當代「藝術統整課程」理論與實踐之研究
摘要
基於現今藝術教師，對藝術統整課程意義不甚瞭解，藝術學科專業知能也不足，使實施流於淺薄等弊病，進行藝術統整課程的理論與實踐研究，以提供教師進行藝術統整課程的參考。為達到上述目的，本研究先藉由文獻分析，釐清藝術教育中藝術統整課程的重要觀點、學科內涵，探討國內、外藝術統整課程論文與實務之相關研究，作為發展藝術統整課程理論之參考；再利用訪談，瞭解國內藝術統整課程的實踐現況與理論之間的落差。為弭平理論與實踐的鴻溝，應用行動研究的方法，發展藝術統整課程，作為實務工作者將來進行藝術統整課程之參考。

綜合本研究結果，提出下列結論：
一、藝術統整課程的實踐有其基本理論
（一）當代藝術（教育）界的轉變，使課程傾向統整的藝術教育（學）方式。
（二）視覺藝術學科本身具有科際整合的特性，可成為統整很好的黏著劑，擴展學生學習的深度與廣度。
（三）藝術統整課程應以藝術為核心，考量各種因素，進行深度意義的主題統整設計，引領學生瞭解藝術與生活、文化的關係，建構本身的知識，進而能轉化應用。
（四）藝術統整課程使視覺藝術不只是技能的學習，而能透過主（議）題探索意義、表達看法，使藝術的學習更深入。
（五）在藝術統整課程實踐的過程要考量學生、教師、學科、環境等影響因素才能有利於藝術統整課程的進行。
二、藝術統整課程的實踐要顧及學科內涵
（一）進行藝術統整課程時，目標及內容上要掌握藝術、文化、生活的關聯及人文涵養的融入，選擇適當藝術品作為探討對象。
（二）藝術統整課程的教學方法，要兼顧鑑賞與創作的歷程教學，及一般的教學法，才能達到深度的學習。
（三）藝術統整課程要採真實多元的評量方式及訂出評量指標，才能瞭解學生的成長歷程及指引其努力的方向。
三、國內外藝術統整課程論文與實例研究的啟示
（一）（藝術）統整課程實施成功的重要因素，值得作為藝術實踐時的考量。
（二）以主題或議題為中心概念的方式，是普遍採用的教學策略；統整的科目以語文和社會學科居多。
（三）藝術統整課程在決定重要意念或主（議）題後，可發展關鍵概念與討論重點，給予主題方向和引導。
（四）藝術教師要練習團隊合作。
四、當前藝術教師教學實踐的問題與困境
（一）國內藝術統整課程現況的最大問題是，藝術教師對統整課程的認知及藝術學科專業知能不足。
（二）國內教師實施藝術統整課程在校內外遭遇的困境有待解決，藝術統整課程才能順利進行。
五、教師可透過藝術統整課程行動研究將理論轉化為實踐
（一）在前置作業上透過各種方法先解決面臨的困境。
（二）瞭解當前藝術教師教學實踐的問題，作為課程行動研究的起點。
（三）以核心理念架構藝術統整課程。
（四）透過課程行動研究的歷程，將理論轉化為實際的教學活動。
（五）實施結果發現，學生學會以不同藝術方式，來表達對議題的理解與看法；學得多元能力及幫助其他學科的學習。教師帶來專業成長。但學校的文化、體制、學生的學習態度與配合度會影響學習成效。
根據上述結論，本研究對教育行政機關、學校、教師及進一步的研究提出建議。
一、對教育行政機關提出「重新擬定藝術與人文領域分科的課程綱要，及訂出評量標準供教師檢核自己的教學」「增加藝術教學時數、提供良好教科書、教學案例及改變藝術教師研習方式，才能有利於後續藝術統整課程的推動」「制定相關的配套措施，將可增加藝術統整課程實施成功的機會」三項建議，以期能增進課程統整的成效。
二、對學校行政提出「學校盡量做到不將「藝術與人文」領域的課程配課，以免損及學生學習權益」、「學校行政單位要做好藝術統整課程的各項支援工作」、「學校可透過策略聯盟的方式，支援學校的藝術教師與其它學校的藝術教師建立親密的夥伴關係」三項建議，以利於課程統整的實施。
三、對教師提出「教師要理解藝術統整課程的真正意義並實施之，才可提高藝術教育的價值與地位」、「教師要加強教育、視覺藝術教育專業知能與具備行動研究、教學反思的能力」、「藝術教師要積極努力，才能爭取到較多的教學時數」、「藝術教師要慢慢培養合作的觀念，單打獨鬥的方式已不適合現今的需求」四項建議，供教師參考。
四、對於未來想要進行後續研究的人，提出「擴大研究對象」「擴大研究層面」之建議。

