學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 環保議題融入中高級華語課程設計與實踐
Environmental Issues in CSL Curriculum Design and Implementation for Intermediate-High Level Learners作者 林芝逸
Lin, Chih Yi貢獻者 張金蘭
Chang, Ching Lan
林芝逸
Lin, Chih Yi關鍵詞 環境保護
華語教學
中高級華語課程
課程設計
environmental protection
teaching Chinese as a second language
intermediate-high level Chinese course
curriculum design日期 2015 上傳時間 27-Jul-2015 11:28:21 (UTC+8) 摘要 本研究期望能設計以環境保護為主題的華語課程，使中高級華語學習者在學習語言的同時，亦能了解相關環保知識，並透過共同討論現實世界所面臨的問題提升其環保意識。研究目的為：一、了解中高級華語學習者之學習需求。二、提供環保議題融入華語教學課程設計參考模式。三、評估具體教學成效。在課程設計前，透過文獻分析釐清本課程適合的教學方法、教學目標訂定方式以及教學材料的選取、編寫準則，主要以主題式教學法（Theme-Based Language Instruction）、溝通式教學法（Communicative Language Teaching）、美國外語教學學會（ACTFL）之5C準則（5C Standards）及貝爾格勒憲章（The Belgrade Charter）中的六項環境教育目標為本研究之教學理念，並參考英語教學之經驗，思考環境議題融入語言課程可行方式。亦透過需求分析，向中高級學習者與教師發放問卷，了解「教」與「學」兩方對於環保主題課程的態度及看法。綜合文獻與需求分析結果為本研究課程設計總體方向，依此進行課程發展設計，並實際進行兩次課程實施以評估學習成就及整體課程設計，提出改進之道及後續研究建議。本文主要研究方法為發展研究法、問卷及訪談調查法。發展研究法提供本研究可參照之設計流程，包含分析、設計發展、課程實施、成效評估、修正等階段。問卷調查用於課程設計前之學習需求分析、課程實施後之課程滿意度調查；訪談則用於課程實施後，了解學習者對本課程的想法、心得與建議，進一步回饋至修正建議。透過教學實施，學習者對於本課程皆給予正面評價，認為本課程有意思且實用，不僅能使語言技能進步，亦能關心、討論環境議題，也讓平常少有機會接觸時事的學生更了解台灣社會與文化。本研究根據教學成效提出幾點教學建議：一、在教學內容選取上，現實議題探討能加強學習者之社會語言能力，且符合學習興趣，使學習者能更了解所處的社會環境。議題以真實材料或非真實材料呈現皆有其須注意之處。二、在環境教育目標於華語課程之實踐上，教師須於課堂提供察覺、認識之契機，透過引導，學習者能自行運用其技能與評估能力，最後發展出個人觀點與態度。三、在課堂活動規劃上，輸入、輸出型活動須搭配且循序運用。筆者並於篇末提出後續研究建議。
This study examines the design of a Chinese language curriculum focused on environmental protection, and aims to enhance students’ language skills while increasing awareness about environmental issues.There are three purposes of this study; the first is to analyze the learning needs of intermediate-high CSL students, the second is to provide a design model for an environmentally themed CSL curriculum, and the third is to evaluate the effectiveness of its implementation. Also included is a review of previous studies that highlights appropriate methods of developing objectives, editing materials, and teaching. The instructional philosophy of this study is based on theme-based language instruction, communicative language teaching, the 5 C’s language teaching standards (ACTFL) , and the six objectives of environmental education in the Belgrade Charter. A learning needs questionnaire is also given to both teachers and students in order to survey their opinions on teaching and learning. The results of this needs analysis and extensive review of existing literature provide the main guiding principles behind the curriculum’s development. The results of two terms of implementations are presented, as well as potential further improvements.The main research method of this study is developmental research; surveys and interviews are used to as supplemental methods. The developmental research method provides a model for curriculum design, and calls for various phases of analysis, design (development), implementation, and evaluation. Survey research is then used to forecast learning needs before the design phase, and also to gather students’ feedback after the completion of the class. Interviews are used after each complete implementation to gather more information and impressions from students.After two complete implementations of the curriculum, the interview results show that students find the course practical and interesting, as they can not only enhance their language skills, but also raise their awareness of environmental issues through class discussion. In addition, they felt the class increased their understanding of Taiwan society and culture via discussion of current events. The main findings are as follows: 1) Content relating to social issues can simultaneously improve students’ sociolinguistic competence and also meet their learning needs. The contents can be provided in authentic or inauthentic contexts, but should follow certain design principles. 