摘 要
本研究旨在探討國中體育教師之實務知識，以一位年資十年的國中女性體育教師為研究參與者，以其籃球與游泳課程的教學實務，分析實務知識的內涵與結構；從教學相關的生活經驗中，尋找實務知識的來源及影響因素；並以上述資料分析特質。本研究為質性取向個案研究，藉觀察、訪談、文件蒐集等方法，進行為期八個月的資料收集，研究結果發現如下：
一、個案體育教師實務知識的內涵
個案體育教師的實務知識主要可分為：自我、教學、班級經營、學生等四方面，其中各自包括不同的內涵，其主要內容如下：
自我方面：其意象為「演員」，內涵包括「自我的要求」與「教學反省」兩部分。以「充實自我、建立教師形象」為主要原則。
教學方面：其意象為「魔術師」，主要包括課程安排、認知引導、技能學習、情意養成與評量等方面。原則之特色為：注重參與、實作學習、同儕學習與轉化教材。其內涵因課程脈絡（運動項目、活動環境）的不同而有所變化。
班級經營方面：其意象為「政治家」，主要包含活動前的安排與活動中的管理等內容，其內涵亦隨課程脈絡而變化。班級經營之主要目的為「維持課程的進行」，管理尺度則會因為學生的特性有所調整。
學生方面：其意象為「朋友」，包含與學生相處及瞭解學生的方法，以「關心學生」及「融入學生」為主要原則。
二、個案體育教師實務知識的結構
除以意象、原則、規則等層次呈現外，各實務知識的類別存在著相互為用、彼此影響的關係，其中「自我方面」的影響最廣。
三、個案體育教師實務知識的來源與影響因素
可分為：當前的教學情境（學校活動的參與、實習生的刺激、同事相處、行政資源、教學環境影響、學生的改變）與個人因素（生活經驗與個人特質、師資培育訓練、教學反省、參與進修）共兩大來源。
四、個案體育教師實務知識的特質
為「個人色彩的」、「實踐的」、「實用的」、「經驗的」、「反省的」、「情境依賴的」、「相互為用的」、「隱藏在行動中」等八項特質。

Abstract
This study aimed at the practical knowledge of physical education teacher in junior high school. The participant was a ten-year-experienced female junior high school physical education teacher. This case study, through the basketball and swimming curriculum of her, was in analysis of connotations and structures of practical knowledge. From the teaching related life experience were sources and influence factors of practical knowledge searched. Further analysis was conducted to yield the characteristics of knowledge. Qualitative approach technique, observation, interview and document were used for data collection for eight months from November, 2003 to June, 2004. It was found that:
(1) The connotations of practical knowledge: The practical knowledge of the PE teacher is mainly divided into four aspects: self, teaching, class management and students.
The self image was “actress”, which contains “self requisition” and “reflection”, based on the predominant principle of “self improvement and teacher image building”.
The image “teaching” was “magician”, which contains curriculum arrangement, cognition guild, skills learning, affective cultivation and assessment, under the principle of emphasis on participation, learning by doing, peer learning and material transforming. The connotation varied with different curriculum contexts, such as sport events, activity environment, etc.
The image “class management” was “politician”, which contains primacy arrangement and impact management. The connotation varied with curriculum contexts. The main goal of class management was “keep class going”. The standard of management was different from the characteristic of students.
The image “students” was “friend”, which contains the manners in getting along with students and in understanding them, rested upon the principles of “caring about students” and “integrating with students”.
(2) The structures of practical knowledge:
Each category of practical knowledge, which was presented by way of images, principles and rules, had also reciprocal demand and interaction, especially intensive in “Self” dimension.
(3) The sources and influence factors of practical knowledge:
They were divided into prevalent teaching contexts: participation in school activities, inspiration from trainee teachers, interaction between colleagues, administrative resource, influence under the teaching environment, changes of students and individual factors: life experiences, individual characteristics, training of teachers, self-criticism in teaching, and the pursuit of further education).
(4) The characteristics of practical knowledge:
“individual”, “practical”, “useful”, “reflective”, “contexts-depended”, “reciprocal demand”, and “concealed in action” were eight characteristics derived..