A Study on the Theories and Practices of
Contemporary Integrated Arts Curriculum
Abstract
In view of the fact that art teachers nowadays do not fully realize the significance of integrated arts curriculum and that their deficiency in professional knowledge often results in shallow practice, this study aims to serve as a reliable pedagogic reference by engaging in the investigations of contemporary integrated art theories and practices. In order to meet the above-mentioned goals, this study seeks to investigate the key perspectives and meanings of the integrated art curriculum. It also examines several treatises and relevant research conducted home and abroad on the subject of integrated art curriculum. The result will serve as a reference for putting theory into practice. Additionally, through a series of interviews, this study gains a more thorough understanding of the discrepancy between theory and practice in Taiwan's current integrated art education. To bridge the gap between theory and practice, Action Research is adopted to help determine what feasible ways there are of transforming theories into practice in integrated art education, thereby developing a more applicable integrated art curriculum for art practitioners as future reference.

Conclusions reached based on research results

I. The Practice of Integrated Arts Curriculum Has Its Basic Theories
1. Changes taking place within contemporary art circles orient the art curriculum towards an integrated mode of education.

2. Visual arts per se are characterized by their interdisciplinary orientation. This interdisciplinary character can in turn serve as a ready adhesive for theory-practice integration to help students broaden the depth and width in learning.

3. Arts should be the core of integrated art curriculum while other factors should also be taken into account in the integrated design of a better-rounded theme curriculum. It is hoped that under such integrated curriculum, students may be able to cultivate better understandings of the relationship between art, life, and culture; build up their own knowledge of arts and transform it to real-life practices.

4. Through the practice of integrated art curriculum, visual arts are able to transcend above a mere repertoire of skill learning. Through theme or topical learning, students are encouraged to explore the meanings of arts, express their opinions, and gained a deeper and more comprehensive artistic training.
5. Factors such as students, instructors, subjects and environment need to be carefully considered in integrating arts curricula.

II. The Realization of Integrated Arts Curriculum Should Take into Account the Fundamental Values and Meanings of Each Individual Subject.
1. Artworks for the integrated curriculum must be appropriate in the sense that they have incorporated a humanistic appreciation of arts and explored the close rapport between art, culture and life.

2. In order to achieve a truly profound learning experience, integrated arts curriculum should not only utilize the common pedagogy but also encompass the process learning of artistic creation and appreciation.

3. To better understand students’ progress of learning and to show them directions for future improvement, integrated arts curriculum should adopt a authentic and multiple way of assessment as well as an evaluation rubric.

III. The Lessons of the Study on Domestic and Foreign Treatises and Practices of the Integrated Art Curriculum
1. The key factors in the success of an integrated arts curriculum should be taken into account in the realization of artistry.

2. Topic or theme are often adopted as the integral concepts of a teaching method. Language and humanities subjects tend to utilize these methods.

3. Once the big ideas and themes of an integrated arts curriculum are decided, key concepts and essential questions may be introduced to give students an overall sense of the curriculum themes.

4. Art teachers should collaborate with real art practitioners.

IV. The Problems and Predicaments of Current Art Teaching
1. The major problem in Taiwan’s current art curriculum is art teachers’ lack of professional knowledge and limited understanding of the integrated art scheme.

2. The problems teachers face inside and outside of school when they seek to integrate the arts curriculum must be solved first so that the integrated scheme can run smoothly and properly.
V. Through Action Research, Teachers can Transform Theory into Real-life Practice
1. Predicaments should be solved first in preparation for the realization of the integrated arts curriculum.

2. A better understanding of the problems and difficulties in integrated arts teaching can serve as a starting point of curriculum action research.

3. “Core Ideology” is used to integrate the arts curriculum
4. Theories are transformed into practical learning activities through curriculum action research

5. The outcome of the curriculum shows that students not only learn to express themselves through different artistic media but also cultivate a multiple capability to help with the learning of other academic subjects. Teachers have also benefited a lot from the curriculum. It is found out that, however, campus culture, administrative system as well as students’ learning attitudes and coordination will greatly influence the effects of the curriculum.

Based on the above conclusions, this study propose the following suggestions for the Ministry of Education, schools and teachers.

1. For the Ministry of Education, the study proposes three suggestions in the hope of enhancing the overall effects of integrated art curriculum: (A) Reorganize the curriculum guidelines for Arts and Humanity subjects and provide a teaching evaluation criteria for teachers’ reference. (B) Increase the total hours of art classes, provide the textbooks proper, offer teaching modules and improve the ways of further training for art teachers, so as to facilitate the propagation of subsequent integrated art curriculum. (C) The Ministry of Education should institute relevant policies regarding the integrated curriculum, so as to increase its chance of success.

2.For schools, this study proposes three suggestions in terms of benefiting the execution of the Integrated Arts Curriculum: (A) Schools should stick to the principle that no Arts and Humanities class should be cut in favor of other subjects so that students’ rights shall not be violated (B) Administrative units should support the arts integrated curriculum with carefully-planned and well-maintained back-up service. (C) Schools should encourage and support their art teachers to establish close rapport with those at other schools through strategic affiliation.

