我國於2014年公布十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱，並陸續完成各領域課綱。新課綱重新界定基本教育的範疇，拓展由國民小學、國民中學組成之九年義務教育，連結後期中等教育階段。透過各面向的政策修辭整併各學習階段與不同學校類型（普通型、技術型、綜合型、單科型高級中等學校），重塑連結不同學習場域之間的關係與認同而呈現國家人才培育的實作。
本研究將以一所普通型高級中等學校之課程計畫書形成歷程作為研究焦點，以行動者網絡理論為觀點，描繪該所個案學校在形成課程計畫書的過程中，所捲納的各方行動者，以及所觸發的組織性與課程性的網絡聚組，呈現出個案學校在準備新課綱的過程中所展現的個體與集體能動性，重塑學校實踐的樣貌。本研究透過文件分析搭配半結構式訪談，藉以描繪以學校為單位的課綱推動歷程與實作，提供大眾理解學校內部的運作邏輯，以及提供政策規劃者做為後續課綱推動工作之參考。

In 2014, Ministry of Education published the 12-Year Basic Education Curricula. The curricula guideline redefines the boundary of basic education, it integrates the 9-year compulsory education and post-secondary education with multiple policy rhetoric and instruments. Moreover, the upcoming curricula guideline tries to bridge the connection within educational stage, and also establishes shared fundamental curricula among the diverse types of schools of post-secondary in Taiwan. Meanwhile, it may reshape the relationship between the different learning fields, and perform another image of practice of national scale cultivation. Among the rhetoric, the ‘school-based curriculum’ keeps playing a key role from the last curriculum reform, the Grade 1-9 Curriculum Guidelines, till 12-Year Basic Education.
This research addresses the process of translation 12-Year Basic Education Curricula in a senior high school. It aims to map out the process and the deployment with Actor-Network Theory perspective. With document and semi structured interview, the case school performs institutional and curriculum assemblage by amount of heterogeneity of actants. Through the process of translation, the case school performs itself agency and forms its school-based discourse and educational practice.

王志弘（2016）。傅柯Heterotopia翻譯考，地理研究，65，75-105。
方德隆（2001）。學校本位課程發展的理論基礎，課程與教學，4（2），1-24。
行政院教育改革審議委員會（1996）。教育改革總諮議報告書。臺北市：行政院。
吳俊憲、黃政傑（2010）。中小學課程政策改革之研究：九年一貫課程的回顧與前瞻。課程研究，5（2），47-62。
吳嘉苓、陳嘉新、黃于玲、謝新誼、蕭昭君譯（2018）。照護的邏輯：比賦予病患選擇更重要的事（The Logic of Care: Active patients and the limits of choice）。（Mol, A.著）台北市：左岸文化。
吳壁純、詹志禹（2018）。從能力本位到素養導向教育的演進、發展及反思。教育研究與發展期刊，14（2）。，35-64。
林文源（2007）。論行動者網絡理論的行動本體論，科技、醫療與社會，4，65-108。
林文源（2014）。看不見的行動者能力：從行動者網絡理論到位移理論。臺北市，中央研究院社會學研究所。
柯朝欽、鄭祖邦、陳巨擘（譯）（2004）。社會學理論（Sociological Theory）（Ritzer, G.著）。臺北市，巨流。
洪仁進（2010）。反思十二年國民基本教育背景、名稱與文本之探究。台灣教育，662，10-17。
張君玫（譯）（2010）。猿猴、賽伯格和女人：重新發明自然（Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature）（Haraway, D. J.著）。臺北市：群學。
張舒涵（2016）。以行動者網絡理論探討國小教師在數位閱讀寫作推動初期的困境（未出版碩士論文）。國立中央大學學習科學研究所：桃園市。
教育部（2008a）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要（修訂版）。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2008b）。普通高級中學課程綱要總綱。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2009）。職業學校群科課程綱要暨設備基準─一般科目。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2010）。綜合高級中學課程綱要總綱。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2011a）。「高中教育政策白皮書」工作計畫專案結案報告。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2011b）。十二年國民基本教育實施計畫（核定版）。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：總綱。臺北市：教育部。
教育部（2017）。美感練習誌，2，臺北市：教育部。
許殷宏（1998）。紀登斯（A. Giddens）「結構化理論」對教育社會學研究的啓示。教育研究集刊，40（1），93-112。
陳伯璋（2005）。從課程改革省思課程研究典範的新取向。當代教育研究，13（1），頁1-34。
陳伯璋、盧美貴（2002）。學校本位課程發展的理念與實踐。載於陳伯璋、許添明（主編），學校本位經營的理念與實務，頁167-189。
陳宗文（2016）。B. Latour著。導讀：布魯諾‧拉圖的巴斯德。載於伍啟鴻、陳榮泰（譯）。巴斯德的實驗室：細菌的戰爭與和平（Pasteur: guerre et paix des microbes）。臺北市，群學。
曾凡慈（2018）。兒童過動症與專業技能的轉變。載於林文源、林宗德、楊谷洋（主編）科技社會人3：STS跨領域新驛路。新竹市，國立交通大學出版社。
劉益誠譯（2003）。廿一世紀的都市社會學（M. Castells 著）。城市與設計學報，13，頁1-20。
謝卓君（2017）。從政策工具選擇省思臺灣高等教育治理，教育研究集刊，63（3），頁41-75。
鍾宜興（2018）。素養導向課程設計理念與實務之分析：論課程綱要發展之變與不變。中等教育，69（2），8-20。
Alcapdipani, R. & Hassard, J. (2010). Actor-Network Theory, organizations and critique: toward a politics of organizing. Organization, 17(4), pp. 419-435.
