摘要
這份論文的動機，主要來自研究者個人學習法語—第二外語的經驗。因目前尚無一套理想的語文教學脈絡化方式可供依循，於是，研究者邀請了一位高中法語教師作為合作研究夥伴，一起進行合作行動研究。其研究目的如下: 一、建構語文脈絡化教學方式，探討其作為實施文化取向外語教學的可能性; 二、瞭解實施語文教學脈絡化教學方式的實施成效與限制; 三、瞭解學生對文化取向外語教學的學習心得與接受度; 四、提供高中法語選修課或其他初級法語教學可參考之教學相關建議。
歷經了一年的教學發展與探究，運用語文教材與生活文化之間的整合方式，發展了一套實施效果不錯的模式，使語言學習圖像更趨於整全。但距離原本的構想，期待真正地塑造有意義的脈絡，協助學生更深入思考與探索法國文化的意義，尚有距離。研究發現原始構想未能實現的原因有: 一、教學創造有意義的學習脈絡有教學實施上的困難，例如引導學生思考問題的技巧、教師對於利用對話教學引導思考的認同等; 二、教材整合上仍是有統整法語和文化教材程度上的挑戰，以及教師掌握學生程度的困難; 三、法語科往往不是學校內的常設科目，而法語教師也並非專任職位，此點亦增加教師進行教學創新的難度; 四、行政上給予教師從事教學創新的支援甚少。
針對上述問題，本論文有下列幾項建議與思考: 法語教師之間須形成教學專業團隊，一同進行理論的討論與實務的反思; 其次，有鑑於文化內容包羅萬象，涵蓋社會、人文、藝術、文學等學科，文化取向的法語教學可以以科際整合的作法，進行學科與教學專業的發展。此外，本研究採合作行動研究進行探究，事實上，研究者與合作夥伴間常出現觀點上的差異，但在經過一年的協調與磋商，無論在發展教學或是進行研究上，都成熟了許多。

關鍵字：合作行動研究、外語教學、第二外語、語文教學脈絡化

Abstract
The motivation of this study is based on the researcher’s own experience in learning French, which is the second foreign language learning in Taiwan. Because there is no ideal way to teach foreign language in a meaningful culture-based context, the researcher invited a senior high school French language teacher to join this cooperative inquiry as a co-researcher. This study was designed to develop a better way for a contextualized language teaching in order to know what are the limitations and effects of the newly constructed teaching approach, to understand how the students think about their French learning experience, as well as to provide suggestions for future French language teaching.
After a year long study, a useful way in integrating French language and culture materials was developed. However, the original ideal for students to have deeper exploration of the French culture and language was not achieved. The constraints are as follows: first, there are technical problems in developing a contextualized foreign language learning environment, such as using appropriate cultural elements to guide students’ thinking; second, it’s difficult to choose the proper materials, in organizing instructional plan, no matter in French or culture subject; third, the French is not a required course, and the French teacher is not a full-time position, all these make the innovation harder; and fourth, the school does not provide enough administrative support for the teacher to create new way of teaching.
Based on this study, the researcher suggests that it is necessary to form a professional development group for gathering French teachers to discuss theories and to reflect on their teaching practice, and teaching of French should be culture-based with an integration of different subject matters. Finally, in cooperative inquiry process, there were different opinions between co-researchers and these made the reflective dialogical cooperation more difficult. But after a year long cooperation, the co-researchers have worked out a way to have better constructive discussions for the development of instructional plan as well as for the enactment of the research plan.

