| Summary: | 教師思維一向被認為與教師的實際教學有重要的關聯。本個案研究探討一位現職語言教師設計的行動學習活動背後之教師思維，以期更深入了解此行動學習活動之設計，並為電腦輔助語言教學師資培育之設計提供新的思維與洞察。
本個案研究為質性研究。研究工具包括受訪教師對於此活動的公開分享、半結構式訪談、文件收集及與學生的非正式談話。在訪談中，個案詳述了她的課室教學及其他經驗，包括過往的學習、專業教師訓練及其在不同場域的經歷。這些資料則進一步透過Borg (2006)和Mishra & Koehler (2006) 提供的架構(分別為教師思維框架及TPACK架構圖)進行討論。此研究首先詳細說明此行動學習活動中的九個關卡及其中教師表現出的各項知識。接著從過往學習經驗、專業教師訓練及不同場域等角度去追溯教師思維的形成。此研究並藉此進一步討論將上述兩個架構融合、調整的可能性以及電腦融入語言教學師資培育課程設計的新思維。
研究結果顯示，以上兩個架構皆未含括與教師本身或教師自主有關之元素，而這些元素在此個案研究中皆扮演教師思維和相應教學活動成形之關鍵角色。此外，研究結果也顯示，Mishra & Koehler (2006)的TPACK中涵蓋的各種元素可能有不同的權重，進而彰顯此框架在應用上有更複雜的潛力。此個案研究期能提供更多思維及啟發給對於科技融入教學，或電腦融入語言教學師資培育課程設計有興趣者。
=== Teacher cognition has been regarded to have strong connections with teachers' teaching practices. The case study intends to investigate a practicing language teacher's cognition behind her mobile-learning activity, an outdoor scavenger hunt activity with multiple missions. The main purpose of this study is to explore how the activity was designed and to further provide insights into CALL teacher education.
This is a qualitative study and data were collected through the participant's presentation about the activity, two semi-structured interviews, documentation and informal talks with students. In the semi-structured interviews, the participant detailed her classroom practices and other related experiences, including past learning experiences, professional development and her experiences in other contexts. The participant's experiences were then reconstructed and analyzed with Borg (2006) and Mishra & Koehler (2006) as the frameworks. The study first detailed the nine missions included in the participant’s scavenger hunt activity and analyzed the teacher's knowledge shown in the activity. Then, the formation of the teacher's cognitions was traced mainly in three aspects: past schooling, professional coursework and classroom practices under various contexts. Finally, the revised, integrated framework and some insights into CALL teacher education were discussed.
The result showed that the frameworks are lacking elements related to teachers themselves and teacher autonomy, both of which serve as a premise in the complex interaction of the elements in teacher cognitions and the resulting classroom practices. Other than that, it was found that the elements in the framework provided by Mishra & Koehler (2006) might carry different weights, which indicated more complexity in the framework. It is expected that those who are interested in technology integration into language teaching or CALL teacher education will find this study insightful and inspiring.
|
|---|
