環境教育在國內正規教育中，藉由議題教育融入課程之中。以議題為導向的教育有別於現行學科教育，重在議題的面對與處理，以問題解決的能力培養為主輔以系統知識的學習（張子超，2017）。但對於在職教師而言是一項嘗試也是挑戰。因此，自103學年度起師資培育生的教育專業課程新增教育議題專題為必修，環境教育議題也成為修課的選擇。再者，教育實習課程是學生角色轉變為教師角色重要因素之一（Hounshell & Griffin, 1989）。因此為了環境教育能在正規教育中實踐，關切師培生如何建構環境教學以及如何藉由實習課程進行教學是重要且有意義的。
本研究的研究目的為：透過「教師思考歷程理論」，描繪師培生在環境教學時其教學計劃決定、教學互動決定以及教學反思決定，並解釋背後原因與觀點。本研究為個案研究，使用訪談、觀察、刺激回憶法以及非干擾性測量四種方法蒐集研究資料。研究參與者為就讀臺灣國立師範大學107學年度修習「環境教育與永續行為建立」的六位師培生。師培生在學期間經由環境教育基礎認識與環境素養建立的課程後，開始規劃和實施環境教學方案。依據Sauvé, L.（1996）將環境分為六類為主題分別進行六堂環境教育教案規劃。經由認識學習對象、校園與社區場域的勘查、環境教育者分享、實際規劃一個三十分鐘的教學活動，並進入OO國中進行教學。
研究發現：（1）師培生藉由師培課程為鷹架結合自身科系專業培訓、教學經驗與社團經驗能發展適切的環境教學；（2）「環境教學」的教學計劃思考特性：教師會先產生教學目的並牽引其他類別的思考與決定、運用「戶外環境」作為以環境教學的「教室」與「教材」以及跨學科的教師合作將學科融入到教學中；（3）教學互動思考歷程，從教學進行、教學互動思考線索出現、思考教學各層面到作出互動與否的決定。在經過思考後58%會產生互動的決定，42%會維持原教學計劃或原教學情況繼續課程；（4）教學互動思考特性：教學互動思考線索中與教學對象相關佔思考比例的43%是最多的類別，其次為教學資源佔16%，第三為教學環境與常規各佔13%。在環境教學中，「教學資源」與「教學環境」的影響特別被凸顯；（5）藉由反思與評鑑教學，幫助教師成長。在教學後的思考階段，65%的教學事件教師（師培生）都會進行教學後的反思；（6）教學反思特性：在教學反思個類別的比例中教學對象、教學目標、教學內容與教學環境分佔前三名。此外，教學目標在此階段扮演重要角色，作為教學評鑑的依據。（7）環境教學知識需要不斷藉由積累與建構而成。

Environmental education is an incorporation teaching method in domestic formal education. The issue-oriented education is different from the subject education. It focuses on confronting and dealing with issues. It focuses on problem-solving and supplemented by systematic knowledge. But it is an attempt and a challenge for teachers. Therefore, since 2014, issue-oriented education has been added as compulsory courses in teacher training courses, and environmental education issue has also become the choice of courses. Furthermore, be a practice teacher is one of the important factors in transforming student roles into teacher roles (Hounshell & Griffin, 1989). Therefore, in order that environmental education can be practiced in formal education, it is important and meaningful to pay attention to how pre-service teachers construct the environmental teaching and how to teach through practice courses.
The purpose of this research is through the " Theory of Teachers’ Thought Processes " to (1) describe the teaching plan decision, teaching interaction decision, and teaching reflection decision of pre-service teachers during the environmental teaching, and (2) explain the reasons and perspectives behind it. The study is a case study, using interviews, observations, stimulus recall methods and non-interfering measurements to collect research data. The study participants were six pre-service teachers enrolled in "Environmental Education and Sustainable Behavior Building" course at National Taiwan Normal University in 2018. After training the pre-service teachers through the courses established by basic knowledge and environmental literacy of environmental education, they began to plan and implement environmental teaching programs. The pre-service teachers were divided into six groups. Each group selected one of concepts which was developed by Sauve (1996) as well as designed and implemented a thirty-minute activity for junior high students.