2) To fulfill the six objectives of environmental education in a CSL curriculum, the instructor needs to help students understand environmental issues first, and then guide students to use their analysis skills to evaluate current events. Afterwards, students will develop their own perspective and attitude. 3) To develop an effective course, the input and output activities should be arranged in sequence.參考文獻 中文部分王文科、王智弘（2006）。教育研究法（增訂十版）。台北：五南。江文芳（2010）。全球教育教學方案發展之行動研究：「戰爭與和平～淡水篇」（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台北教育大學，台北市。行政院環境保護署（2014）。環境白皮書。台北：行政院環境保護署。取自http://www.epa.gov.tw/lp.asp?ctNode=31049&CtUnit=851&BaseDSD=7&mp=epa杜振亞、郭聰貴、周伶瑛、鄭麗娟、林麗娟、吳佳蕙（譯）（2007）。學習導向的教學設計原理（原作者：Gagne R. M., Wager W. W., Golas K. C. & Keller J. M.）。台北市：湯姆生。（原著出版年：2005）。何婉麗（2009年6月）。環境保護課程在華語教學中的設計與運用。周世箴（主持人），論文及教學應用發表會。第六屆全球華文網路教育研討會，公務人力發展中心福華國際文教會館。李燦如（1995）。第二語言教學的焦點突破──溝通式語言教學之探討。台灣教育，529，48-51。吳馥如（2008）。中級華語交際溝通會話課程之設計與實證（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。李櫻（1990）。功用語法與英語教學（下）。英語教學，15卷2期，58號，34-40。孫懿芬（2008）。華語讀寫課程設計與實踐──針對歐美華裔學生之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。陳惠邦（1998）。教育行動研究。台北：師大書苑。許雅雯（2013）。全球化觀點下的華語習得規劃－以法國里昂第三大學中國研究系為個案（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心。課程等級與學習目標。取自http://140.122.110.12/mtcweb/files/Class%20level_Chinese.pdf國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心、工業技術研究院。《TOCFL華語詞彙通》【華語文線上閱讀輔助學習工具】。取自http://huayutools.mtc.ntnu.edu.tw//ts/index.aspx國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。取自 http://www.sc-top.org.tw/教育部（2012）。中小學國際教育融入課程資源手冊：國小版。教育部。取自http://www.ietw.moe.gov.tw/GoWeb/include/index.php?Page=1-A教育部（2012）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要重大議題（環境教育）。取自 http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC2/9cc_97.php張祖忻、朱純、胡頌華（1995）。教學設計：基本原理與方法。台北：五南。張莉萍（2012）。對應於歐洲共同架構的華語詞彙量。華語文教學研究，9(2)，77-96。蔡清田（2000）。教育行動研究。台北：五南。黎世潔（2014）。國民小學活動導向的全球環境與永續發展議題教學之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。淡江大學，新北市。顏佩如（2007）。全球教育課程發展。台北：冠學文化。外文部分American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). (1999). Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century.Brown, H. D. (1995). Teaching global interdependence as a subversive activity. JALT: Global Issues in Language Education Newsletter, 20.Breen, M.P., Candlin, C. N. & Waters, A. (1979). Communicative materials design: Some basic principles. RELC Journal, 10(2), 1-13.Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-Based Second Language Instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication. New York: Longman.Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.Cartwright, D. P. (1953). Analysis of qualitative material. In L. Festinger & D. Katz (Eds.), Research methods in the Behavioural Sciences (pp.421-470). New Delhi: Amerind Publishing Company.Cates, K. A. (1990). Teaching for a Better World: Global Issues and Language Education. The Language Teacher, XIV(5), 41-52.Denis, C. (2011). FIPLV and Linguapax: A quasi-autobiographical account. In UNESCOCAT & Linguapax (Eds.), Linguapax Review 2010 (pp.23-35). [Adobe Reader]. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20120602082421/http://www.linguapax.org/en/linguapax-reviewDenzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Finocchiaro, M. & Brumfit, C. (1983). The Functional-Notional Approach: From Theory to Practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Fisher, S. & Hicks, D. (1985). World Studies 8-13: a teacher’s handbook. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Gagne, R., Briggs, L. & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th Ed.). Fort Worth, TX: HBJ College Publishers.Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In Snow, M. A. & Brinton, D. M. (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 5–21). White Plains, NY: Longman.Global Education Guidelines Working Group (2012). Global Education Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/nscentre/ge/GE-Guidelines/GEguidelines-web.pdfHanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. Denver, CO: Center for Teaching International Relations.Huang, W. J. (2008). Global Perspectives: Making Connections between Global Education and Taiwan`s EFL Classrooms. Hwa Kang Journal of English Language & Literature, 14, 1-17.Jacobs, G. M. (1995). Developing materials with an environmental focus. In A. C. Hidalgo, D. Hall, & G. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Getting started: Materials writers on materials writing (pp. 269-279). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.Jacobs, G. M. & Cates, K. (1999). Global Education in Second Language Teaching. KATA, 1(1), 44-56.Kniep, W. (1985). A Critical Review of the Short History of Global Education. NY: American Forum for Global Education.Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Holt, NY: Harcourt College Publishers.Leshin, C. B., Pollock, J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional Design Strategies and Tactics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Education Technology Publications.Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1-55.Molenda, M. (2003). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model. Performance Improvement, 42(5).Madsen, H. S., & Bowen, J. D. (1978). Adaptation in language teaching. New York, NY: Newbury House Publishers.Merryfield, M. M., Jarchow, E. & Pickert, S. (1997). A framework for teacher education in global perspectives. In M. M. Merryfield, E. Jarchow, S. Pickert (Eds.), Preparing teachers to teach global perspectives: A handbook for teacher educators (pp. 1-23) . Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.Nkwetisama, C. M. (2011). EFL/ESL and Environmental Education: Towards an Eco-Applied Linguistic Awareness in Cameroon. World Journal of Education, 1(1), 110-118.Royal, D. (2006). Global Issues, Everyday Actions (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa). Retrieved from http://www.esletc.com/papers/DavidRoyalScholarlyPaper.pdfRoyal, D. & Davis, K. (2008). Greening an Intensive English Programme. IATEFL GISIG Newsletter, 22, 18-21.Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching : A Description and Analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Richey, R. C., & Nelson, W. A. (1996). Development research. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp.1213-1245). London: Macmillan.Snow, M. A. (2001). Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.), (pp. 303-318). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Stoller, F. L. (2002). Content-Based Instruction: A Shell for Language Teaching or a Framework for Strategic Language and Content Learning? Plenary presentation at TESOL, Salt Lake City, UT. Retrieved from http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/strategies/Stoller2002/stoller.pdfSchwartz, J., Bevan, V. & Lasche, S. (1983). An intensive theme-oriented course in advanced English for first-semester German university students of diverse subject studies. Berlin, German: Freie Universitat Berlin.The National Council for the Social Studies (2014). What are Global and International Education? Retrieved from http://www.socialstudies.org/positions/global/whatisglobaledUN. (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?documentid=52UN. (2002). Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/jburgdec.htmUN. (2012). The Future We Want. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/727The%20Future%20We%20Want%2019%20June%201230pm.pdfUNESCO-UNEP. (1976). The Belgrade Charter: A global framework for environmental education. Connect: UNESCO-UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter, 1(1), 1-9.Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, R. M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training (pp.1-14). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-Based Language Education: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London, England: Longman. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
