研究旨在探討技術型高中推動跨領域主題式教學之發展歷程與成效，以開平餐飲學校跨領域主題式課程「家族菜臺灣味」為研究個案，深入分析教師如何協作設計、因應教學挑戰並促進自身專業成長。研究採質性取向的個案研究法，透過個別訪談蒐集資料進行分析，並結合文獻探討進行歸納詮釋。
研究結果顯示，跨領域主題式課程能有效串連多學科知識，並以「家族菜」真實情境與家庭文化資源激發學生的學習動機與自我認同。教師雖面臨課時不足、家庭背景差異與翻轉學習適應等挑戰，但透過團隊備課、差異化教學與行動反思等，持續強化課程品質並獲得專業成長。課程成果深化學生對自我與家族文化的理解，並顯示家庭參與對學習動力的重要性。
基於以上發現，本研究分別對教師、學校及未來研究提出建議。就教師而言，宜善用主題式課程整合與差異化教學，並結合同儕協作，共同挖掘家庭文化價值；在學校層面，建議行政單位提供課程彈性調整之協助、適切資源設備，及鼓勵家長投入課程互動，以奠定跨領域教學的制度基礎；未來研究則可採縱貫性或多元研究設計，長期追蹤學生在自我認同、學業成就與家庭互動上的成效。最終期盼此研究能為技術型高中跨領域教學提供可行參考與持續發展空間。

This study aimed to explore the developmental process and outcomes of promoting cross-disciplinary, theme-based instruction in technical high schools, focusing on the “Family Cuisine: The Taste of Taiwan” course as a case example. Through in-depth analysis, the research examined how teachers collaborated on curriculum design, responded to instructional challenges, and fostered their own professional growth. By adopting a qualitative case study approach, data were collected and analyzed via interviews, and this process was supplemented by a review of relevant literature for synthesis and interpretation.
The findings indicate that such cross-disciplinary, theme-based curricula can effectively integrate multiple subject areas. By incorporating authentic contexts of “family cuisine” and leveraging family cultural resources, the course stimulated students’ learning motivation and sense of self-identity. Although teachers faced challenges such as limited class time, diverse family backgrounds, and adaptation to flipped learning, they continuously improved course quality and achieved professional growth through collaborative lesson planning, differentiated instructional strategies, and reflective practice mechanisms. The course outcomes not only enhanced students’ understanding of themselves and their family cultures but also underscored the importance of family involvement in fostering learning motivation and emotional development.
Based on these findings, the study offers recommendations in three main areas—teachers, schools, and future research. For teachers, it emphasizes making full use of thematic integration and differentiated teaching, working collaboratively with peers, and delving deeply into the value of family culture. For schools, it recommends that administrators provide flexible course scheduling, appropriate facilities and resources, and encourage family engagement mechanisms to lay a structural foundation for cross-disciplinary teaching. Regarding future research, employing longitudinal or more nuanced multi-method designs could track students’ development in self-identity, academic achievement, and family interactions over time, thereby building a more comprehensive evidence base for cross-disciplinary curricula. Ultimately, it is hoped that this study will serve as a practical reference for cross-disciplinary teaching in technical high schools, providing space for continuous development.

