本研究旨在探討十二年國民基本教育課程改革中，高中公民與社會科專家教師之公共議題與社會探究課程實踐情形，借鑑其教學經驗，討論該課程在臺灣教學現場的可行實踐方式。

本研究之資料蒐集分為兩個階段：第一階段以半結構式訪談蒐集四位教師的課程實踐歷程，及兩位教師的公民學科中心課程推動經驗；第二階段以個案研究法蒐集個案教師教學資料，結合觀察法、訪談法及文件分析等方式描繪個案教師的課程實踐。整理分析資料後，歸納成「公共議題與社會探究課程設計及設計考量」、「課程實踐的挑戰與克服」與「課程實踐與社會領域綱要的關聯與落差」等三大主題，並獲致以下結論：

一、學習者中心之公共議題與社會探究課程設計與實施要點
（一）協助學生找到具「公共」性質、範圍適切、明確且關鍵的主題與問題，從而「發現與界定問題」。
（二）引導學生選定實作取徑與探究方法，提示可能衍生的挑戰，以利「觀察與蒐集資料」。
（三）教導資料統整分析要點，觀察並適當介入小組合作，以利「分析與詮釋資料」。
（四）有意識地引導學生完成階段性反思，期末加以統整，促進「總結與反思」。
（五）關注學生自主程度、合作情形並實施多元評量，貫串整體探究歷程。
二、學生課堂表現、課堂任務成果與課堂回饋表單促進專家教師反思與精進課程。
三、學校課程決策影響課程設計彈性，教師與行政間的溝通影響探究主題可行性。
四、教師共備社群與校外研習等教師支持系統，提供共學機會。
五、專家教師擅於規劃課程、解決問題、反思與充實精進，社會領域課程綱要提供高度彈性，有效縮小課程實踐與課程綱要落差。

最後，本研究針對現場教師的課程設計與實施、學校行政端可提供之支持、在職精進及師資培育課程規劃、社會領域課程綱要的未來展望等面向提出建議。

This study aims to explore the curriculum design and teaching practice of Public Issues and Social Inquiry of Civics and Society in high schools under the 12-year compulsory education curriculum reform. It is expected to provide suggestions for feasible practice of the inquiry-based curriculum for high schools.

A total of five Civics and Society expert teachers participated in this study. The data collection was divided into two stages. In the first stage, semi-structured interviews were used to collect the data from four school teachers and two teachers from Civics and Society Resource Center in order to investigate the overall picture of the curriculum implementation. In the second stage, case study method, including field observation, interview, and document analysis, was applied to gain a deeper understanding of their curriculum implementation. 

After data analysis, the research results were summarized into three themes: “Curriculum Design of Public Issues and Social Inquiry Curriculum”, “Challenges and Solutions of Teaching Practice”, and “Gaps between Curriculum and Teaching Practice and Social Studies Curriculum Guidelines” .

The following conclusions were drawn:
1.Features of designing and implementing learner-centered Public Issues and Social Inquiry courses
(1)At the stage of “Discovery and Definition of Problems”, teachers assisted students in finding appropriate, clear and critical issues related to the public.
(2)At the stage of “Observation and Data Collection”, teachers guided students in selecting pathways and methods of inquiry, and suggest possible challenges.
(3)At the stage of “Analysis and Data Interpretation”, teachers taught methods of data integration and analysis, and provided guidance to the group if necessary.
(4)At the stage of “Summarization and Reflection”, teachers guided students to make reflections at the end of each stage and at the end of the semester.
(5)Teachers focused on students’ autonomy and cooperation when implementing multiple assessments throughout the whole process.
2.Students’ behavior in class, learning outcomes, and student feedback all contributed to the expert teacher’s reflection and curriculum transformation.
3.Curriculum decision-making at school level influenced the flexibility of individual teachers’ course design. The communication between teachers and school administration affected the feasibility of conducting inquiry on certain issues.
4.Teacher support systems, such as professional learning communities and workshops, provided opportunities for collaboration among teachers.
5.Expert teachers were skilled in curriculum planning, problem solving, reflection, and professional development；Social Studies Curriculum Guidelines provide a high degree of flexibility. As a result, the gap between field teachers’ curriculum practice and the curriculum guideline was effectively narrowed.