華語文教學碩士學位學程
101161010資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101161010 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 張金蘭 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chang, Ching Lan en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 林芝逸 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Lin, Chih Yi en_US dc.creator (作者) 林芝逸 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Lin, Chih Yi en_US dc.date (日期) 2015 en_US dc.date.accessioned 27-Jul-2015 11:28:21 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 27-Jul-2015 11:28:21 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 27-Jul-2015 11:28:21 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0101161010 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/76902 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 華語文教學碩士學位學程 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 101161010 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究期望能設計以環境保護為主題的華語課程，使中高級華語學習者在學習語言的同時，亦能了解相關環保知識，並透過共同討論現實世界所面臨的問題提升其環保意識。研究目的為：一、了解中高級華語學習者之學習需求。二、提供環保議題融入華語教學課程設計參考模式。三、評估具體教學成效。在課程設計前，透過文獻分析釐清本課程適合的教學方法、教學目標訂定方式以及教學材料的選取、編寫準則，主要以主題式教學法（Theme-Based Language Instruction）、溝通式教學法（Communicative Language Teaching）、美國外語教學學會（ACTFL）之5C準則（5C Standards）及貝爾格勒憲章（The Belgrade Charter）中的六項環境教育目標為本研究之教學理念，並參考英語教學之經驗，思考環境議題融入語言課程可行方式。亦透過需求分析，向中高級學習者與教師發放問卷，了解「教」與「學」兩方對於環保主題課程的態度及看法。綜合文獻與需求分析結果為本研究課程設計總體方向，依此進行課程發展設計，並實際進行兩次課程實施以評估學習成就及整體課程設計，提出改進之道及後續研究建議。本文主要研究方法為發展研究法、問卷及訪談調查法。發展研究法提供本研究可參照之設計流程，包含分析、設計發展、課程實施、成效評估、修正等階段。問卷調查用於課程設計前之學習需求分析、課程實施後之課程滿意度調查；訪談則用於課程實施後，了解學習者對本課程的想法、心得與建議，進一步回饋至修正建議。透過教學實施，學習者對於本課程皆給予正面評價，認為本課程有意思且實用，不僅能使語言技能進步，亦能關心、討論環境議題，也讓平常少有機會接觸時事的學生更了解台灣社會與文化。本研究根據教學成效提出幾點教學建議：一、在教學內容選取上，現實議題探討能加強學習者之社會語言能力，且符合學習興趣，使學習者能更了解所處的社會環境。議題以真實材料或非真實材料呈現皆有其須注意之處。二、在環境教育目標於華語課程之實踐上，教師須於課堂提供察覺、認識之契機，透過引導，學習者能自行運用其技能與評估能力，最後發展出個人觀點與態度。三、在課堂活動規劃上，輸入、輸出型活動須搭配且循序運用。筆者並於篇末提出後續研究建議。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) This study examines the design of a Chinese language curriculum focused on environmental protection, and aims to enhance students’ language skills while increasing awareness about environmental issues.There are three purposes of this study; the first is to analyze the learning needs of intermediate-high CSL students, the second is to provide a design model for an environmentally themed CSL curriculum, and the third is to evaluate the effectiveness of its implementation. Also included is a review of previous studies that highlights appropriate methods of developing objectives, editing materials, and teaching. The instructional philosophy of this study is based on theme-based language instruction, communicative language teaching, the 5 C’s language teaching standards (ACTFL) , and the six objectives of environmental education in the Belgrade Charter. A learning needs questionnaire is also given to both teachers and students in order to survey their opinions on teaching and learning. The results of this needs analysis and extensive review of existing literature provide the main guiding principles behind the curriculum’s development. The results of two terms of implementations are presented, as well as potential further improvements.The main research method of this study is developmental research; surveys and interviews are used to as supplemental methods. The developmental research method provides a model for curriculum