知識的生生不息

KEEPING KNOWLEDGE ALIVE

William E. Doll, Jr.


所屬期刊： 第1卷第1期 「課程與教學」
主編：國立台北教育大學
課程與教學研究所 莊明貞教授
系統編號： vol001_02
主題： 課程與教學
出版年份： 2005
作者： William E. Doll, Jr.
作者(英文)：
論文名稱： 知識的生生不息
論文名稱(英文)： KEEPING KNOWLEDGE ALIVE
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別：
論文頁數： 16
中文關鍵字： 課程;學習;教學;Whitehead
英文關鍵字： Curriculum; Learning;Teaching;Whitehead
服務單位：
稿件字數： 7500
作者專長：
投稿日期： 2005/03/28
論文下載： pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文)： 一世紀多前，著名的哲學家、教育家、及數學家 Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) 公開宣稱大學、學院、以及學校所提供的教育都是「死亡的、貧乏的、無生氣的、無益的」，並且是「充滿思想的乾腐」。他的抱怨意指如此的學術機構教導事實並且僅僅只有事實，完全無關乎生活或者該事實所嵌入存在的領域。記憶（Memorization）是一學習的途徑並且是唯一的途徑，對他而言，這樣的學習並不能稱得上是學習。
　　為了使知識生生不息，Whitehead 提議身於教育界的我們應當僅教導「幾個觀念」（few ideas），但卻是「主要觀念」（main ones），?而我們將這些觀念儘可能的進行組合。這個建議雖是過去的根本概念，但對現在來說依然是；這個建議儘管是出眾的明智，尤其是當我們處於後現代世界裡掙扎以試圖尋找一個可行的方法來教育。Whitehead 的建議更涉及把教育看作有階段或者時期：一為浪漫期（觀念逗玩，playing with ideas），一為準確期（精準，exactness），一為類化期（抽取一般原則，abstracting general principles）。
　　在 Whitehead 最初提出建議的一世紀後，文中提議所述三個時期的相互作用－遊戲、準確、原則－對於那些期望修改課程設計與教學策略會是一個有幫助的規準。文中亦探索這三個時期與其之間的相互關係。
　　最後，以檢視 Whitehead 擔憂的「完美教學」（too good teaching）以及給現今教師的建議作為本文的結束。
摘要(英文)： Over a century ago, the noted philosopher, educator, mathematician Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) declared that the education universities, colleges, schools were providing was “dead, barren, lifeless, useless,” and “full of mental dry rot.” His complaint was that such institutions were teaching facts and only facts, unrelated to either life or to the field in which the facts were embedded. Memorization was the oneand only way to “learn,” and for him such was not learning.
In order to keep knowledge alive, Whitehead proposed that we in education teach only a “few ideas,” the “main ones,” and that we “throw these ideas into every combination possible.” This suggestion was then, and still is now, a radical one; albeit an eminently sensible one, especially as we struggle in our post-modern world to find a viable way to educate. Whitehead’s suggestion involved looking upon education as having stages or periods: one of romance (playing with ideas), one of precision (exactness), one of generalization (abstracting general principles).
This paper itself suggests that interplay of these three stages or periods -- play, precision, principles -- can be useful guides for those wishing to devise curriculum designs and instructional strategies, a century after Whitehead first made his proposal. The paper explores each of the stages and their interrelationship.
The paper ends with an examination of Whitehead’s worry about “too good teaching,” and with suggestions for what Whitehead has to offer teachers today.
參考文獻： Brumbaugh, R. S. (1982). Whitehead, Process Philosophy, and Education. Albany, N. Y: State University of New York Press.
Bruner, J., A. Jolly, and K. Sylva, Eds. (1976). Play: Its Role in Development and Evolution. New York: Basic Books.
Costello, W. T. (1958). The Scholastic Curriculum of Early Seventeenth-Century Cambridge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Davis, B., D. Sumara, D. Osberg, and G. Biesta, Eds. (2005). Complexity in Education: Emergent Thinking on Learning, Pedagogy and Research. London: Open University Press.
Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press. (Original publication.1916)
Doll, W. E. Jr. (1979). “Play and Mastery: A Structuralist View.” Journal of Curriculum Theorizing. 209-26.
Doll, W. E. Jr. (2001) “Beyond Methods: Teaching as an Aesthetic and Spiritful Quest,” in Passion and Pedagogy, E. Mirochnik and D. Sherman, Eds. Lang, 127 - 51.
Doll, W. E. Jr. (2002). “Ghosts and the Curriculum,” in Curriculum Visions, W.E. Doll Jr. and N. Gough, Eds. New York: Lang, 23-73.
Doll, W. E. Jr., M.J. Fleener, D. Trueit, and J. St.Julien (2005). Chaos, Complexity, Curriculum, and Culture. New York: Lang.
Fleener, M. J. (2002). Curriculum Dynamics. New York: Lang.
Fleener, M. J., A. Carter, and S. Reeder (2003). “Language-Games in the Mathematics Classroom: Learning a Way of Life,” in Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, Vol. 19, No. 2, Summer, 2003.
Genova, J. (1995) Wittgenstein: A Way of Seeing. New York: Routledge.
Gould, S. J. (1990) “An Earful of Jaw.” Natural History. March, 12-23.
Hamilton, D. (1990). Curriculum History. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Janik, A. and S. Toulmin (1973). Wittgenstein’s Vienna. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Jardine, D., P. Clifford and S. Friesen (2002). Back to the Basics of Teaching and Learning: Thinking the World Together. Mahwah, N.J: Erlbaum.
Lowe, V. (1961). Understanding Whitehead. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lowe, V. (1985). Alfred North Whitehead: The Man and his Work, Vol. I. Batlimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lowe, V. (1990). Alfred North Whitehead: The Man and his Work, Vol. II, J.B. Schneewind, ed. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Maxwell, C. (1873). Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ong, W. (1983). Ramus, Method and the Decay of Dialogue. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Palter, R. (1961). “The Place of Mathematics in Whitehead’s Philosophy,” in The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. LVIII, No. 20, September 28, 1961.
Price, L. (1954). Dialogues of Alfred North Whitehead. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Triche, S. (2002). “Reconceiving Curriculum: An Historical Approach.” LSU doctoral dissertation, unpublished.
Whitehead, A. N. (1938). Modes of Thought. New York: Macmillan.
Whitehead, A. N. (1948). Essays in Science and Philosophy. New York: Philosophical Library.
Whitehead, A. N. (1967). The Aims of Education and other Essays. New York: The Free Press. (Original publication, 1929)
Whitehead, A. N. (1967). Science and the Modern World. New York: The Free Press. (Original publication ,1925)
Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology, Corrected Edition. D.R. Griffin and D. Sherburne, Eds. New York: The Free Press. (Original publication, 1929)
Wittgenstein, L. (1958) Philosophical Investigations, The English Text of the 3rd Edition. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. New York: Macmillan.