3.For teachers, this study proposes four suggestions for their reference: (A) Teachers should be familiar with the true meanings of integrated art curriculum so as to enhance the value and status of art education. (B) Overall skills and professional knowledge need to be strengthened on the teachers’ part, especially those in visual arts education. Teachers should also possess the ability of action research and a self-critical thinking. (C) Art teachers should take every initiative to demonstrate the significance of artistic knowledge. It is hoped then that more teaching hours will be given to art education. (D) Teachers should learn to coordinate and cooperate with one another. A one-man’s fight no longer suffices the needs nowadays.

4.For those who would like to further research into this area, this study suggests
expanding (A) the target groups and (B) the aspects of investigation

參考文獻
中文部分
于書麟（1972）。教學原理。臺北市：文景。
王怡文（2004）。高雄市國小藝術與人文學習領域統整課程與協同教學之實施現況調查研究。屏東師範學院視覺藝術教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
王秀雄（1986）。美術教育的功能探討。教育資料集刊，11，20。臺北：教育資料館。
王秋絨、楊洲松（1995）。後現代社會中的成人教育。載於中華民國比較教育學會編，教育：傳統、現代化與後現代化（頁165-168）。臺北：師大書苑。
中國教育部（2000）。藝術課程標準。
方炳林（1978）。普通教學法。臺北市：教育文物出版社。
方德隆（1998）。國民小學多元文化教育之課程設計模式。高雄師大學報，9，191-205。
白雲霞（2002）。國民教育階段學校本位課程發展理論與模式之建構。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文。
成露茜（1999）。落實基本能力教育的一個實驗方案。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會主編，九年一貫課程研討會論文集—邁向課程新紀元（頁55-87）。臺北：中華民國教材研究發展學會。
江婉婷（2004）。澎湖縣國民中小學藝術與人文領域課程統整實施現況與意見調查之研究。臺南師範學院在職進修課程與教學碩士論文，未出版。
吳芝儀、李奉儒譯（1995）。質的研究與評鑑。台北：桂冠。
吳宗立（2002）。協同教學法在社會領域的應用。人文及社會學科教學通訊，1，
136-146。
呂佳真（2003）。高雄縣國民小學視覺藝術與人文學習領域實施現況調查與分析。屏東師範學院音樂教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
何育真（2003）。從國民小學視覺藝術與人文領域的實施現況探討未來視覺藝術教育的發展。載於視覺藝術與人文領域教學理論與實務研討會論文集（頁201-218）。新竹：國立新竹師範學院。
李坤崇、歐慧敏（2000）。統整課程理念與實務。臺北：心理出版社。
李雅婷（2003）。課程美學探究取向的理論與實踐之研究—以國小藝術統整課程之 教育批評為例。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版。
李雅琴（2003）。藝術與人文領域議題取向統整課程之研究。彰化師範大學美術學系在職進修專班碩士論文，未出版。
李勝雄（2002）。國小實施健康與體育學習領域課程統整發展之研究—以屏東縣三所國小為例。國立臺灣師範大學體育研究所博士論文，未出版。
李園會（1999）。協同教學法。臺北市：心理。
李毓真(2001) 國小統整課程之設計與實施— 一位職前教師的行動研究歷程。臺東師範學院教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
李錫津（1992）。合作學習原理的應用。教師天地，47，48-54。
林文生（2004）。課程理論與實踐之交互辯證。國立臺灣師範大學/教育研究所博士論文， 未出版。
林志忠（2001）。教育改革的微觀工程－九年一貫課程與協同教學。高雄市：復文。
林怡秀（1999）。國民小學課程統整模式之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
林佩璇（2000）。教師行動與研究：課程及教學實踐。臺北：教育部台灣省國民學校教師研習會印行。
林逢祺譯（1994）。教育的語言。臺北：桂冠。
林曼麗（2000）。台灣視覺藝術教育研究。臺北市：雄獅圖書公司。
林曼麗、郭博州、林義祥、吳進風、劉得劭、楊宗賢（2001）。藝術‧人文‧新契機：視覺藝術教育課程改革論文集。臺北：藝術教育館。