Keywords: cooperative action inquiry, the teaching of foreign language, the second foreign language, contextualization of language teaching

參考文獻
一、 中文部分
方淑如（譯）（2001）。Moreno. M. C.著。語言教師指南。台北：冠唐。
王宜燕、戴育賢（譯）（1994）。Wuthnow. R., Hunter. J D., Bergesen. A., & Kurzwel. D.（主編）。文化分析。台北：遠流。
成寒（譯）（1999）。流動的饗宴。台北：九歌。
余月妙（2002）。英語教學課中的文化認知。國立政治大學英國語文學研究所在職碩士班論文，未出版，台北。
李奉儒（2003）。P. Freire的批判教學論對於教師實踐教育改革的啟示。教育研究集刊，49（3），1-30。
林佩璇（2003）。空言無物、行之無悟？--課程行動研究中的實踐反省。教育研究集刊，49（3），195-219。
林玫君（2001）。通識課程中第二外語教學實務之探討。載於林水福（主編），通識課程中第二外語教材、教法研討會論文集（頁179-189）。台北：輔仁大學外語學院。
周慶華（1997）。語言文化學。台北：生智。
施玉惠（1979）。文化與外語教學的關係。載於湯廷池，曹逢甫，李櫻（主編），一九七九年亞太地區語言教學研討會論集（頁79-88）。台北：台灣學生。
唐雅敏（譯）（1998）。Turner, G.著。英國文化研究導論。台北：亞太。
夏林清（譯）（1997）。Altrichter, H., Posch, P., &Somekh, B.著。行動研究方法導論 : 教師動手做研究。台北：遠流。
夏林清（譯）（2000）。Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D.M.著。行動科學。台北：遠流。
莊嘉琳（2002）。國小英語教師對英美文化教學之意見調查研究。國立台北師範學院兒童英語教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
陳申（1998）。外語教育中的文化教學。北京：北京語言文化大學。
陳昇飛（2004）。社會建構主義在國小語文教學上的實踐與省思。第十屆課程與教學論壇研討會（頁229-240），2004年6月18-19日。未出版。
教育部（2004）。中華民國九十三年二月二十三日立法院教育及文化委員會第五屆第五會期報告教育部業務概況報告。2004年9月3日，取自 http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/E0001/EDUION001/menu01/sub04/930223.htm?search。
黃崑巖（2004）。語言與教養。聯合報。2004年9月28日，取自http://udn.com/NEWS/READING/X5/2263915.shtml.。
黃雪霞（2001）。第二外語教學之閱讀能力的訓練以輔大折學系之法語教學為例。載於林水福（主編），通識課程中第二外語教材、教法研討會論文集（頁191-198）。台北：輔仁大學外語學院。
裴文（譯）（2002）。Saussure, F.著。普通語言學教程。南京：江蘇教育。
甄曉蘭、曾志華（1997）。建構教學理念的興起與應用。國民教育研究學報，3，179-208。
甄曉蘭（1995）。合作行動研究—進行教育研究的另一種方式。嘉義師院學報，9，197-318
甄曉蘭（2003）。課程行動研究實例與方法解析—國小戲劇創作課程之教學轉化。台北：師大書苑。
齊若蘭（2004）。國際化教育，世界即校園。天下雜誌，2004年教育特刊，34-43。
蔡清田（2000）。教育行動研究。台北：五南。
蔡淑玲、楊淑娟、孟尼亞（編）（2004）。Vis--vis。台北：敦煌。
劉順一（2001）。通識教育第二外語課程中之法國文化議題。林水福主編。通識課程中第二外語教材、教法研討會論文集（頁231-241。）。台北：輔仁大學外語學院。
賴念華（2002）。災後心理重建歷程之合作行動研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理教育輔導研究所博士班論文，未出版，台北。
韓莉（譯）（1999）。Geertz, C.著。文化的解釋。南京：峰林。
鵬程千萬里—電影苦行者，用膠捲記錄生命。（2004）。2004年6月24日，取自http://forums.chinatimes.com.tw/showbiz/travellingbird/page1.html。
二、 英文部分
Ambert, A. N. & Melendez, S. E. (1985). Bilingual education. NY: Garland.
Akiyama, Y. (2003). An ethnographic study of students learning culture in a summer intensive Japanese course. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa University, Iowa.
Breen, M. P. (1985). The social context for language learning—a neglected situation? Studies in second language acquisition, 7(2), 135-158.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). NY: Longman.
Brooks, N. (1997). Teaching culture in the foreign language classroom. In P. R. Heusinkveld (Ed.), Pathways to culture (pp.3-10). Me: Intercultural press.
Cenoz, J. (2000). Research on multilingual acquisition. In J. Cenoz& U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: the acquisition of a third language. (pp.39-53). Buffalo: Multilingual Matters
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). Buffalo: Multilingual Matters
Chen, H. L. S.（1997）.Toward a re-constituted action inquiry for educational studies. Proceeding of the National Science Council, ROC, Part C: Humanities and Social Science, 7(2), 167-180.
Chastain, K. (1988). Developing second-language skills theory and practice( 3rd ed.). San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Damen, L (1987). Culture learning: the fifth dimension in the language classroom. Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Ellis, R (1997) .Second language acquisition. NY : Oxford university press.
Goodman, Y. M. & Goodman, K. S. (1990). Vygotsky in a whole-language perspective. In L.C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.223-250). NY: Cambridge University.