Belikian, L. (2017). Rhetorical agency: mind, meshwork, materiality, mobility. Earth, milkyway: Punctum.
Brown, S. D. & Capdevila, R. (2005). Perpetuum mobile. In J. Law& J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor-Network Theory and after (pp.26-50) (3rd edition). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law, Power, action and belief: a new sociology of knowledge? (Pp.196-223) London, UK: Routledge.
Castills, M. (2000). Materials for an exploratory theory of the network society. British Journal of Sociology, 51(1). 5-24.
Dwiartama, A. & Rosin, C. (2014). Exploring agency beyond human the compatibility of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and resilience thinking. Ecology and Society, 19(3).
Eccleston, R. (2011). The OECD and global economic governance. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 65(2).
Edwards, R. & Usher, R. (2003). Putting space back on the map of learning. In Edwards, R. & Usher, R (Eds.), Space Curriculum, and Learning (pp.1-11). Greenwich, MA: Information Age Publish.
Eyal, G. (2013). For a sociology of expertise: the sociology origins of the Autism epidemic. American Journal of sociology, 118(4), 836-907.
Fenwick, T. and Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-Network Theory in Education. New York, NY: Routledge.
Fenwick, T. (2010). (un)Doing standards in education with actor‐network theory. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2). 117-133.
Fenwick, T. and Edwards, R. (2011). Researching Education through Actor-Network Theory, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Fenwick, T. and Edwards, R. (2014). Networks of knowledge, matters of learning, and criticality in higher education. Higher Education, 67(1). 35-50.
Foucault, M. (1980). The Confession of the Flesh. In Colin Gordon (Eds.), Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: outline of Theory of Structuration. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Gorur, R., Hamilton, M., Lundahl, C. & Sjödin, E. S. (2019). Politics by other means? STS and research in education, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1). 1-15.
Kockelman, P. (2007). Agency: The relation between meaning, power, and knowledge. Current Anthropology, 48(3). 375-401
Knochel, A. D. (2016). Photoshop Teaches With(out) You: Actant Agencies and Non-Human Pedagogy. Visual Arts Research, 42(1). 71-87.
Koyama, J. & Varenne, H. (2012). Assembling and Dissembling: Policy as Productive Play. Educational Researcher, 41(5). 157-162.
Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory. A few clarifications plus more than a few complications. Soziale Welt, 47. 369-381.
Latour, B. (1999). On recalling ANT. The Sociology Review, 47(1). 15-25.
Latour, B. (2007). Reassembling the Social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. New York, NY: Oxford.
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the Theory of the Actor Network: Ordering strategy and heterogeneity. Retrieved from: http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/resources/sociology-online-papers/papers/law-notes-on-ant.pdf
Law, J. (2005). After ANT: complexity, naming and topology. In J. Law& J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor-Network Theory and after (3rd edition). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell.
Law, J. & Mol, A. (1995). Notes on materiality and sociality, The Sociological Review, 43. 274-294. Retrieved from http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/LawMol1995MaterialityAndSociality.pdf
Moberg, E. (2018). Exploring the relational efforts making up a curriculum concept—an Actor-network theory analysis of the curriculum concept of children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(1). Pp.113-125.
Mol, A. (2016). Actor-Network Theory: sensitive terms and enduring tensions. In Chris Rojek (Eds.), Actor-Network Theory research. UK: SAGE.
Nespor, J. (2012) Device and educational change. In Fenwick, T. & Edwards, R. (Eds.), Researching Education through Actor-Network Theory. UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Paechter, C. (2003). Territoriality, inter-disciplinary, and school space. In Edwards, R. & Usher, R. (Eds.), Space Curriculum, and Learning. Greenwich, MA: Information Age Publish, 29-43.
Perillo, S. J. (2008). Fashioning leadership in schools: an ANT account of leadership as networked practice. School Leadership& Management, 28(2). 189-203.
Resnik, J. (2016). The development of the International Baccalaureate in Spanish speaking countries: a global comparative approach. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 14(2). 298-325.
Sayes, E. (2013). Actor-Network Theory and methodology: Just what does it mean to say that nonhumans have agency? Social Study of Science, Advance online publication.doi:10.1177/0306312713511867
Sellar, S. & Lingard, B. (2013). PISA and the Expanding Role of the OECD in (Meyer, H. & Benavot, A. Eds.), Global Educational Governance. PISA, Power, and Policy: the emergence of global educational governance. UK, Symposium Books.
Star, S. L. & Griesener, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology. “Translations” and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies and Science, 19(3), 387-420.
Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human values, 35(5), 601-617.