林進材（1999）。教學理論與方法。臺北市：五南。
林雯芬（2003）。國小六年級視覺藝術與音樂統整課程設計及實施之行動研究。屏東師範學院視覺藝術教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
林霓岑（2000）。國民小學教師設計統整課程之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
林寶山（1990）。教學論—理論與方法。臺北：五南。
周淑卿（2001）。在應為與難為之間─論當前課程統整的困境。載於國立暨南國際大學教育學程中心主編。教育改革的微觀工程：小班教學與九年一貫課程（頁141-160）。高雄：復文。
周淑卿（2002）。課程政策與教育革新。台北：師大書苑。
邱玉萍（2001）。國小教師課程探險之旅—妙妙國小統整課程發展之協同行動研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
岳斯平（2002）。以合作學習教學法改善學生對高中物理的解題能力及學習態度之合作式行動研究。彰化師範大學物理學系在職進修專班碩士論文。
香港課程發展委員會編（2002）。藝術教育學習領域課程指引（小一至中三）。香港：教育署藝術教育組。
姚世澤（2003）。視覺藝術與人文學習領域之國際觀--「視覺藝術教育」與「視覺藝術文化」相關議題的探究。發表於「第 1245期九年一貫課程深耕計畫種子教師研習資料」（頁34-43）。臺北：國立教育研究院籌備處。
柯啟瑤（2000）。協同教學初探。翰林文教雜誌，15，8-35。
胡應銘（1998）。課程統整初探。教師天地，93，頁41-45。
范慶鐘（2003）。國民小學課程統整的理念、模式與實施之研究—以南投市南投國小為例。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
高宣揚（1999）。後現代論。臺北：五南。
高廣孚（1993）。教學原理。臺北：五南。
袁汝儀（2001）。國民教育階段「藝術與人文」領域的思考。國教天地，143，32-40。
徐秀菊（2002）。藝術統整課程設計原理與實務。載於藝術教育研究編輯委員會編。藝術與人文教育（頁401-436）。台北：桂冠。
孫嘉妏（2001）。九年一貫藝術與人文學習領域課程統整之研究。臺北：國立臺灣師範大學美術學系碩士論文，未出版。
許有志（2001）。後現代藝術教育本質研究。臺北：國立臺灣師範大學美術學系碩士論文，未出版。
許信雄（1999）。課程統整的基本認識。教師天地，100，58-65。
郭禎祥、楊須美（1988）。以艾斯納（E.W.Eisner）「學術本位的美術教育」（DBAE）為理論基礎探討現今我國國民美術教育。師大學報，33，1-5。
郭禎祥（1999）。描繪新世紀視覺藝術教育藍圖。美育，110，1-9。
郭禎祥（2001a）新世紀藝術教育的變動。國際藝術教育學會─亞洲地區學術研討會論文集。427～438。
郭禎祥（2001b）。社區取向藝術教育。未出版。
郭禎祥（2002）。新世紀藝術教育的變動。載於國立藝術教育館主編，二零零二新世紀藝術教育理論與實際（頁33-47）。臺北：國立台灣藝術教育館。
郭禎祥（2004）。藝術教育的變動與展望。載於首都師範大學舉辦之「藝術教育與文化理解」InSEA亞洲地區學術研討會論文集（頁56-71），北京。
陳亞苹（2001）。國民小學九年一貫統整課程「視覺藝術與人文」領域-以視覺視覺藝術為核心之課程設計研究。國立彰化師範大學視覺藝術教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
陳建伶（2004）。以視覺藝術為核心之統整課程設計與實施之行動研究—以基隆市東信國小及信義國小為例。國立彰化師範大學視覺藝術教育學研究所碩士論文，未出版。
陳皓薇、林逢祺、洪仁進（2004）課程統整與教師知識的轉化—以「藝術與人文」 領域教師為例。師大學報，49（1），103-122。
陳新轉（2000）。課程統整之理論性研究及其對九年一貫社會領域課程綱要（草案）之啟示。國立政治大學博士論文，未出版。
陳榮瑞（2003）。社區取向藝術教育統整課程設計研究—以臺北市北投地區公共藝術為例。彰化師範大學美術學系在職進修專班碩士論文，未出版。
陳瓊花譯 (1998)。美國藝術教育國家標準。台北市：教育部。
陳瓊花 (2001)。從美術教育的觀點探討課程統整設計之模式與案例。視覺藝術，4，97-126。
陳瓊花（2002）。九年一貫「藝術與人文」學習領域教學策略及其應用模式。國立臺灣藝術教育館委託研究計畫報告。
莊秀貞（1977）。協同教學法與教學團。今日教育，32，49-53。
莊佩螢（2001）。九年一貫視覺藝術與人文領域課程統整之研究-以臺北市國中為例。國立台灣師範大學音樂研究所碩士論文，未出版。
莊惠菁 (2003)。以視覺文化為核心之藝術教育課程研究：以廣告影像為例。國立台灣師範大學美術研究所碩士論文，未出版。
張玉成 (1996)。批判思考教學法。載於黃光雄主編，教學理論(頁.294-319)。高雄: 復文書局。
張佑任（2002）。國民中學「視覺藝術與人文」領域教師發展統整課程之現況研究—以台中市國民中學為例。國立彰化師範大學視覺藝術教育學研究所碩士論文，未出版。
張哲豪（2002）。協同教學模式中教師專業成長之研究。國立臺北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文。
張淑美（1993）。合作學習的涵義、實施與成效。教育文粹，21，20-25。
張清濱（1999）。怎樣實施協同教學。師友，387，43-47。
張稚美（1998）。談心智習性和專業成長對開放教育的影響，中華民國開放教育學會會訊，4，2-8。
張曉華 (1999)。創作性戲劇原理與實作。台北：成長基金會。
教育部（1948）。小學課程標準。
教育部（1948）。中學課程標準。
教育部（1962）。國民學校課程標準。