The research finds that: (1) the pre-service teachers could use the course as a scaffold and combine their own professional training, teaching experience and club experience to develop their activity; (2) Thinking characteristics of teaching plans: Teachers produced teaching purposes at first. The teaching purpose led other categories of thinking and decision-making. Teachers used the "outdoor environment" as "classrooms" and "textbooks" in the environmental teaching, and interdisciplinary teachers worked to incorporate disciplines into teaching; (3) The process of teaching interactive thinking was from teaching progress, the emergence of thinking clues, thinking about all aspects of teaching to making interactive decisions. After thinking, 58% of the teachers made interactive decisions, and 42% maintained the original teaching plan or continue the course; (4) Thinking characteristics of teaching interaction: 43% of thinking clues related to learners in thinking clues were the largest category, followed by teaching resources with 16%, and teaching environment with 13% each. In this teaching, the influence of "teaching resources" and "teaching environment" were particularly prominent; (5) Teaching reflection helped teachers improve their teaching. During the teaching reflection stage, 65% of teaching events were reflected; (6) The characteristics of teaching reflection: learners, teaching goals, teaching content and teaching environment ranked the top three in the proportion of teaching reflection categories. In addition, teaching goals played an important role at this stage as the basis for teaching evaluation; (7) The teaching knowledge of the environmental teaching needed to be continuously accumulated and constructed.

西文
Borich, G. D. (1986). Paradigms of teacher effectiveness research: Their relationship to the concept of effective teaching. Education and Urban Society, 18(2), 143-167.
Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Report of the World Commission on environment and development:" our common future.": United Nations.
Callahan, J. F., & Clark, L. H. (1998). Teaching in the middle and secondary schools. Prentice Hall.
Clark, C. M., & Elmore, J. L. (1981). Transforming curriculum in mathematics, science, and writing: A case study of teacher yearly planning.
Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1984). Teachers' Thought Processes. Occasional Paper No. 72.
Clark, C. M. & Peterson P. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.). Handbook of research on teaching, 255-296. New York: Macmillan.
Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1979). Three Studies of Teacher Planning. Research Series No. 55.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Dane, F. C. (1990). Research methods. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Dewey,J. (1916). Democracy of education. N.Y.: The Macmillan Company.
Eisner, E. W. (1994). The educational imagination. N.Y.: The Macmillan.
Engleson, D. C., & Yockers, D. H. (1994). A guide to curriculum planning in environmental education: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological review, 87(3), 215.
Evans, R. W. (1992). Introduction: What Do We Mean by Issues-Centered Social Studies Education? The Social Studies, 83(3), 93-94.
Evertson, C. M., & Green, J. L. (1986). Observation as inquiry and method. Handbook of research on teaching, 3, 162-213.
Gilbertson, K., Bates, T., Ewert, A., & McLaughlin, T. (2006). Outdoor education: Methods and strategies. Human Kinetics.
Griffiths, M. & Tann, S.(1992) Using Reflective Practice to Link personal and Public Theories. Journal of Educational for Teaching, 18(1), 69-84.
Hounshell, P. B., & Griffin, S. S. (1989). Science Teachers Who Left: A Survey Report. Science Education, 73(4), 433-43.
Jackson, P. W. (1968). Life in Classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Inc: 转引自张华. 课程与教学论 (M). 上海: 上海教育出版社, 2000, 297.
Kirk, J. J. (1977). The Quantum Theory of Environmental Education in Current Issues un Environmental Education III. ERIC/SMEAC.
Marland, P. W. (2002). A study of teachers' interactive thoughts.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Liu, S.-Y., Yeh, S.-C., Liang, S.-W., Fang, W.-T., Tsai, H.-M. (2015). A national investigation of teachers’ environmental literacy as a reference for promoting environmental education in Taiwan. The Journal of Environmental Education, 46 (2), 114-132.
National Institute of Education. (1975). Teaching as clinical information processing (Report of panel 6, National Conference on Studies in Teaching). Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological review, 84(3), 231.
Peterson, P. L., & Clark, C. M. (1978). Teachers’ reports of their cognitive processes during teaching. American educational research journal, 15(4), 555-565.
Shavelson, R. (1973). The basic teaching skill: Decision making (R & D Memorandum No. 104): Stanford, CA: Stanford University, School of Education, Center for R & D in Teaching.
Sauvé, L. (1996). Environmental education and sustainable development: A further appraisal. Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 1, 7-34.
Snow, R. E. (1972). A Model Teacher Training System; An Overview.
Stem, P., & Shavelson, R. J. (1981). Research on teacher's pedagogical thoughts, judgement, decision and behavior. Review of Educational Research, 51(4), 455-498.
Sutcliffe, J., & Whitfield, R. (1979). Classroom-based teaching decisions. Teacher decision making in the classroom: A collection of papers. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Wodlinger, M. G. (2002). A study of teacher interactive decision making.
Urban Dahllöf (1970). Curriculum Process Analysis and Comparative Evaluation of School Systems. Paedagogica Europaea Vol. 6, The Changing School Curriculum in Europe (1970 - 1971), 21-36.

