本研究旨在探討國民中學課程運作中的「借課」問題。研究者以自身初任教師時的借課經驗出發，運用課程社會學的理論視角，質性研究厚實描述的特色，探究個案大東國中的借課現況與背後成因。在本研究中，研究者將借課視為學校日常生活中，某種習焉不察但隨處可見，而且背後蘊含著某種意義的文化，希望藉由對大東國中借課文化的探索，嘗試揭露借課文化的問題，陳顯借課文化的潛在教育意涵及重點方向。

由資料分析發現，現今的課程時數、課程安排與師資結構，並不符合大東國中教學與課程正常運作的需求，借課文化被學校視為某種解決課程運作難處的彈性作法，因而被教師們認為有存在的必要。然研究結果顯示，借課文化反應出升學主義下學科結構的失衡，它以導師作為橋樑而運作，且成為學校不正常中的習以為常。最後，本研究綜合研究發現與結論，提出相關反思以提供教育當局、學校與教師們參考之。

The purpose of this research is to inquire the issues and current conditions of borrow-and-lend behaviors of curriculum of junior high school teachers. Not just taking this issue as an abnormal phenomenon, the researcher analyzed this issue with the sociology of curriculum theories, and viewed it as a kind of culture containing some important meanings in school’s everyday life. With the way of quantitative analysis and case study method, the researcher interviewed 16 teachers and two students in Dadong junior high school, hoping to uncover the problems of the issue and to find out the true educational meanings behind.
In the research, we can find that the recent reform of curriculum doesn’t really provide this school with enough resources, so the school faces some problems, such as not having enough teachers in some non-academic subjects, or not having enough time for academic subjects’ teachers to teach. Therefore, although borrow-and-lend culture of curriculum is viewed improper, it somehow provides as some flexibility to make curriculum operating smoothly. As a result, teachers think it’s necessary to exist. However, according to the analysis and discussion, three conclusions are drawn. First, the borrow-and-lend culture of curriculum shows that Taiwan’s educational system tends to training students to pass the exam and emphasizes academic subject too much. Second, homeroom teachers play an important role like a bridge in the culture. Third, although it is viewed improper and abnormal, this culture is taken for granted in junior high school. Finally, in order to solve this problem, some reflections are provided as a reference for the authority, schools, and teachers.

中文部分
人本基金會（2009）。「為學生爭取正常教育」—2009 年國中現況調查記者會。2010 年5 月5 日，取自http://hef.yam.org.tw/index01.htm
王淑慧（2004）。國中生活科技教師教學知識之研究。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
吳芝儀、李奉儒（譯）（1995）。M. Q. Patton 著。質的研究與評鑑（Qualitative evaluation and research methods）。台北：桂冠。
林佩璇（2000）。個案研究及其在教育研究上的應用。載於中正大學（主編），質的教育研究方法（頁239-262）。高雄：麗文。
國教司（2009）。教部制定要點，藝能教育正常化將列校長考績。2010 年12 月7 日，取自http://www.edu.tw/PDA/news.aspx?news_sn=2581&pages=9
教育部（1978）。加強輔導中小學正常教學實施要點。教育部公報，38，10-12。
教育部（2009）。加強國民中學藝能及活動課程教學視導實施要點。教育部公報，015：107，17805-17806。
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究。台北：五南。
陳祥麟（2009，6 月13 日）。挪用藝能課，列為視導重點。國語日報，2 版。
黃政傑（1991）。課程設計。台北：東華。
黃政傑（1994）。課程教材改革與中小學教學正常化。載於台灣研究基金會（主編），台灣的教育改革（頁431-466）。台北：前衛。
黃瑞琴（1991）。質的教育研究方法。台北：心理。
蔡敏玲（1986）。教育質性研究者請在文本中現身：兩項重要思慮。國民教育，37（2），21-30。
蔡碧夆（2008）。升學氛圍下國中學生的課程觀：ㄧ個班級的民族誌研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
盧增緒（1992）。論「國中教學正常化」。現代教育，7（2），3-14。
英文部分
Apple, M, W. (1990). The hidden curriculum and the nature of conflict. In ideology and curriculum. London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (1990). The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse: class, codes and control, Volume 4. London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (1971). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. In M. F. D. Young （Ed.）, Knowledge and Control （pp.47-69）. London: Collier Macmillan.
Bernstein, B. (2004). Social Class and Pedagogic Practice. In S. Ball（Ed.）, The RoutledgeFalmer Reader in Sociology of Education（pp. 196-217）. New York and London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Giroux, H. (1981). Toward a new sociology of curriculum. In H. Giroux, A. Penna, &
Goodson, I. F. (1981). Becoming an academic subject. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 2（2）, 163-180.
Gove, P. B. (Ed.) (1982). Webster’s third new international dictionary. New York: G＆C. Merriam Company.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Williams, R. (1961). The Long Revolution. London: Chatto & Windus.
Young, M. F. D. (1971). An approach to the study of curricula as socially organized knowledge. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions
120 for the sociology of education (pp. 19-46). London: collier-Macmillan.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.