本研究目的在於將學習共同體的理念融入國中體育課，藉由行動研究方案的設計與實施，解決學生在課堂上「從學習中逃走」的問題，並發展出因應之方法及策略。本研究採行動研究法，針對研究者任教的七年級班級1班為研究參與班級，全班共27位學生 (男生14位、女生13位)，進行10節課 (450分鐘) 之籃球教學，教學過程全程錄影，並實施正式訪談及相關圖文等資料之蒐集。資料採持續比較法後，獲得以下結論：一、學生在體育學習共同體的學習情形：透過規則的限制，學生參與活動、傳接球的機會皆有所提升；單元教學目標「快攻」在最後的單元教學評量中，有出現但不多；在情意方面，學生缺乏個人的情緒管理、聆聽他人聲音、尊重他人及關懷他人的素養。二、體育課學習共同體中教師單元設計情形：透過比賽規則的修訂，增加學生在參與機會，並提升團隊向心力，藉以解決學習中逃走之問題；持續轉變教學型態，及教師教學信念，以學生的學習為中心，藉以改變學生學習的方式，創建學習共同體。三、師的省思與成長：改變學生的學習方式與教師的教與學的方式是困難的，但唯有改變了，學生才能真正達到學習，老師才能夠成為學習的專家。

The purpose of this study was to blend the ideas of learning community into physical
education classes. By designing and implementing an action research about learning
community, this study attempted to solve students’ problem of “escaping from classes,” and
to develop the coping teaching methods and strategies. Action research was utilized to be
the methodological approach. Participants (14 male and 13 female) came from one
seventh-grade class whose physical education teacher was the researcher himself. Ten
classes (each 45 minutes) was implemented and videotaped; and after that, data including
individual interviews and related archives was collected. Consistent comparison was used as
analysis method and concluded with following points: (1) students learning in learning
community: through the limitations of game rules, students’ opportunities of participating
into activities and passing/catching a ball were relatively promoted; the performance of fast
break which is the psychological purpose of our lessons showed in the last few units, but the
frequency of this performance was not regular; in the affective dimension, the literacy about
emotion management, listening others’ voices, and respecting and caring others was still
under-developing. (2) lessons designing in learning community: with the aim of solving
problem of “escaping from classes,” game rules were revised to eventually improve the
opportunities of students’ participations and the centripetal force of each groups; teacher
kept on changing his own teaching styles and faiths for constructing the learning
environment of learning community. (3) the development and reflection of
teacher/researcher: it was very difficult to change the styles of student’s learning and
teacher’s teaching and learning; but it’s also because of all the changes, real learning could
be achieved by students themselves and then teachers could become the real experts of
learning.

朱仲謀 (譯) (2004)。行動研究—原理與實作。臺北市：五南。 (McNiff, J., ＆ Whitehead, J., 2002)

周宏室、潘義祥 (2002)。運動教育學的課程理論。載於周宏室 (主編) ，運動教育學 (頁105-144) 。臺北市：師大書苑。

林國棟 (2009) 。學課研究 (lesson study) 之初探及其在我國小學實施的可能性探究。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，2 (1) ，43-60。

紐文英 (2012)。質性研究方法與論文寫作。臺北市：雙葉。

陳向明 (2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北市：五南。

陳淑敏 (1994)。Vygotsky的心理發展理論和教育。屏東師學院報，7，121-143。

許以平 (2012)。以學生學習為核心的另類教師專業發展取徑－日本之授業研究 (Lesson Study) 。新北市教育，2，11-15。

許芳菊 (2012)。學習，動起來.2，上海：思考、提問、表達的學習。臺北市：天下雜誌。

張世忠 (2000)。建構教學：理論與應用。臺北市：五南。

張春興 (1994)。教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北市：東華。

張瀞文 (2012)。日教育大師佐藤學分享對台灣的三個觀察。取自天下雜誌，親子天下網址http://www.parenting.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5043739&view=full&time=
1357656304324

教育部 (2012a) 。教育施政理念與政策。取自教育部，秘書室網址http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/EDU01/10109教育施政理念與政策.pdf

教育部 (2012b)。十二年國民基本教育－開啟孩子的無限可能。取自教育部，十二年國民基本教育主題網站網址http://12basic.edu.tw/

歐用生 (2012)。日本中小學「單元教學研究」分析。教育資料集刊，54，121-147。

黃郁倫 (2011)。激發學習的快樂與潛能－「學習共同體」在日本教育改革中的導入及實行。教師天地，171，39-42。

黃郁倫、鍾啟泉 (譯) (2012)。學習的革命：從教室出發的改革。臺北市：天下雜誌。 (佐藤學，2004)。

鍾啟泉 (譯) (2010)。學校的挑戰－創建學習共同體。上海市：華東師範大學 (佐藤學，2006)。

鍾啟泉 (譯) (2012)。教師的挑戰－寧靜的課堂革命。上海市：華東師範大學 (佐藤學，2003) 。

葉俊賢 (2010)。體育課實施合作學習(CL)教學策略之探討。臺大體育，50，61-69。

蔡美華 (譯) (2008)。教師研究者的指引。臺北市：學富。 (Mills, G. E., 2007).

甄曉蘭 (2003)。課程行動研究：實例與方法解析。臺北市：師苑。

甄曉蘭、曾志華 (2002) 。建構教學理念的興起與應用。載於詹志禹 (主編) ，建構論：理論基礎與教育應用 (頁116-146) 。臺北縣：正中。

簡紅珠 (2007)。教師專業發展與教學改善：借鏡日本小學教師的學課研究。教育研究月刊，158，130-140。

Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical Education, 18 (1) , 7-10.

Butler, J. I., & McCahan, B. J. (2005). Teaching games for understanding as a curriculum model. In L. L. Griffin, & J. I. Butler (Eds.), Teaching games for understanding: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 33-54). Windsor: Human Kinetics.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1983). Becoming critical: Knowing through action research. Australia: Deakin University.

Confrey, J. (1995). How compatible are radical constructivism, sociocultural approaches, and social constructivism? In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in Education (pp.185-225). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson study: A Japanese approach to improving mathematics teaching and learning. Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hastie, P. A. (1996). Student role involvement during a unit of sport education. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 16, 88-103.

Jewett, A. E., Bain, L. L., & Ennis, C. D., (1995). The curriculum Process in physical education (2th ed.). Dubuque, IA: WCB Brown & Benchmark.

Lenski, S. J., & Caskey, M. M. (2009). Using the lesson study approach to plan for student learning. Middle School Journal, 40 (3), 50-57.

OECD (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What students know and can do: Student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Volume I). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdf

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: SAGE.

Tuska, A. (2006). Lesson Study: A Student-centered Professional Development Opportunity for Teachers. Thinking Classroom, 7(1), 26-29.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.