中高一貫校のカリキュラム開発とその教員組織に関する調査研究 : カリキュラム・アーティキュレーション論の視点から

抄録

The purpose of this study is to clarify the task in which curriculum study should undertake, based on analyses of a questionnaire research and interview about the curriculum development and teacher organization in Unified Lower and Upper Secondary School from the viewpoint of curriculum articulation. In Japan, character of Lower Secondary School and Upper Secondary School is different in teachers. For example, teacher-training system (pre-service education), teacher's license and so on. Therefore, each teacher's culture is not same. But, since those teachers work together in Unified Lower and Upper Secondary School, there is a problem in teacher's organization. Actually, they can not work for six-year throughout curriculum development as one team. Because they give priority to their own value as Lower secondary school teacher or Upper one. Generally, curriculum articulation means "connection and division". In those schools curricular, connection means "consistency curriculum for six years" and division is "dividing six years into grades (Gakunen-no-Bunsetsuka in Japanese)", for example, 2-2-2 or 1-2-2-1 years system, and so on. By questionnaire research from Sep. to Oct. 2003, I surveyed all national and public such schools (h = 237) in Japan, to clear 1) What was difficult with curriculum development, 2) How teacher's culture was changed by curriculum development, and 3) How the "dividing six years into grades" affect curriculum development. And to elucidate characteristic of alternative teacher organization style, I implemented a case study on six-year secondary school, which has a consistency curriculum for throughout six years (called "Chuto-Kyouiku-Gakkou" in Japanese) by interview investigation at Dec. 2003. Results of questionnaire research are following: 1) Educational organization: There is an important problem about teacher's role dilemma; Lower secondary teachers must teach Upper's classes, and Upper secondary teachers must teach Lower's ones. 2) Teacher organization based on dividing six-years into grades: They can not develop consistency curriculum for throughout six-years, because there is not enough to work as one team. 3) Core organization for curriculum development throughout six-years: In those schools they have to build up core organization as supervisor for effective curriculum development. Findings of interview investigation are following: 1) Originality of organization for curriculum development Committee of curriculum: Most significant function of this organization is to consider consistency curriculum throughout six-year with high mobility. Delegation of each subjects and sectional meeting in each subjects: Those meetings concerning with subjects develop curricular smoothly. Since they make the original plans of each subjects together in advance. 2) Flexible reform with all organizations; In this school, since they always inquiry better organization for curriculum, if necessary, they check and improve all organizations. Thus, from the viewpoint of curriculum articulation, curriculum development in those schools must be investigated by organization of "consistency curriculum for six-years" and of "dividing six-years into grades". In conclusion, to develop curriculum, we must consider uniting curriculum and teacher organization.