中文部分
毛禮菁（2017）主題統整教學對不同性別國中生的電腦學習態度與成效之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。中華大學，新竹市。
任慶儀（2007）。課程統整的設計與應用。社會科教育研究，14，151-169。
李育諭、林季怡（2018）。大學跨領域能力、課程參與和問題覺知關係之研究。科學教育學刊，26，419-440。
李其昌（2016）。運用跨領域教學提升國中學生自我認同之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。臺灣藝術大學，臺北市。
李開復、王詠剛（2017）。人工智慧來了。臺北市：天下文化。
吳緯中、馬嶔（2021）。丟掉課本之後，學習才真正開始：啟動學習的九大關鍵字。臺北市：時報文化。
林佳誼（2016年6月28日）。2016年是新產業元年，跨領域才是贏家。遠見雜誌。取自https://www.gvm.com.tw/article/21915
林炎旦（2003）。藝術與人文領域師資培育課程之整合規劃。國民教育，43（6），5-13。
林香君（2001）。學校本位課程改革實踐歷程之反思：以開平中學為例（會議論文）。滬臺教育改革與發展研討會，臺北市。
林香君（2002年12月24日）。開平經驗——以「超學科課程統整」為核心的人文教改工程（會議論文）。香港教育研究學會2002年國際研討會，香港。
林盈芳（2011）。國小電腦課與表演藝術之協同教學：以 Scratch 程式設計輿聲音表演藝術之結合為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。
周珮儀（2003）。課程統整。高雄市：復文。
周淑卿（1999）。論九年一貫的統整問題。載於中華民國課程與教學學會（主編），九年一貫課程之展望（頁55-77）。臺北市：揚智。
周淑卿（2000）。面對統整課程與教學的教師文化。載於中華民國課程與教學學會（主編），課程統整與教學（頁233-251）。臺北市：揚智。
范斯淳、游光昭（2016）。科技教育融入 STEM 課程的核心價值與實踐。教育科學研究期刊，61（2），153-183。
洪詠善、范信賢（主編）（2015）。同行──走進十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。新北市：國家教育研究院。
夏惠汶（2000）。開平高中課程改革綱領-發展生活經驗導向課程。（未出版）
夏惠汶（2002）。摸著石頭過河：一位頑童校長的辦校歷程。臺北市：師大書苑。
夏惠汶（2003）。亂有道理的學校。臺北市：智庫出版。
夏惠汶（2013）。未來世界關鍵能力：合作。臺北市：開平餐飲學校。
夏惠汶（2017）。反思寫作在教育的運用──以開平餐飲學校為例。載於林文淇（主編），反思寫作論文集（一）（頁46-68）。臺北市：臺北醫學大學。
夏惠汶、林香君（2002）餐飲超學科統整課程規劃與實施效果評估。（未出版）
陳竹亭、唐功培（2013）。跨科際教育在臺灣大專校院實施之探究。長庚人文社會學報，6（2），159-195。
陳宣亦（2014）。觀光文宣品活化社會領域統整課程──以「臺灣地方特色」為例（未出版之碩士論文）。臺北市立大學，臺北市。
陳新轉（2001）。課程統整理論與設計解說。臺北市：商鼎文化。
教育部（2012年12月）。中華民國師資培育白皮書：發揚師道．百年樹人。取自https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ED2600/cp.aspx?n=37734BA79B67A89A&s=AF04D533FC93AA8D
教育部（2018年3月12日）。面向未來的能力：素養導向教學教戰手冊。取自https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=4F8ED5441E33EA7B&s=889634EC31790FC8
張金田（2017）。淺談我國中小學「課程統整」現況奥未來展望。臺灣教育評論月刊，6（4），171-174。
張春興（1989）。張氏心理學辭典。臺北市，東華書局。
張春興（1996）。教育心理學──三化取向的理論與實踐（修訂版）。臺北市：東華。
張素苓（2015）。資訊科技融入數學領域課程統整之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。臺北市立大學，臺北市。
張貴傑（2004年6月19-20日）。開平高中「超學科統整課程」協同教學團隊建構歷程︰以學群督導位置進行的行動研究（會議論文）。政大學術論壇「另類與創新——臺灣本土教育經驗再出發」研討會，臺北市。
張嘉育、林肇基（2019）。推動高等教育跨領域學習：趨勢、迷思、途徑與挑戰。課程與教學，22（2），31-48。
單文經（譯）（2003）。課程統整的十種方法（原作者：R. Fogarty）。臺北市：學富。（原著出版年：2002）
黃永和（1999）。課程統整的理論與方式之探討。新竹師院學報，12，231-260。
黃欣（2018年9月3日）。大陸金融業，半年裁員3.2萬人。工商時報。取自https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20180903000168-260202?chdtv
黃政傑（1991）。課程設計。臺北市：東華。
黃政傑（1997）。課程改革的理念與實踐。臺北市：漢文。
黃炳煌（1999）。談課程統整──以國民教育九年一貫課程為例。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252）。臺北市：中華民國教材研究發展學會。
黃薇芳（2017）。高中統整式營建科技課程之行動研究──以桃園市某高中為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
開平餐飲學校（2019）。開平餐飲學校教學中心三年課程計畫 V6。（未出版）
開平餐飲學校（2020）。2020年全國學校經營與教學創新 KDP 國際認證獎學校經營創新類。（未出版）
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 。
曾晏祝（2007）。國中社會領域地理科實施全球教育主題式統整課程之學習成效：以「搶救消失中的熱帶雨林」議題為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。
曾祥榕（2016）。跨領域統整的教與學。2016邁向十二年國教新課綱：學生學習與學校本位課程發展研討會，臺北市。
傅斌暉（2013）。高中藝術教師跨領域領導與協同教學之個案研究──以中山女中高瞻計畫（2007–2010）為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。
葉靜慧（2008）。融合形式美學與部落格於國校蝴蝶生態教育統整課程之行動研究。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
廖經華（2001）。雕琢──從課程程統整到統整課程（未出版之碩士論文）。國立新竹師範學院，新竹市。
歐用生（1999）。從「課程統整」概念評九年一貫課程。教育研究資訊，7（1），22­32。
蔡明宏（2013）。超媒體與多媒體電腦輔助教學對教導國民小學智能障礙學生跨領域教學成效之比較研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。
蔡清田（2000）。教育行動研究。臺北市：五南圖書。
蔡釋鋒（2016）。STEAM 課程統整模式運用於國中生活科技教學對於學生知識整合應用之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
潘瑀婕（2018）。跨領域協同教學課程設計研究──以時尚插畫導入國中家政課程「衣著」單元為例（未出版之碩士論文）。朝陽科技大學，臺中市。
賴亭靜（2021）。我的學習我做「主」──探討主題式教學法在高職餐飲科之成效──以開平餐飲學校為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。
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（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。
薛梨真、游家政、葉興華、鄭淑惠（2000）。課程統整手冊。臺北市：教育部。
西文部分
Adame, D. (2011). From a disciplinanry to transdisciplinary vision of the university: A space of knowledge, culture, art, spirituality, and life. Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science, 2, 33-39.