Gould. June S.(1996). A Constructivist Perspective on Teaching and Learning in the Language Arts. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory, Perspective, and Practice. (pp.92-102). NY: Teachers College.
Herdina, P. & Jessne, U. (2000). The dynamics of third language acquisition. In J. Cenoz& U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: the acquisition of a third language. Buffalo: Multilingual Matters
Humboldt, W. F. (1971). Linguistic variability & intellectual development. (Buck, G. C. & Raven, F. A., Trans.).Fla: University of Miami.
Howatt, A. P. R. (1985). A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford university.
Hinkel, E. (Ed.) (1999). Culture in second language teaching and learning. NY: Cambridge university press.
Heusinkveld, P. R. (1997). Pathways to culture. Me: Intercultural press.
Honebein, P. C. (1993).Constructivism and the design of learning environments: Context and authentic activities for learning. In T. M. Duffy et al. (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp.87-108). NY: Springer-Verlag.
Heron, J. & Reason, P. (2002). The practice of cooperative inquiry: research “with” rather than “on” people. In Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Ed.). Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice. (pp.179-188)Cal: Sage.
Kramsch, C. (1985). Classroom interaction and discourse options. Studies in second language acquisition, 7(2), 169-183.
Kramsch, C. (1987). Socialization and literacy in a foreign language: learning through interaction. From http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=
5200197&lang=zh-tw.( 2005/4/20).
Kramsch, C. (1991). Culture in language learning: a view from the United States. In K. De Boot et al. (Eds.) Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective. Utrecht: Benjamin.
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. HK: Oxford university.
Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. NY: Oxford.
Littlewood, W. (1984). Foreign and second language learning: Language acquisition research and its implications for the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University.
Melvin, B. S. & Stout, D. F. (1987). Motivating language learners through authentic materials. In Rivers, W. M. (Ed.). Interactive language teaching. (pp.44-56).NY: Cambridge university.
Met, M. & Galloway, V. (1992).Research in foreign language curriculum. In Jackson, P. W. (Ed.). Handbook of research on curriculum: a project of the American Educational Research Association(pp.852-890).NY: Maxwell Macmillan International.
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. Md: Arnold.
Omaggio, A. C. (1986). Teaching language in context-proficiency-oriented instruction. Mass : Heinle and Heinle.
Paige, M., Jorstad, H., Siaya, L., Klein, F., & Colby, J. (1999). Culture learning in language education: A review of the literature .Culture as the core: Integrating culture into the language curriculum. Retrieved June 10, 2003, from Minnesota University, Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition. From http://carla.acad.umn.edu/IS-litreview/intreview.html(2003/10/25).
Paulston, C. B. (Ed.) (1992). Sociolinguistic perspectives on bilingual education. Philadelphia : Multilingual Matters.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). NY: Cambridge university press.
Rey, A. (Ed.) (1998). Le Robert micro. Paris: Micro-Robert Poche.
Reason, P. (Ed.) (1988). Human inquiry in action: developments in new paradigm research. London: Sage.
Reason, P. (Ed.) (1994a). Inquiry and Alienation. Participation in human inquiry. (pp.9-15). London: Sage.
Reason, P. (Ed.) (1994b). Human inquiry as discipline and practice. Participation in human inquiry. (pp.40-56). London: Sage.
Sato K. & Cullen B.（2000）. Practical Techniques for Teaching Culture in the EFL Classroom. In The Internet TESL Journal, 6(2), December 2000. From http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Cullen-Culture.html.10/28,2003(2003/11/02).
Seelye, H. N. (1997a). The cultural mazeway: Six organizing goals..In P. R. Heusinkveld (Eds.). Pathways to culture (pp.97-107). Me: Intercultural press.
Seelye, H. N. (1997b). Teaching culture-strategies for intercultural communication. Ill: National Textbook.
Tang, R. (1999). The Place of "Culture" in the Foreign Language Classroom: A Reflection. The Internet TESL Journal, 5(8), August 1999. From http://iteslj.org/Articles/Tang-Culture.html(2003/11/02).
Wade, J. A. L. B. T. (2003). Searching for 'place' in the Japanese language classroom: Linguistic realizations of social identity in discourse and the acquisition of sociopragmatics. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Wolcott, H, F. (1995). The art of fieldwork. CA: AltaMira Press.
Zeichner, K. (2002). Educational action research.. In P. Reason& H. Bradbury (Eds.). Handbook of action research: participative inquiry and practice(pp.273-283). London: sage.