design, and calls for various phases of analysis, design (development), implementation, and evaluation. Survey research is then used to forecast learning needs before the design phase, and also to gather students’ feedback after the completion of the class. Interviews are used after each complete implementation to gather more information and impressions from students.After two complete implementations of the curriculum, the interview results show that students find the course practical and interesting, as they can not only enhance their language skills, but also raise their awareness of environmental issues through class discussion. In addition, they felt the class increased their understanding of Taiwan society and culture via discussion of current events. The main findings are as follows: 1) Content relating to social issues can simultaneously improve students’ sociolinguistic competence and also meet their learning needs. The contents can be provided in authentic or inauthentic contexts, but should follow certain design principles. 2) To fulfill the six objectives of environmental education in a CSL curriculum, the instructor needs to help students understand environmental issues first, and then guide students to use their analysis skills to evaluate current events. Afterwards, students will develop their own perspective and attitude. 3) To develop an effective course, the input and output activities should be arranged in sequence. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 目錄 ⅰ表目錄 ⅳ圖目錄 ⅵ第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究動機 1第二節 研究目的與研究問題 2一、研究目的 2二、研究問題 2第三節 名詞釋義 3一、華語、華語教學 3二、環保議題、環境教育 3三、教學設計 3四、中高級華語學習者 4第二章 文獻探討 6第一節 環保議題與語言教學 6一、全球教育與全球議題 6二、環保思潮發展與環境教育 7三、全球議題融入語言教學之發展 9第二節 環保議題融入華語課程之教學設計 11一、課堂案例探討 11二、教學目標訂定 14三、教學法探討 16四、教學材料之選取與編寫 20第三節 小結與啟示 22第三章 研究方法 24第一節 研究方法 24一、發展研究法 24二、問卷及訪談調查法 26第二節 研究流程 26第三節 研究場域、研究者角色與研究對象 28一、研究場域 28二、研究者角色 29三、研究對象 29第四節 研究工具 30一、需求分析教師問卷 30二、需求分析學習者問卷 30三、課堂札記 31四、課程滿意度問卷 31五、學習者訪談 31第五節 資料蒐集與分析 32第六節 研究倫理與信效度 33第四章 需求分析 35第一節 學習者與教師問卷分析 35一、受訪者背景資料 35二、問卷調查結果 37第二節 小結與啟示 54第五章 環保華語課程設計與實施 57第一節 第一次設計發展與實施 57一、教學內容選取 57二、教學材料編寫與修正 58三、課程大綱與單元教案 63四、第一次課程實施 66第二節 第一次課程實施成效分析 67一、課程滿意度問卷調查 67二、課程實施成效分析 68三、課程檢討與建議 77第三節 課程設計修正與第二次實施 79一、課程設計修正 79二、第二次課程實施 81第四節 第二次課程實施成效分析 82一、課程滿意度問卷調查 82二、課程實施成效分析 83第五節 小結與討論 97一、語言學習目標方面 98二、環境教育目標方面 99三、現實議題之教學 99第六章 結論與建議 100第一節 結論 100一、課程設計模式 100二、教學內容之選取與呈現形式 101三、環境教育目標於華語課程之實踐方式 101四、課堂輸入、輸出型活動需綜合運用 102五、教師為引導者 103六、學習者評價 104七、免費班開設考量事項 104第二節 研究限制 105一、需求分析方面 105二、教學時間限制 105三、選課人數不穩定 105四、課程約束力較低 105五、成效評估方面 106第三節 對未來研究發展之建議 106一、結合現實議題的教學 106二、運用真實語料的教學 107三、實際走入社區的教學 107四、發展環保議題中其他主題之華語課程 107五、發展其他全球議題之華語課程 107參考文獻 109附錄 114 zh_TW dc.format.extent 3711689 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101161010 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 環境保護 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 華語教學 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 中高級華語課程 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 課程設計 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) environmental protection en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) teaching Chinese as a second language en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) intermediate-high level Chinese course en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) curriculum design en_US dc.title (題名) 環保議題融入中高級華語課程設計與實踐 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Environmental Issues in CSL Curriculum Design and Implementation for Intermediate-High Level Learners en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中文部分王文科、王智弘（2006）。教育研究法（增訂十版）。台北：五南。江文芳（2010）。全球教育教學方案發展之行動研究：「戰爭與和平～淡水篇」（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台北教育大學，台北市。行政院環境保護署（2014）。環境白皮書。台北：行政院環境保護署。