中文
方炳林（1976）。普通教學法。台北：三民。
王淑怡（2002）。國民小學教師教學效能指標之建構（未出版碩士論文）。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所。
王順美（2017）。大學師培課程中環境教育課程規劃及其理念。第五屆師資培育國際學術研討會各科教材教法論文集。
王順美（付梓中）。實作為基礎的師培環境教育課程之研究。
江世豪（2004）。科學教學實務中的認知腳本與教師思考之個案研究（未出版博士論文）。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
李坤崇等人（2006）。教學評量（Vol. 31）。心理出版。
宋建奇（2000）。高雄市國小教師環境知識、態度及研習需求之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺東教育大學：臺東市。
吳淑鈴（2007）。國小體育專家與生手教師排球課教學與回饋行為之教師思考研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺南大學體育學系教學研究所。
沈翠蓮（2001）。教學原理與設計。台北：五南。
林淑馨（2010）。質性研究：理論與實務。新北市：巨流。
林進材（1997）。教師教學思考-理論、研究與應用（初版）。高雄: 復文圖書。
段曉琳（2009）。科學教師的學習與成長。彰化市：國立彰化師範大學。
郭小蘋、吳勁甫（2011）。台灣地區近年來校長教學領導與教師教學效能學位論文研究走向之分析。嘉大教育研究學刊，(27)，1-27。
陳木金（1999）。班級經營。台北市：揚智。
陳向明（2002）。 社會科學質的研究。台北：五南。
孫志麟（2001）。教師自我效能與教學行為的關係-實徵取向的分析。國立台北師範學院學報。
徐南號（1985）。教學層面與教學領域之分析。中等教育。
陳昭曄（2000）。國民中學實習教師思考之研究-師範大學與教育學程畢業生之比較（未出版碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學教育學系研究所。
莊惠銓（2019）。傍山而行的春風：大學教育學程環境教育課程對師培生環境公民行動的影響（未出版碩士論文）。國立東華大學自然資源與環境學系：花蓮。
郭義章（1997）。國中初任理化教師思考與呈現其學科教學知識之個案研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
高翠霞，高慧芬，& 楊嵐智。（2018）。十二年國教議題課程的挑戰—以環境教育為例。臺灣教育評論月刊， 7（10），68-75。
陳麗玉（2015）。適合各級學校採行之「環境議題解決及行動力教學活動課程」規劃、教學之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺中教育大學科學教育與應用學系環境教育及管理研究所。
張子超（2001）。環境教育課程設計。臺北市：師大。
張子超（2017）。議題教育的意義與課程融入——以環境教育為例。教育脈動，(11)，23-30。
張世忠（2000）。教學原理—統整與應用。台北市：五南。
張芬芬、張嘉育（2015）。十二年國教「議題融入課程」規劃芻議。台灣教育評論月刊，4(3)，26-33。
張春興、林清山（1981）。教育心理學。台北：東華。
鈕文英（2019）。質性研究方法與論文寫作。台北市：雙葉書廊。
黃光雄、楊龍力（2012）。課程發展與設計：理念與實作。台北市：師大書苑有限公司。
黃茂在、曾鈺琪主編（2015）。戶外教育實施指引。台北：國家教育研究院。
黃政傑主編（1996）。道德與社會科教學法。台北市：師大書苑有限公司。
曾淑玢（2012）。澎湖縣國民小學教師思考與教學決定之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺南大學。
曾富林（2000）。環境覺知教育之探究以國小五年級學生為例（未出版碩士論文）。臺灣師範大學環境教育研究所。
黃嘉雄、黃永和(2011)。新興及重大議題課程發展方向之研究—整合型計畫。教育部國家教育研究專題研究成果報告(編號: NAER-97-05-A-2-06-00-2-25)，未出版。
楊冠政（1997）。環境教育。台北市：明文。
蔡依純（2015）。環境教育法在學校落實之探討─以環境教育研習為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
霍秉坤主編（2004）。教學方法與設計。香港：商務印書館。
鄭淑玉（2006）。學生自主學習發展國小藝術與人文領域課程之研究---以環境議題為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立新竹教育大學人資處美勞教學研究所。
謝鴻儒（2000）。國小教師戶外教學現況與障礙之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北教育大學課程與教學研究所。
國家教育研究院(2017)。議題融入說明手冊(初稿)。取自走進十二年國教課程綱要網站 http://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/img/67/444852436.pdf
環境友善種子團隊（2017）。課程設計力：環境教育職人完全攻略。華都文化。