過去科學教育的覺察研究多以教師覺察為主，而課程覺察之研究則以心理輔導居多，很少研究探索有關於科學教育之課程覺察，因此本研究希望從食農教育之教學方案來探討教師的課程覺察歷程。
本研究目的為探討十八位不同專業背景（數理與非數理）的國小中高年級教師針對食農教育之課程覺察。課程覺察（curricular noticing）可分為三個歷程：注意、詮釋、回應，教師注意到教學方案的什麼活動或任務，如何詮釋這個活動或任務，以及這個活動或任務可以被實施或是應該如何改編與操作。希望透過教師的課程覺察之分析，可以理解不同背景教師對於課程或教學方案的覺察，以利未來在職教師能有更多的課程覺察過程的參考。本研究方法以質性研究進行資料蒐集與分析，研究者提供兩份教案與比較表格，請訪談教師進行閱讀與筆記，然後進行晤談。透過錄音與錄影的方式進行資料蒐集，形成編碼架構後，再將訪談內容進行編碼、分析。
本研究發現參與的國小中高年級食農教育教師，在課程覺察的三個歷程中，皆較聚焦於詮釋教學目標與詮釋活動內容類別，而其中非數理背景之教師比數理背景教師有較多的詮釋，思考的內容也較多元化。

Previous noticing studies have mostly focused on teacher noticing, while little research was conducted on curricular noticing in science education. Therefore, this study explored teachers' curricular noticing process from the lesson plans of food and agriculture education. The purpose of this study was to investigate the curricular noticing of eighteen upper elementary school teachers with different professional backgrounds (STEM and non-STEM) regarding agri-food education. Curriculum noticing can be divided into three processes: attention, interpretation, and responding. The processes involve what activities or tasks in the curricula materials are noticed by teachers, how teachers interpret these noticed activities or tasks, and how teachers revise, adopt, or implement these activities or tasks. This study used qualitative research methods for data collection and analysis. The participating teachers were given two lesson plans and comparison tables and interviewed. Data were collected through audio and video recordings. A coding scheme was developed to analyze the interview transcripts. This study found that the participating teachers of agri-food education focused more on interpreting teaching objectives of the lesson plans and engaged more in interpreting the noticed activities and tasks. Compared to teachers with STEM backgrounds, teachers with non-STEM backgrounds were more likely to generate interpretations and demonstrated more diverse ideas and thoughts.

中文文獻
方珍玲、古昌平（2020）。臺灣食農教育推動模式之分析。農業推廣文彙，65，29－44。
朱佳惠（2018）。淺論「食農教育」融入「十二年國教」課程之定位。臺灣教育評論月刊，7(10)，126－129。
吳心楷、辛靜婷（2011）。數位學習研究中質性資料的管理與分析: 以 NVivo 軟體的使用為例。收錄於宋曜廷（編著），數位學習研究方法（頁163-208）。高等教育。
林勇吉. (2017). 真的只有教師知識和信念嗎？數學教師覺察力：從另一個觀點來看 待教師的專業能力. 科學教育月刊，402，2－15。
邱士倢（2020）。食農教育融入小學教育階段教學方案之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立臺灣師範大學環境教育研究所。
胡幼慧（1996）。質性研究：理論，方法及本土女性研究實例。巨流圖書公司。
食農教育法（2022）。全國法規資料庫。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=M0090039
徐紹恒、曾宇良（2018）。食農教育融入國小正式課程教案之研究。農業推廣文彙，63，43－60。
徐嘉偉、張志維、王義善、林素華（2019）。十二年國教課程學習內容與食農教育議題整合之探討。教育理論與實踐學刊，40，47－76。
陳玟婷（2023）。探討國小自然教師對科學教學與學習之覺察。未出版碩士論文，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
蔡元隆（2023）。初探日治時期國民學校臺籍教師的課程意識與教學實踐之圖像：以音樂教師林妹為例。課程研究，第18:1期，1－22。
蔡佳雯（2021）。食農教育實施之初探。台灣教育評論月刊， 10(1)，193－197。
顏建賢、曾宇良、張瑋琦、陳美芬、謝亞庭（2015）。我國食農教育推動策略之研究。農業推廣文彙，60，69－86。

 
英文文獻
Amador, J., Males, L., Earnest, D., & Dietiker, L. (2017). Curricular noticing: theory on and practice of teachers’ curricular use. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-46753-5_25
Breyfogle, M., Roth McDuffie, A., & Wohlhuter, K. (2010). Developing curricular reasoning for grades pre-K-12 mathematics instruction. In Mathematics curriculum: Issues, trends, and future directions (pp. 307－320)
Brown, M., & Edelson, D. (2003). Teaching as design: can we better understand the ways in which teachers use materials so we can better design materials to support their changes in practice? LeTUR Report Series, 1-11.
Brown, M. W. (2011). The teacher–tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In Mathematics teachers at work (pp. 37-56). Routledge.
Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. In Aufmerksamkeit: Geschichte-Theorie-Empirie (pp. 387-425). Springer.
Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L., & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children's mathematical thinking. Journal for research in mathematics education, 41(2), 169-202.
Jones, K., & Pepin, B. (2016). Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19, 105-121.
Judit N. Moschkovich, M. E. B. (2000). Integrating a Naturalistic Paradigm Into Research on Mathematics and Science Cognition and Learning. In Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education (1st ed.).
Learn, H. P. (2000). Brain, mind, experience, and school. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning.
Luft, J. A., Hanuscin, D., Hobbs, L., & Törner, G. (2020). Out-of-Field Teaching in Science: An Overlooked Problem. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 31(7), 719-724. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1814052
Males, L. M., Earnest, D., Dietiker, L., & Amador, J. M. (2015). Examining K-12 Prospective Teachers' Curricular Noticing. North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
Mitchell, R. N., & Marin, K. A. (2015). Examining the use of a structured analysis framework to support prospective teacher noticing. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18, 551-575.
Remillard, J. T., & Bryans, M. B. (2004). Teachers' orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning. Journal for research in mathematics education, 35(5), 352-388.
Sherin, M., & Drake, C. (2009). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers' use of a reform-based elementary mathematics curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies - J CURRICULUM STUD, 41, 467-500. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270802696115
Sherin, M., Jacobs, V., & Philipp, R. (2011). SITUATING THE STUDY OF TEACHER NOTICING. In (pp. pp.3-13).
Star, J. R., & Strickland, S. K. (2008). Learning to observe: using video to improve preservice mathematics teachers’ ability to notice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(2), 107-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9063-7
Van den Akker, J. (2007). Curriculum design research. An introduction to educational design research, 37, 37-50.
van Es, E., & Sherin, M. (2002). Learning to Notice: Scaffolding New Teachers' Interpretations of Classroom Interactions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10.
Van Es, E. A. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In Mathematics teacher noticing (pp. 164-181). Routledge.