中文部分
王文科（1994）。質的教育研究法。台北：師大書苑。
王博成（2002）。國小教師生活課程實際知識之研究。未出版碩士論
文，國立台北師範學院，台北市。
王雪萍（2003）。一位資深國小語文科教師教學實際知識之個案研究。
未出版碩士論文，屏東師範學院，屏東。
阮凱利（2002）。理論與實踐的辯證---國小教師實踐知識之敘說性研
究。未出版碩士論文，國立台北師範學院，台北市。
李明潔（2001）。體育實習教師對「有效體育教學」知識結構變化之研
究。未出版碩士論文，國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
李奉儒、高淑清、鄭瑞隆、林麗菊、吳芝儀、洪志成、蔡清田等譯
（2001）。質性教育研究：理論與方法。嘉義：濤石。
林靜萍（2002）。體育師資生學科教學知識之研究。未出版博士論文，
國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
林生傳（2003）。教育研究法—全方位的統整與分析。台北：心理。
吳芝儀、廖梅花譯（2001）。質性研究入門：紮根理論研究方法。
嘉義：濤石。
郭玉霞（1997）。教師的實務知識。高雄：復文。
郭玉霞（1997）。教師實務知識與學習教學。國立台中師範學院國民教
育研究所國民教育研究集刊，5，39-59。
陳克宗（1999）。體育教學研究與實務—運動技能學習與體適能促進。
高雄：復文。
陳惠邦（1998）。行動研究。台北：師大書苑。
陳美玉（1999）。教師專業學習與發展。台北：師大書苑。
陳向明（2001）。教師如何做質的研究。台北市：洪葉文化。
陳向明（2001）。社會科學質的研究。台北市：五南。
陳國泰（2000）。國小初任教師實際知識的發展之研究。未出版博士論
文，國立高雄師範大學，高雄。
陳麗穎（2002）。特殊教育實習教師實務知識之研究。未出版碩士論
文，國立台北師範學院，台北市。
湯銘新、簡世豪、韓念錦、江正輝、楊永華等譯（1994）國際籃球規則
中文版。台北市，中華民國籃球協會。
賴秀芬（2003）。國中英語專家教師實務知識之探究。未出版碩士論
文，國立中正大學，嘉義。
蕭秋祺（1997）。有效體育教學因素之分析。未出版碩士論文，國立台
灣師範大學，台北市。
羅明華（1995）。國民小學初任教師實務知識的發展及其影響因素之個案研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台中師範學院，台中。
英文部分
Carter, K. (1990). Teacher’s knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston, M, Haberman, & J. P. Sikula (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching Education (pp.291-310). New York: MacMillan.
Clandinin, D.J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge: A study of teachers’classroom images. Curriculum Inquiry, 15(4), 361-385
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (1986). Rhythms in teaching: The narrative study of teachers’ personal practical knowledge of classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 2(4), 377-387.
Clandinin, D.J., & Connelly, F.M. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: narratives of experience. New York: Teachers College Press.
Elbaz, F. (1981). The teacher’s “practical knowledge”: Report of a case study. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 43-71.
Elbaz, F. (1991). Research on teacher’s knowledge: The evolution of a discourse. Journal of Curriculum studies, 23(1), 1-19
Grumet, M.R. (1987). The politics of personal knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry,17(3), 319-329
Garrahy, D., Cothran, D., & Kulinna, P. H. (2002, April). Teachers' Perspectives on Classroom Management in Elementary Physical Education. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Grossman, P. L. & Richert, A. E. (1988). Unacknowledged knowledge growth: A re-examination of the effects of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1), 53-62.
Johnson, M. (1989). Embodied knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(4), 361-377.
Kelley, E. J., & Lindsay, C. A. (1980). A comparison of knowledge obsolescence of graduating seniors and practitioners in the field of physical education. Research Quarterly, 51(4), 636-44.
Meijer, P. C., Zanting, A., & Verloop, N. (2002). How can student teacher elicit experienced teacher’s practical knowledge. Journal of teaching education, 53(5), 406-419
Rosehler, L. R., Duffy, G. G., Herrmann, B. A., Conley, M., & Johnson, J. (1988). Knowledge structures as evidence of the “Personal”: bridging the gap from thought to practice. Journal of Curriculum studies, 20(2), 159-165.
Rosenberg, D.Z. (1989). Learning To Teach: An Examination of Non-Formally Trained Physical Education Teachers. (SP031463).
Shulman, L.S.(1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Tamir, P. (1988). Subject matter and related pedagogical knowledge in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(2), 99-109.
Wolcott H. F. (1998). 質性研究寫作（顧瑜君）。台北市：五南。（原著於1990出版）
Yin, R. K. (2001). 個案研究(尚榮安)。台北市：弘智文化。
（原著於1994出版）