一個參考方向。
To enhance the country's overall competitiveness by improving English language proficiency and establish Taiwan as a bilingual nation by 2030, the number of primary and junior high schools in Taiwan engaged in bilingual education programs has notably increased over the past decade. Among a variety of bilingual teaching methodologies, the incorporation of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has been widely adopted in bilingual teaching practices. Despite the fact that most literature advocates that cross-disciplinary collaboration can be effective in achieving the dual goals of students' academic knowledge and language learning, there are still significant challenges in the collaborative teaching relationship between content teachers and language teachers. This paper employs a qualitative case study approach to examine how two local teachers, an information science & technology teacher and an English teacher, fostered a positive partnership in a successful project-based learning (PBL) experience in a public junior high school. The data presented in this study was derived from the two teachers' stimulated dialogues and reflective discussions to recall and reconstruct the process of their collaboration, based on all the documents included in the three-month PBL project in the academic year 2022. The study explored the establishment of the two teachers’ collaborative teaching relationship through the theoretical framework of the five stages of cross-disciplinary collaboration and a critical events analysis. Further, it identified the key factors that may have influenced the two teachers’ successful collaboration. The analysis revealed that the partnership between the two teachers underwent a continuous evolution throughout the entire project. Additionally, it was observed that the gradual development of a trusting relationship between teachers and students contributed to the success of this cross-disciplinary collaboration. In this case study, the findings suggest that seven key elements contribute to the formation of positive cross-disciplinary partnerships in education. The aim of this study is to provide schools and teachers with a framework for future reference when implementing and evaluating the effectiveness of cross-disciplinary collaborations. |
| 參考文獻: | Adamson, B., & Walker, E. (2011). Messy collaboration: Learning from a learning study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 29-36.
Algan, Y., Cahuc, P., & Shleifer, A. (2013). Teaching practices and social capital. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(3), 189-210.
Almulla, M. A. (2020). The effectiveness of the project-based learning (PBL) approach as a way to engage students in learning. SAGE Open, 10(3), 2158244020938702. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020938702
Arkoudis, S. (2006). Negotiating the rough ground between ESL and mainstream teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(4), 415-433.
Ball, P., Clegg, J., & Kelly, K. (2015). Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford University Press.
Bonnet, A., & Breidbach, S. (2017). CLIL teachers’ professionalization: between instrumental skills and professional identity. In A. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), An Applied Linguistics Perspective on CLIL (pp. 273-290). John Benjamins.
Butler, D. L., Lauscher, H. N., Jarvis-Selinger, S., & Beckingham, B. (2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(5), 435-455.
Butler, Y. G. (2005). Content-based instruction in EFL contexts: Considerations for effective implementation. JALT Journal, 27(2), 227-242.
Butterfield, L. D., Borgen, W. A., Amundson, N. E., & Maglio, A. S. T. (2005). Fifty years of the critical incident technique: 1954-2004 and beyond. Qualitative Research, 5(4), 475-497.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.
Creese, A. (2002). The discursive construction of power in teacher partnerships: Language and subject specialists in mainstream schools. TESOL Quarterly, 36(4), 597-616.
Creese, A. (2005). Teacher collaboration and talk in multilingual classrooms (Vol. 51). Multilingual Matters.
Creese, A. (2010). Content-focused classrooms and learning English: How teachers collaborate. Theory into Practice, 49(2), 99-105.
Cummins, J. (2000). Putting language proficiency in its place: Responding to critiques of the conversational/academic language distinction. In J. Cenoz & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The Acquisition of a Third Language (pp. 54-83). Multilingual Matters.
Darling‐Hammond, L., Newton, X., & Wei, R. C. (2010). Evaluating teacher education outcomes: A study of the Stanford Teacher Education Programme. Journal of education for teaching, 36(4), 369-388.
Davison, C. (2006). Collaboration between ESL and content teachers: How do we know when we are doing it right? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(4), 454-475.
Friend, M. (2008). Co-teaching: A simple solution that isn't simple after all. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 2(2), 9-19.
Giles, A., & Yazan, B. (2019). ESL and content teachers’ collaboration. Indonesian JELT: Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 14(1), 1-18.
Haapaniemi, J., Venäläinen, S., Malin, A., & Palojoki, P. (2021). Teacher autonomy and collaboration as part of integrative teaching–Reflections on the curriculum approach in Finland. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53(4), 546-562.
Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., Mäkitalo-Siegl, K., Ahonen, A., Näykki, P., & Valtonen, T. (2017). Preparing teacher-students for twenty-first-century learning practices (PREP 21): A framework for enhancing collaborative problem-solving and strategic learning skills. Teachers and Teaching, 23(1), 25-41.
Han, S., Capraro, R., & Capraro, M. M. (2015). How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) project-based learning (PBL) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 1089-1113.
Hargreaves, A. (2001). The emotional geographies of teachers’ relations with colleagues. International journal of educational research, 35(5), 503-527.
Hellekjaer, G. O., & Wilkinson, R. (2001). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) in Higher Education: an issue raising workshop. In B. Someeditor (Ed.), Language for Special Purposes: Perspectives for the New Millennium (pp. 398-408). Gunter Narr Verlag.
Hoyle, E. and John, P. D. (1995). Professional Knowledge and Professional Practice. Cassell.
Jacobs, C. (2007). Towards a critical understanding of the teaching of discipline-specific academic literacies: Making the tacit explicit. Journal of education, 41(1), 59-81.
Jacobs, C. (2010). Collaboration as pedagogy: Consequences and implications for partnerships between communication and disciplinary specialists. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 28(3), 227-237.
Jaidev, R., & Chan, P. (2018). Embedding communication in the disciplines: A tale of two faculties. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 12(3), 199-211.
Johnson, B. (2003). Teacher collaboration: Good for some, not so good for others. Educational studies, 29(4), 337-350.
Johnson, T. M., King-Sears, M. E., & Miller, A. D. (2022). High school co-teaching partners’ self-efficacy, personal compatibility, and active involvement in instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 45(2), 96-107.
Kewara, P., & Prabjandee, D. (2018). CLIL teacher professional development for content teachers in Thailand. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 93-108.
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267-277.
Lasagabaster, D. (2018). Fostering team teaching: Mapping out a research agenda for English-medium instruction at university level. Language Teaching, 51(3), 400-416.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2009). Language attitudes in CLIL and traditional EFL classes. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(2), 4-17.
Li, D., & Zhang, L. (2022). Exploring teacher scaffolding in a CLIL-framed EFL intensive reading class: A classroom discourse analysis approach. Language Teaching Research, 26(3), 333-360.
Lo, Y. Y. (2014). Collaboration between L2 and content subject teachers in CBI: Contrasting beliefs and attitudes. RELC Journal, 45(2), 181-196.
Lo, Y. Y. (2015). A glimpse into the effectiveness of L2-content cross-curricular collaboration in content-based instruction programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4), 443-462.
Lo, Y. Y. (2020). Professional development of CLIL teachers. Springer.
Lo, Y. Y., & Lo, Y. Y. (2020). Theoretical Underpinnings of Cross-Curricular Collaboration: How and why would it work in CLIL? In Y. Y. Lo (Ed.), Professional Development of CLIL Teachers (pp. 29-47). Springer.
Lo, Y. Y., & Murphy, V. A. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge and growth in immersion and regular language-learning programmes in Hong Kong. Language and Education, 24(3), 215-238.
Man, E. Y. F. (2008). Teachers’ perspectives towards language across the curriculum initiatives for English-medium schools in Hong Kong. In Curriculum and instruction: The journey of research and practice (pp.383-390). Chongqing University Press.
Meirink, J. A., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2007). A closer look at teachers’ individual learning in collaborative settings. Teachers and Teaching, 13(2), 145-164.
Méndez García, M. D. C. (2013). The intercultural turn brought about by the implementation of CLIL programmes in Spanish monolingual areas: A case study of Andalusian primary and secondary schools. The Language Learning Journal, 41(3), 268-283.
Mentzer, G. A., Czerniak, C. M., & Brooks, L. (2017). An examination of teacher understanding of project-based science as a result of participating in an extended professional development program: Implications for implementation. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1-2), 76-86.
Mirous, H. J., & Beeman, M. (2012). Bilateral processing and affect in creative language comprehension. The Handbook of the Neuropsychology of Language, 319-341.
Ministry of Education. (2018). Blueprint for developing Taiwan into a bilingual nation by 2030. https://bilingual.ndc.gov.tw/sites/bl4/files/news_event_docs/blueprint_for_deve loping_taiwan_into_a_bilingual_nation_by_2030.pdf.
Mottet, T. P., Martin, M. M., & Myers, S. A. (2004). Relationships among perceived instructor verbal approach and avoidance relational strategies and students' motives for communicating with their instructors. Communication Education, 53(1).