教育部（1962）。中學課程標準。
教育部（1968）。國民小學暫行課程標準。
教育部（1968）。國民中學暫行課程標準。
教育部（1972）。國民中學暫行課程標準。
教育部（1975）。國民小學課程標準。
教育部（1983）。國民中學課程標準。
教育部（1985）。國民中學課程標準。
教育部（1993）。國民小學課程標準。
教育部（1994）。國民中學課程標準。
教育部（2000）。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。
教育部（2003）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。
崔光宙（1992）。美感判斷發展研究。台北：師大書苑有限公司。
黃壬來（2002）。前言。載於藝術教育研究編輯委員會編。藝術與人文教育（頁3-10）。台北：桂冠。
黃壬來（2004）。主要國家及香港中小學視覺藝術素養指標研究。香港特別行政區教育統籌局課程發展處藝術教育組委託研究計畫，未出版。
黃光雄等（1988）。教學原理。臺北：師苑。
黃夙霞（2004）。高雄市國民小學藝術與人文統整課程教學實施現況調查研究。屏東師範學院音樂教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
黃政傑（1994）。課程設計。臺北：東華。
黃炳煌（1995）。談課程發展的一些概念。教改通訊，11，41-43。
黃嘉倫（2001）。國民中小學實施統整課程的難題與解決對策之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
黃韻潔（2002）。統整課程設計與實施歷程之個案研究—以竹塹國小為例。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
黃譯瑩（1998）。實施課程統整的走向和原則。教育資料與研究，25，12-13。
黃譯瑩（1999）。九年一貫課程中課程統整相關問題探究。教育研究資訊，7（5）， 60。
游家政（2000）。學校課程的統整及其教學。課程與教學季刊，3（1），19-38。
溫明麗（1997）。批判性思考教學：哲學之旅。臺北：師大書苑。
葉興華（2000）。我國國小推行課程統整之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版。
楊洲松（2000）。後現代知識論與教育。臺北：師大書苑。
楊洲松（2002）。教育哲學研究新議題—全球化理論初探。教育研究月刊，93，116-126。
楊深坑（1995）。現代化與後現代思潮衝擊下的師資培育。載於中華民國比較教育學會編，教育：傳統、現代化與後現代化（頁165-168）。臺北：師大書苑。
楊龍立（2001）。統整課程的探討與設計。臺北：五南書局。
隆惠芬（2002）。絕對表現主義應用於「藝術與人文」領域統整課程之行動研究。國立臺北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
廖明玲（2002）。概念化網路統整課程在國中「藝術與人文」學習領域之發展研究。臺北市立師範學院音樂藝術研究所碩士論文，未出版。
廖經華（2001）。雕琢—從統整課程到統整課程。國立新竹師範學院學校行政碩士班論文，未出版。
管淑華（2002）。視覺藝術與人文領域課程設計與實施之研究。國立臺北師院課程與教學研究所碩士論文，未出版。
趙惠玲（1990）。談國中美術鑑賞教學（上）─美術史與美術批評統合教學法。美育，10，2-10。
鄭博真（2002）。國民小學實施協同教學之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博
士論文。
劉淑雯（2004）。繪本運用於國小社會學習領域的教學探究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版。
劉豐榮（2001）。當代藝術教育論題之評析。視覺藝術，4，59-96。
蔡清田（1998）。從行動研究論教學實習課程與教師專業成長。載於中華民國師範教育學會（主編），教師專業成長：理想與實際（頁177-202）。台北：師大書苑。
歐用生（1996）。初等教育的課程與教學。初等教育。增訂二版。臺北：師大書 苑。
歐用生（1999）。從課程統整的概念評析九年一貫課程。教育研究資訊。7（1），22-32。
歐用生（2000）。新學校的建立:九年一貫課程的展望。國民教育，40（1），2-6。
謝東山（2000）。視覺藝術概論。臺北：偉華書局。
隋夢真（2002）。國小教師對協同教學認知之研究。國立台東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
薛梨真（1999）。國小課程統整的理念與實務。高雄：復文。
蕭福生（2000）。國民小學協同教學實施之分析研究－以一所國民小學為例。國
立臺北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文，未出版。
戴曉霞（1996）。現代與後現代：第一期及第二期教育改革審議委員會諮議報告書之比較研究。載於中華民國比較教育學會等編，教育改革－從傳統到後現代（頁167-204）。臺北：師大書苑。
鍾政岳（2003）。高中視覺藝術統整課程教學研究—以國立苑裡高中為例。彰化師範大學藝術教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
顏佩如（2004）。課程圖像重建：學校全球教育課程發展之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版。
饒見維（1996）。教師專業發展─理論與實務。臺北：五南出版社。
嚴俊傑（2003）。德國藝術教育實施概況。載於林曼麗總召，世界重要國家中小學藝術教育課程統整模式參考手冊（頁68-75）。臺北：藝術教育館。