取自http://www.epa.gov.tw/lp.asp?ctNode=31049&CtUnit=851&BaseDSD=7&mp=epa杜振亞、郭聰貴、周伶瑛、鄭麗娟、林麗娟、吳佳蕙（譯）（2007）。學習導向的教學設計原理（原作者：Gagne R. M., Wager W. W., Golas K. C. & Keller J. M.）。台北市：湯姆生。（原著出版年：2005）。何婉麗（2009年6月）。環境保護課程在華語教學中的設計與運用。周世箴（主持人），論文及教學應用發表會。第六屆全球華文網路教育研討會，公務人力發展中心福華國際文教會館。李燦如（1995）。第二語言教學的焦點突破──溝通式語言教學之探討。台灣教育，529，48-51。吳馥如（2008）。中級華語交際溝通會話課程之設計與實證（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。李櫻（1990）。功用語法與英語教學（下）。英語教學，15卷2期，58號，34-40。孫懿芬（2008）。華語讀寫課程設計與實踐──針對歐美華裔學生之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。陳惠邦（1998）。教育行動研究。台北：師大書苑。許雅雯（2013）。全球化觀點下的華語習得規劃－以法國里昂第三大學中國研究系為個案（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心。課程等級與學習目標。取自http://140.122.110.12/mtcweb/files/Class%20level_Chinese.pdf國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心、工業技術研究院。《TOCFL華語詞彙通》【華語文線上閱讀輔助學習工具】。取自http://huayutools.mtc.ntnu.edu.tw//ts/index.aspx國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。取自 http://www.sc-top.org.tw/教育部（2012）。中小學國際教育融入課程資源手冊：國小版。教育部。取自http://www.ietw.moe.gov.tw/GoWeb/include/index.php?Page=1-A教育部（2012）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要重大議題（環境教育）。取自 http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC2/9cc_97.php張祖忻、朱純、胡頌華（1995）。教學設計：基本原理與方法。台北：五南。張莉萍（2012）。對應於歐洲共同架構的華語詞彙量。華語文教學研究，9(2)，77-96。蔡清田（2000）。教育行動研究。台北：五南。黎世潔（2014）。國民小學活動導向的全球環境與永續發展議題教學之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。淡江大學，新北市。顏佩如（2007）。全球教育課程發展。台北：冠學文化。外文部分American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL). (1999). Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century.Brown, H. D. (1995). Teaching global interdependence as a subversive activity. JALT: Global Issues in Language Education Newsletter, 20.Breen, M.P., Candlin, C. N. & Waters, A. (1979). Communicative materials design: Some basic principles. RELC Journal, 10(2), 1-13.Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-Based Second Language Instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication. New York: Longman.Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.Cartwright, D. P. (1953). Analysis of qualitative material. In L. Festinger & D. Katz (Eds.), Research methods in the Behavioural Sciences (pp.421-470). New Delhi: Amerind Publishing Company.Cates, K. A. (1990). Teaching for a Better World: Global Issues and Language Education. The Language Teacher, XIV(5), 41-52.Denis, C. (2011). FIPLV and Linguapax: A quasi-autobiographical account. In UNESCOCAT & Linguapax (Eds.), Linguapax Review 2010 (pp.23-35). [Adobe Reader]. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20120602082421/http://www.linguapax.org/en/linguapax-reviewDenzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Finocchiaro, M. & Brumfit, C. (1983). The Functional-Notional Approach: From Theory to Practice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Fisher, S. & Hicks, D. (1985). World Studies 8-13: a teacher’s handbook. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Gagne, R., Briggs, L. & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of Instructional Design (4th Ed.). Fort Worth, TX: HBJ College Publishers.Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (1997). Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In Snow, M. A. & Brinton, D. M. (Eds.), The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 5–21). White Plains, NY: Longman.Global Education Guidelines Working Group (2012). Global Education Guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/nscentre/ge/GE-Guidelines/GEguidelines-web.pdfHanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. Denver, CO: Center for Teaching International Relations.Huang, W. J. (2008). Global Perspectives: Making Connections between Global Education and Taiwan`s EFL Classrooms. Hwa Kang Journal of English Language & Literature, 14, 1-17.Jacobs, G. M. (1995). Developing materials with an environmental focus. In A. C. Hidalgo, D. Hall, & G. M. Jacobs (Eds.), Getting started: Materials writers on materials writing (pp. 269-279). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.Jacobs, G. M. & Cates, K. (1999). Global Education in Second Language Teaching. KATA, 1(1), 44-56.Kniep, W. (1985). A Critical Review of the Short History of Global Education. NY: American Forum for Global Education.Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research (4th ed.). Holt, NY: Harcourt College Publishers.Leshin, C. B., Pollock, J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional Design Strategies and Tactics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Education Technology Publications.Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1-55.Molenda, M. (2003). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model. Performance Improvement, 42(5).Madsen, H. S., & Bowen, J. D. (1978). Adaptation in language teaching. New York, NY: Newbury House Publishers.Merryfield, M. M., Jarchow, E. & Pickert, S. (1997). A framework for teacher education in global perspectives. In M. M. Merryfield, E. Jarchow, S. Pickert (Eds.), Preparing teachers to teach global perspectives: A handbook for teacher educators (pp. 1-23) . Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press.Nkwetisama, C. M. (2011). EFL/ESL and Environmental Education: Towards an Eco-Applied Linguistic Awareness in Cameroon. World Journal of Education, 1(1), 110-118.Royal, D. (2006). Global Issues, Everyday Actions (Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa). Retrieved from http://www.esletc.com/papers/DavidRoyalScholarlyPaper.pdfRoyal, D. & Davis, K. (2008). Greening an Intensive English Programme. IATEFL GISIG Newsletter, 22, 18-21.Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching : A Description and Analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Richey, R. C., & Nelson, W. A. (1996). Development research. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp.1213-1245). London: Macmillan.Snow, M. A. (2001). Content-based and immersion models for second and foreign language teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.), (pp. 303-318). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Stoller, F. L. (2002). Content-Based Instruction: A Shell for Language Teaching or a Framework for Strategic Language and Content Learning? Plenary presentation at TESOL, Salt Lake City, UT. Retrieved from http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/strategies/Stoller2002/stoller.pdfSchwartz, J., Bevan, V. & Lasche, S. (1983). An intensive theme-oriented course in advanced English for first-semester German university students of diverse subject studies. Berlin, German: Freie Universitat Berlin.The National Council for the Social Studies (2014). What are Global and International Education? Retrieved from http://www.socialstudies.org/positions/global/whatisglobaledUN. (1992). Agenda 21. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?documentid=52UN. (2002). Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/jburgdec.htmUN. (2012). The Future We Want. United Nations. Retrieved from http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/727The%20Future%20We%20Want%2019%20June%201230pm.pdfUNESCO-UNEP. (1976). The Belgrade Charter: A global framework for environmental education. Connect: UNESCO-UNEP Environmental Education Newsletter, 1(1), 1-9.Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, R. M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen & T. Plomp (Eds.), Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training (pp.1-14). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-Based Language Education: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London, England: Longman. zh_TW