National Development Council. (2021). Bilingual 2030. https://www.ndc.gov.tw/en/Content_List.aspx?n=BF21AB4041BB5255
Network, E. (2012). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe 2012.
Ortega, L., & Iberri-Shea, G. (2005). Longitudinal research in second language acquisition: Recent trends and future directions. Annual review of applied linguistics, 25, 26-45.
Otwinowska, A., & Foryś, M. (2017). They learn the CLIL way, but do they like it? Affectivity and cognition in upper-primary CLIL classes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(5), 457-480.
Parker, G. (2015). Teachers' autonomy. Research in Education, 93(1), 19-33.
Pawan, F., & Green, M. C. S. (2017). In trust, we collaborate: ESL and content-area teaching working together in content-based language instruction. The Content-Based Classroom: NewPerspectives on Integrating Language and Content, 323-337.
Pawan, F., & Ortloff, J. H. (2011). Sustaining collaboration: English-as-a-second- language, and content-area teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 463-471.
Perry, B., & Stewart, T. (2005). Insights into effective partnership in interdisciplinary team teaching. System, 33(4), 563-573.
Pesonen, H. V., Rytivaara, A., Palmu, I., & Wallin, A. (2021). Teachers’ stories on sense of belonging in co-teaching relationship. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(3), 425-436.
Pham, P. A., & Unaldi, A. (2022). Cross-curricular collaboration in a CLIL bilingual context: The perceptions and practices of language teachers and content subject teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(8), 2918-2932.
Pratt, S. (2014). Achieving symbiosis: Working through challenges found in co-teaching to achieve effective co-teaching relationships. Teaching and teacher education, 41, 1-12.
Postholm, M. B., & Skrøvset, S. (2013). The researcher reflecting on her own role during action research. Educational Action Research, 21(4), 506-518.
Rendon, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and student development. Innovative higher education, 19, 33-51.
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. 2011. “Which Language Competencies Benefit from CLIL? An Insight into Applied Linguistics Research.” In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. M. Sierra, & F. Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning: Contributions to Multilingualism in European Contexts (pp. 129–153). Peter Lang.
Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). CLIL learning: Achievement levels and affective factors. Language and Education, 21(4), 328-341.
Tajino, A., Stewart, T., & Dalsky, D. (2016). Team Teaching and Team Learning in the Language Classroom: Collaboration for innovation in ELT. Routledge.
Tan, M. (2011). Mathematics and science teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding the teaching of language in content learning. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 325-342.
Thomas, J. W. D, P.(2000). A Review of Research on Project Based Learning. California: The Autodesk Foundation.
Trent, J. (2010). Teacher identity construction across the curriculum: Promoting cross-curriculum collaboration in English-medium schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30(2), 167-183.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and teacher education, 17(7), 783-805.
Voogt, J. M., Pieters, J. M., & Handelzalts, A. (2018). Teacher collaboration in curriculum design teams: Effects, mechanisms, and conditions. In J. M. Voogt, J. M. Pieters, & A. W. Handelzalts (Eds.), Teacher Learning Through Teacher Teams (pp. 7-26). Routledge.
Watson, M., & Ecken, L. (2003). Learning to Trust: Transforming Difficult Elementary Classrooms Through Developmental Discipline. Jossey-Bass.
Webster, L., & Mertova, P. (2007). Using narrative inquiry as a research method: An introduction to using critical event narrative analysis in research on learning and teaching. Routledge.
Weddle, H., Lockton, M., & Datnow, A. (2019). Teacher collaboration, differing expectations, and emotions in school improvement: “It’s always take, take, take”. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 4(4), 325-343.
Wilhelm, J., Wilhelm, R., & Cole, M. (2019). Creating project-based STEM environments. Springer International Publishing.
Zappa-Hollman, S. (2018). Collaborations between language and content university instructors: Factors and indicators of positive partnerships. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(5), 591-606.
Zhao, K., Zhou, J., & Zou, B. (2022). Developing subject knowledge co-construction and specific language use in a technology-enhanced CLIL programme: effectiveness and productive patterns. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(6), 2172-2185. |
| 描述: | 碩士
國立政治大學
英語教學碩士在職專班
110951006 |
| 資料來源: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110951006 |
| 資料類型: | thesis |
| 顯示於類別: | [英語教學碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| 100601.pdf | 779Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