英文部分
Alleman, J. & Brophy, J. (1993). Is curriculum integration a boon or a threat to social studies? Social Education, 57(6), 287-291.
Anderson, T. & Milbrandt, M. K. (2005). Art for life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception. . Berkeley：University of Californian.
Barnad, M. (1998). Art, design and visual culture. London: Macmillan.
Beane, J. A. (1991). The middle school: The natural home of integration curriculum. Educational Leadership, Oct , 9-13.
Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration―designing the core of democratic education. New York: Teacher college press.
Beattie, D. K. (1997). Assessment in art education. Worcester, Massachusetts: Davis Publication
Boston, B. O. (1996). Connections：The arts and the integration of the high school curriculum.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 407317）
Brandt, R. (1991). On interdisciplinary curriculum: A conversation with Heidi Hayes Jacobs. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 24-26.
Brazee, E. N., & Capelluti , J. (1995). Dissolving the boundaries：Toward an integrative curriculum.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 397982）
Bresler, L. (1995) . The subservient, co-equal, affective, and social integration styles and their implications for the arts. Arts Education Policy Review, 96（5）,31-36.
Broundy, H. S. (1981). Art education as artistic perception. In Hardiman, G. W. & Zernich, T.（Eds.）. Foundation for curriculum development and evaluation in art education. Champaign, IL: Stipes.
Brown, L.＆ Craven, J. (1999). Beginning from the end. In Wolf, D.＆ Balick, D（Eds.）. Art works. (pp.1-42). Portsmouth, NH：Heinemann.
Burns , R. C. & Sattes , B. D.（1995）. Dissolving the Boundaries：Planning for Curriculum Integration in Middle and Secondary Schools and Facilitator’s Guide.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 384455）
Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain.
Alexandria, VA:ASCD.
California State Board of Education (2004).Content standards. Retrieved May 10, 2004, from http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/
Chapman, J.D. (1990). School-based decision-making and management. London: The Famler Press.
Chapman, L.H. (1978). Approach to art in education. Sandiago: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Clark, G. & Zimmerman, E. (1997). Project arts: Programs for ethnically diverse, economically disadvantaged, high ability, visual arts students in rural communities. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
Collins, S. (1993). A study of the thematic integrated curriculum (TIC) of the Focus 2000 program. Western Michigan University EdD Theseis.
Council of Europe (2005). Arts education in Europe. Retrieved May 10, 2005, from http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/culture/Completed_projects/Youth/France.asp#P13_209
Craig, A. (1980). Teacher perceptions of curriculum autonomy. (ERIC Document reproduction Service No. ED190498)
Davis, C. L. (1999). The professional beliefs and the conditions that support integrated curriculum in a New England middle school. Lesley university, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Dobbs, S.M. (1998). Learning in and through. Los Angeles, CA: The Getty Education Institute for the Arts.
Doll, W. E. (1993). A post-modern perspective on curriculum. N.Y.: Teachers.
Dorn, M.C. (2002). The teacher as stakeholder in student art assessment and art program evaluation. Art Education, 55(3), 40-45.
Dougherty, M. B. (1999). Integrating curriculum at the secondary school level. Pepperdine University, Unpublished Master Dissertation.
Drake, S. (1993). Planning integrated curriculum. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Drake, S. (1998). Creating integrated curriculum: Proven ways to increase student learning. Thousand Oaks California: Corwin Press, Inc.
Duncum, P. (2000). Art education and visual culture. In Art Education and visual culture2000 International Visual Arts Conference(pp.125-151). Taipei : Taipei Municipal Teachers College.
Efland, A. (1970). Conceptualizing the curriculum problem. Art Education, 23(2),7-16.
Efland, A.& Freedman, K.＆ Stuhr, P. (1996). Postmodern art education: An approach to curriculum. Reston,VA: National Art Education Association.
Efland, A. (2000). The city as metaphor for integrated learning in the arts, Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 276-295.
Efland, A. (2002a). Emerging visions of art education. Paper presented at the meeting of INSEA Congress, New York.
Efland, A. (2002b). Art and cognition: Integrating the visual arts in the curriculum. New York: Teachers College press.
Eisner, E.W. (1972). Education artistic vision. New York: Macmillan Publishing.
Eisner, E.W. (2002). The Arts and the creation of mind. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.
Ennis, R. H. (1985). Critical thinking and the curriculum. National Forum,1(1) ,
28-31.
Erickson, H. L. (1995). Strring the head, heart, and soul: Redefining curriculum and instruction. Thousand Oaks, C A: Corwin.
Feldman, E. B.(1971). Varieties of visual experience. New Jersey: Prentic-Hall, Inc.
Fogarty, R. (1991). The ways to integrate curriculum. Education Leadership, 49(2), 8-16.
Fogarty , R .(1993). Integrating the curriculum：A collection.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No .ED 369572 ）