Allen, R., & Freed, M. (2014, August). Project-based learning gains momentum in America’s schools. Education Update, 56(8). Retrieved form https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/project-based-learning-gains-momentum-in-americas-schools
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
Banks, J. (2010). Multicultural education: Characteristics and goals. In J. A. Banks & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (7th ed., pp. 3-30). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Beane, J. A. (1997). Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Bell, E., & Bryman, A. (2007). The ethics of management research: An exploratory content analysis. British Journal of Management, 18(1), 63-77.
Bereiter, C. (1984). How to keep thinking skills from going the way of all frills. Educational Leadership, 42, 75-77.
Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
Blythe, M. (1996). Research, development, and validation of training handbook for development integrated units of study through a systemic approach [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Kansas State University, Kansas.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K.(2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Brazee, E. N., & Capelluti, J. (1995). Dissolving boundaries: Toward an integrative curriculum. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association (NMSA).
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Brown, C., & Calhoun, R. (2022). Integrating knowledge across disciplines: Approaches for middle school cross-curricular design. Educational Forum, 86(3), 299-310.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1964). The course of cognitive growth. American Psychologist, 19(1), 1-15.
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Chen, Y., Li, S., & Yang, C. (2023). Addressing diverse backgrounds in integrated curricula: Case studies on middle school students’ cultural engagement. Journal of Interdisciplinary Learning, 15(1), 45-60.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Crowley, R., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2016). Taxonomically or thematically related? Creating word association spaces for cross-linguistic lexical semantic research. In A. Papafragou, D. Grodner, D. Mirman, & J. Trueswell (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1567-1572). Philadelphia, PA: Cognitive Science Society.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dewey, J. (1936). The theory of the Chicago experiment. In K. C. Mayhew & A. C. (Eds.), Edwards, the Dewey School: The laboratory school of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903 (pp. 463-477). New York, NY: D. Appleton-Century.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books.
Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Drake, S. M. (1987). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. The Clearing House, 60(6), 276-278.
Drake, S. M. (1993). Planning integrated curriculum: The call to adventure. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Drake, S. (1998). Creating integrated curriculum: Proven ways to increase student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Drake, S. M., & Reid, J. (2010). Integrated curriculum and interdisciplinary approaches: What are the benefits? Education Canada, 50(4), 54-57.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500507.
Epstein, J. L. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Ertas, A., Maxwell, T., Rainey, V. P., & Tanik, M. M. (2003). Transformation of higher education: The teansdisciplinary approach in engineering. IEEE Transactions on Education, 6(2), 289-295.
Fogarty, R. (1991). The mindful school: How to integrate the curricula. Palatine, IL: Skylight Publishing.
Fogarty, R. (2009). How to integrate the curricula (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.
Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London, UK: Pearson.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gehrke, N. J. (1998). A look at curriculum integration from the bridge. The Curriculim Journal, 9(2), 247-260.
Giroux, H. (1992). Border crossing. London, UK: Routledge.
Glatthorn, A., & Foshay, A. (1991). Integrated curriculum. In A. Lewy (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of curriculum (pp. 160-162). Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121-140.
González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2021). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge. (Original work published 2005)
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3/4), 381-391.
Halinen, I. (2015). What is going on in Finland? Retrieved form http://www.oph.fi/english/current_issues/101/0/what_is_going_on_in_finland_curriculum_reform_2016
Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1997). Why do parents become involved in their children’s education? Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 3-42.
Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jacobs, H. H. (1991). Planning for curriculum integration. Educational Leadership, 49(2), 50-60.
Jantsch, E. (1972). Inter- and transdisciplinary university: A systems approach to education and innovation. Higher Education, 1(1), 7-37.
Jeffrey, B., & Woods, P. (2009). Creative learning in the primary school. New York, NY: Routledge.
Jeynes, W. H. (2007). The relationship between parental involvement and urban secondary school student academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Urban Education, 42(1), 82-110.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Jones, M., Rodriguez, T., & Li, A. (2022). Engaging youth through visual and digital media in cross-disciplinary curricula. Contemporary Educational Technology, 14(3), 1-16.
Kim, E., & Lee, H. (2023). Personalized learning and youth agency: Toward lifelong learning competencies. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 60(1), 89-106.
Klein, J. T. (2005). Interdisciplinarity and integration. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement (Vol. 2, pp. 927-938). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Kockelmans, J. J. (1979). Interdisciplinarity and higher education. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lara, T., & Farkas, G. (2021). Parental participation as a mediator of adolescents’ academic and social outcomes. Social Psychology of Education, 24(2), 431-446.
Larmer, J., & Mergendoller, J. R. (2010). 7 essentials for project-based learning. Educational Leadership, 68(1), 34-37.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Loepp, F. L. (1991). Integrating science, mathematics, and technology education. The Technology Teacher, 50(3), 17-21.
Luszki, M. B. (1958). Interdisciplinary team research: Methods and problems. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1979)
Mansilla, V. B. (2017). Interdisciplinary learning: A cognitive-epistemological foundation. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & R. C. S. Pacheco (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (2nd ed., pp. 288-306).Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Mansilla, V. B., & Jackson, A. (2011). Educating for global competency. Retrieved from http://asiasociety.org/files/book-globalcompetence.pdf
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miller, R. (2007). What is holistic education? Encounter: Education for Meaning and Social Justice, 20(2), 39-48.
Nitschke, C., Minami, Y., Hiromoto, M., Ohshima, H., & Sato, T. (2014). A quadrocoper automatic control contest as an example of interdisciplinary design education. Proceeding of 14th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems, Korea, 678-685.
Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Novak, J. D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education, 86, 548-571.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget’s theory. In P. Muss (Ed.), Carmichael’s manual child psychology (pp. 61-84). New York, NY: Wiley.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1972). The psychology of the child (H. Weaver, Trans.). New York, NY: Basic Books. (Original work published 1966)
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6.
Pryce, V. (2005). Creativity, design and business performance. DTI Economics Paper, 15, 16-17.
Relam, A., & Kimpston, R. (1991). Curriculum integration: A critical analysis of practical and conceptual issues. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 334 677)
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization. New York, NY: Doubleday.
Symeonidis, V., & Schwarz, J. F. (2016). Phenomenon-based teaching and learning through the pedagogical lenses of phenomenology: The recent curriculum reform in Finland. Forum O'swiatowe, 28(2), 31-47.
Silander, P. (2015). Phenomenon-based learning. Retrieved from http://www.phenomenaleducation.info/phenomenon-based-learning.html
Smith, A., & Grant, J. (2020). The effects of family heritage projects on student motivation and self-identity in secondary education. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 12(2), 89-104.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1998). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Tanner, D., & Tanner, L. N. (1975). Curriculum development: Theory into practice. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Taylor, J. R. (2011). Organization as an (imbricated): Configuring of transactions. Organization Studies, 32(9),1273-1294.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Wolfinger, D. M., & Stoehr, J. W., Jr. (1997). Elementary methods: An integrated curriculum (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Zimmerman. B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.