Finally, this study provides suggestions on curriculum design and implementation for teachers, support for school administration, planning for teacher education programs, and the future outlook of the Social Studies Curriculum Guidelines.

中文部分
教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要。https://www.naer.edu.tw/upl
oad/1/16/doc/288/十二年國教課程綱要總綱.pdf
教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育社會領域課程綱要。https://www.k12ea.
gov.tw/files/class_schema/課綱/16-社會/16-1/十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校─社會領域.pdf
教育部（2019）。社會領域探究與實作課程計畫審查情況暨填報樣態說明。https://courweb142.tchcvs.tc.edu.tw/courseH/download/社會探究審查情況暨填報樣態說明-1080221.pdf
卯靜儒（主編）（2020）。喚醒你的設計魂：素養導向專題探究課程設計指
南。高等教育。
王韻玲（2021年3月25日）。【探究與實作．觀念篇】明年學測納入自然科考題，沒有固定課本該怎麼考？親子天下。https://flipedu.parenting.com.tw/article/64
全國高級中等學校小論文寫作比賽格式說明暨評審要點（民國109年5月26日）。
李淑慧（2000）。探究教學法。教育大辭書。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/
1309716/
何玲、黎加厚（2005）。促進學生深度學習。現代教學，5，29-30。
何昭青，徐艷輝（2015）。大學生深度學習培養研究。湖南第一師範學院學報，15（6），41-44。
施良方（1997）。課程理論——課程的基礎、原理與問題。教育科學出版社。
郭玉霞（2000）。歸納思考模式。教育大辭書。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/
1315089/
洪振方（2003）。探究式教學的歷史回顧與創造性探究模式之初探。高雄師大學報，15（3），641-662。
莊德仁（2020）。概念為本的探究教學：由Bruner到Taba的觀點。教育研究月刊，310，36-47。
陳麗華（2019）。社會學習領域課程標準的想像及啟示—評介《美國社會領域課程標準》及《C3美國社會領域州課程標準架構》。教育研究集刊，65（2），117-135。
陳美華、陳信憲、龔建吉（2009）。大學生學習取向與教學環境設計關聯性評估—以合作學習教學法為例。課程與教學，12（4），141-168。
陳麗華、李涵鈺、洪詠善、歐用生、佐藤學、黃郁倫 （2018）。中小學教材教法的現況觀察與改革契機—素養導向觀點。教科書研究，11（2），109-145。
張茂桂（2021）。公民與社會科「探究與實作—公共議題與社會探究」原理原
則，包括參考建議〔工作坊〕。探究與實作工作坊，公民與社會學科中心，臺南市，臺灣。
張茂桂、楊秀菁（2018）。十二年國教「社會領綱」的探究學習及「探究與實作」課程的特色。國教課綱向前行電子報。https://newsletter.edu.tw/2018/12/10/
十二年國教「社會領綱」的探究學習及「探究與實/
楊博安（2021）。普通型高中「探究與實作：公共議題與社會探究」課程實踐之行動研究〔未出版碩士論文〕。國立清華大學教育與學習科技學系。
彭耀平、陳榮政、何希慧（2018）。大學生學習模式與學習成效間關聯之研究：深度取向學習投入為中介變項。課程與教學，21（1），133-157。
黃嘉雄（2000）。運作課程。教育大辭書。http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1312665/
游淑燕（2000）。正式課程。教育大辭書。http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1304011/
楊國揚、張茂桂、張懿婷、陳亭潔、黃春木、楊秀菁（2018）。十二年國民基本教育社會領域課程綱要發展。教科書研究，11（1），101-124。
蔡旺慶（2015）。探究式教學的理論、實踐與案例。南京大學出版社。
蔡清田（2008）。課程學。五南。
鄭博真（2016）。技職大專生學習取向及其相關因素之研究。教育研究與發展期刊，12（4），57-86。
鄭蕙如、林世華（2004）。Bloom認知領域教育目標分類修訂版理論與實務之探討─以九年一貫課程數學領域分段能力指標為例。台東大學教育學報，15（2），247-274。
顏弘志（2004）。從建構主義看教學。科學教育研究與發展季刊，36，1-14。
蘇苑瑜（2012）。高中性別運作課程與經驗課程之性別差異分析〔未出版碩士
論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系。
Boaler, J.（2021）。大腦解鎖：史丹佛頂尖學者裘．波勒以最新腦科學推動學習革命〔廖月娟譯〕。天下文化。（原著出版年：2019）
Dewey, J.（1995）。經驗與教育〔姜文閩譯〕。五南。（原著出版年：1986）
Jonassen, D. H.（2002）。學習環境的理論基礎〔鄭太年、任友群譯〕。華東師範大學出版社。（原著出版年：2000）
Lieberman,M.D.（2018）。社交天性：人類如何稱為與生俱來的讀心者？〔林奕伶譯〕。大牌出版。（原著出版年：2014）
Slavin, R. E.（2013）。教育心理學：理論與實際〔張文哲譯〕。學富文化。（原著出版年：1986）