Fogarty, R. & Stoehr, J. (1995). Integrating curriculum with multiple intelligences . Teams, Themes, & Threads. K-College.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 383435）
Freedom, J. (1995). An integrated transdisciplinary approach through art education: at primary. 1995 INSEA-ASIAN regional congress. Culture‧society‧art ducation, Taiwan museum of art.
Gall, M. D., & Gall, J. P. (1976). The discussion method. In Gage, N. L.(Ed.), The psychology of teaching methods. The 75th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Gall, M. D., & Gillett, M. (1981). The discussion method in classroom teaching. Theory into Practice, 19(2), 98-103.
Gardner, H. (1973). The arts and human development: A psychological study of the
artistic process. New York: Wiley and Sons.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
Grady, E. (1992). The Portfolio Approach to Assessment. Bloomington, Ind.：Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Gray, T. & Halbert, S. (1998). Team teach with a student. College teaching, 46(4),
150-153.
Grinder, A. L. & McCoy, E. S. (1987). The good guide., Scottsdale, Alison: Ironwood.
Godin, R. A. (1999). Integrating the arts into the curriculum: Its effect on an elementary school math and reading achievement. Georgia State University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Hamblen,K. (1997). The emergence of Neo-DBAE. In Hutchens, J. & Suggs, M. (Eds.). Art education: Content and practice in a postmodern era （pp.40-46）.Reston,VA:National Art Education Association.
Hart, D. (1994). Authentic assessment：A handbook for educators. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
Hartzler, D. S. (2000). A meta-analysis of studies conducted on integrated curriculum programs and their effects on student achievement. Indiana university, Unpublished master dissertation.
Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary Curriculum : Design and Implementation.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 316506）
Johnson, P. O. (1979). An art appreciation teaching model for visual aesthetic education. Studies in Art Education, 20(3), 4-14.
Krug, D. H. & Cohen-Evron, N. (2000). Curriculum integration positions and practices in art education. Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 259-275.
Lanier,V.(1984).Eight guidelines for selecting art curriculum content. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 232-237.
Lazear, D.G. (1991). Seven ways of teaching：The artistry of teaching with multiple intelligences. Palatin：Skylight Publishing.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lowenfeld, V. (1982). Creative and mental growth, New York: Macmillan.
Lyotard, J. F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition：A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis：University of Minnesota University.
Macdonald, J. B. (1988). Theory- practice and the hermeneutic circle. In W. F. Pinar （Ed.）Contemporary curriculum discourses（pp.101-113）Scottsdale, Arizona: Gorsuch Scarisbrick, Publishers.
Mansilla, V. B., Miller, W. C., ＆ Gardner, H. (2000).On disciplinary lenses and interdisciplinary work. In Sam Wineburg & Pam Grossman(Eds.). Interdisciplinary curriculum : Challenges to implementation（pp.17-38）. New York & London: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Marche, T. (1998). Looking outward, looking in: Community in art education. Art Education, 51(3), 6-13.
Mashack, M. B. (1988). An integrated curriculum for the arts and the language arts in gradess K-3. Arizona University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Mason, T. C. (1996). Integrated Curriculum: Potential and Problems. Journal of Teacher Education, 47(4), 263-270.
McFee, J. K. (1991). Art education progress: A field of dichotomies or a network of mutual support. Studies in Art Education, 32(2), 78-81.
Meinbach, A.& Rothlein, L.& Fredericks, A. (1995). The complete guide to thematic units: creating the integrated curriculum. Norwood, Mass.: Christopher-Gordon.
Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand (2004 ). Internal assessment resources. Retrieved November 20, 2004, from http://www.tki.org.nz/e/community/ncea/resources.php
Mirzoeff, N. (1999). An introduction to visual culture. London: Routledge.
Nitko, A.J. (2001). Educational assessment of students. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prerice-Hall.
Newman, J.E. (1996). What happens when art isn't absent: The influence of an arts-integrated curriculum on second and fourth grade students enrolled in a K-8 visual and performing arts magnet school. Denver university, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Ornstein, A.C. & Hunkins, F.P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundation, Principles, and issues(3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Parsons, M. J. (1987). How we understand art: A cognitive developmental account of
aesthetic experience. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Parsons, M. J. (1999).What we learn through art：Habits of mind and multiplicity. In the prospects of art education in the 21st century : An international symposium in art education(pp.76-91), Taiwan museum of art.
Parsons, M. (2002). Integrated curriculum: Possibilities for the arts. Art Education, 55(3), 12-22.
Parsons, M. (2003). Integrated curriculum, art and cognition. Art in education symposium. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Perkins, D. N. (1991). Educating for insight, Educational Leadership. 49(2), 4-8.