英文部分
Belland, B. R. (2017). Instructional scaffolding in STEM education. Springer.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. McGraw-Hill Education. 
Bruce, B. C. (2008). The inquiry cycle. Retrieved April 8, 2021, from https://chipbruce.net/resources/inquiry-based-learning/the-inquiry-cycle/
Bruce, B. C. & Bishop, A.P. (2002). Using the web to support inquiry-based literacy development. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,45(8),706.
Biggs, J.B., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133-149. 
Biggs, J. B. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-19. 
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar,
A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning：Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychology, 26(3&4), 369-398.
Bruner, J. S.(1966).The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21-32.
Crawford, B.A. (2000) . Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of research in science teaching, 37(9), 631-645.
Callahan, J.F. & Clark, L.H. (1982). Teaching in the middle and secondary schools. Macmillian.
Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. Holt.
Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. Croom Helm.
Goodlad, J. I. (1979). Curriculum inquiry: The study of curriculum practice. McGraw-Hill.
Goodlad , J. I. (1985). Curriculum as a field of study. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (pp. 141-1144). Pergamon.
Harmon, L (2006). The effects of an inquiry-based American history program on the achievement of middle school and high school students [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University Of North Texas.
Hung, C. Y. (2015). The revival of the process model in curriculum design changes and challenges in the new Taiwanese citizenship curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2021.1957157
Jonassen, D. H. (2010). Designing for problem solving. In R. A., Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology （3rd ed.） (pp.64-74). Pearson.
Karplus, R., & Their, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Rand McNally.
Klein, M. F., Tye, K. A., & Wright, J. E. (1979). A study of schooling: Curriculum. Dhi
Delta Kappan, 61(4), 244-247.

Kuhlthau, C. C., Maniotes, L.K., & Caspari, A.K. (2007). Guided inquiry: Learning in the 21st century. Computer Science.
Larmer, J., Mergendoller, J. & Boss,S. (2015).Setting the standard for project based learning. ASCD.
Laird, T. F. N., Shoup, R., Kuh, G. D., & Schwarz, M. J. (2008). The effects of discipline on deep approaches to student learning and college outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 49(6), 469-494. 
Lumen Learning (n.d.). Inquiry-based learning. Retrieved March 18, 2021, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/educationx92x1/chapter/inquiry-based-learning/
Murray, K.C. (1978). Developing concepts and generalizations in the secondary social
studies programs. The Clearing House,52(2),80-84.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I-outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology,46(1),4-11.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1984) . Approaches to learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 39-58). Scottish Academic Press. 
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. Routledge.
Wanda, J. M. (2017). Using inquiry-based instructional strategies to increase student achievement in 3rd grade social studies [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Brenau University.
Suchman, J. R. (1962). The elementary school training program in scientific inquiry. University of Illinois, Chicago.
Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab, & P. F. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 1-103). Simon and Schuster.
Schwab, J. J. (1971). The practical: arts of eclectic. The School Review,79(4) ,493-542 .
Schon, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books.
Taba, H. (1962). Curriculum development: Theory and practice. Harcourt, Brace and World. 
Taba, H. & Freeman, E. (1964). Teaching strategies and thought processes. Teacher’s College Record, 65, 25-49. 
Vygotsky, L.S.(1978). Mind in society : The development of higher psychological process. Harvard University Press.
Wells, G. (1995). Language and the inquiry-oriented curriculum. Curriculum inquiry, 25(3), 233-269.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of 
education. Cambridge University Press.