Phenix, P. H.（1964）. Realms of meaning. In G. Willis et al.（eds.）The American curriculum: A documentary history. London: Westport, Connecticut.
Phye, G.. (1997). Handbook of classroom assessment：learnning, achievement, and adjustment. New York：Academic Press.
Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology. London：Routledge＆ Kegan Paul.
Pitts, J. I. (1992). An examination of the relationship between South Carolina elementary school teachers' development and/or implementation of integrated curriculum and their teaching style preferences. South Carolina university, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Relan, A. & Kimpston, R. (1991). Curriculum integration: A critical analysis of practical and conceptual issues.（ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 334677）
Reynolds, M. (1989). Knowledge base for the beginning teacher. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Sager, R. R. (1996). The conditions of interdisciplinary team organization that yield integrated curriculum in a selected middle school in Indiana. Indiana University, Unpublished master dissertation
Schubert W. H. (1986). Curriculum : Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. London : Macmillan Publish.
Schwab, J. J. (1973). The practical 3: Translation into curriculum. School Review, 81, 501-522. (In I.Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.).(1978), Science, curriculum, and
Liberal education: Selected essays (pp. 365-383). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Sheridan, M. A. (2002). A descriptive analysis of a case study: Integrated curriculum through filmmaking. The Ohio State University , Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Shoemaker, B. J. E. (1993). An evaluation study of the implementation of an integrated curriculum model in selected elementary schools in Eugene, Oregon. Oregon University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Shulman L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
Simpson, J.（1997）.Creating meaning through art：Teacher as choices maker.
Merrill：Prentice Hall.
Smith, R. (1995). On the third realm-integrated and interdisciplinary learning in arts education. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 29, Spring, 1-4.
Stnehouse, L. (1975). An introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.
Tarr, P. (1987). Symbolic interactionism as a theoretical perspective for the study of children’s artistic development. Unpublished manuscript, The University of Iowa.
The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (1999). The national curriculum for england: Art and design. Retrieved November 5, 2003, from
http://www.nc.uk.net/nc/contents/download/AD.doc
Tiedt, P. L. & Tiedt, I. M. (1990). Multicultural teaching：A handbook of activities, information, and resources, 3 rd ed. Boston：Allyn and Bacon.
Tomhave,R. D. (1992). Value bases underlying conceptions of multicultural education: An analysis of selected literature in art education. Studies in Art Education, 34(1), 48-60.
Tsuei, T. H. (1995). An analysis of the relationships between and among principals' and teachers' perceptions toward assumptions of teaching and learning and integrated curriculum. Northern Colorado University, Unpublished master dissertation.
Tye, A. K.(Ed.). (1990). Global education: School- based strategies. Orange, California: Interdependence Press.
Ulbricht, J. (1998).Interdisciplinary art education reconsidered. Art Education, 51(4), 13-17.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walker, J. & Chaplin, S. (1997). Visual culture: An introduction. N. Y. : Manchester University Press.
Waller, C. R. (1997). An integrated discipline-based art education framework for Bramlett Elementary School Oxford, Mississippi. The University of Mississippi Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Walker, S.R. (2001). Teaching meaning in artmaking. Worcester, Mass.: Davis.
Wang, W. (2002). Aesthetic Development in Cross-cultural Contexts: A Study of Art Appreciation in Japan, Taiwan, and the United States. Studies in Art Education, 43 (4),373─392.
Weigand, H. (1984). Art education as natural science: An integrated curriculum approach to the teaching of visual art and natural science in the secondary. The Pennsylvania State University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Wilson, B. (1997). The quiet evolution: Changing the face of arts education. Log Angeles: The Paul Getty Trust.
Wiggins, J. (2001). Making connections to other way of understanding: Teaching for musical understanding. N. Y.: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Wiggins, G. (1989). Teaching to the authentic test. Educational Leadership, 46, 41-47.
Wolfinger, D.M. & Stockard, J.W. (1997) . Elementary methods: An integrated curriculum. New York: Longman.
Wu, S. C. (2003). Taiwan kindergarten and second grade teachers' knowledge, dispositions, and use of integrated curriculum. Idaho University, Unpublished doctoral dissertation
Zahorik, J. A. (1997). “Encouraging-and Challenging -Students Understandings”. Educational Leadership, 54(6), 30-32.
Zimmerman, E. (2001). Blending multicultural, community-based, and global Approaches to teaching intercultural art education. In 2001 InSEA-ASIAN regional congresas (pp.139-147）。Taiwan：Graduate Institute of Art Education National Changhua University of Education.