國中男女生上工藝及家政課程之實施模式及成效研究 作者:李大偉、林　薇(國立臺灣師範大學工藝教育系所)

摘要：

由於受到傳統的「男主外、女主內」之性別刻板觀念，以及就業形態的影響，使國人覺得男女性在成長過程中所需之學習經驗應有不同，乃至於在安排能提供生計試探功能之工藝及家政課時，便認為男生只適合學工藝，而女生只適合學家政。事實上，由於未來之工作與生活情境受到資訊化與自動化的影響，往後男女性在工作與生活中所扮演的角色將不會有太明顯的區別。近年來國內有部分學校已體認了這方面的需求，嘗試男女生都學工藝及家政課。
　　本研究的主要目的在探討目前國民中學，為男女生安排工藝及家政課程之模式，及其教學成效，以做為未來實施教學的參考。調查對象包括臺灣地區所有國民中學的教務主任、教師（每校抽取工藝、家政教師各五名）、以及實施「男生只上工藝」、「女生只上家政」、「男女生皆上工藝及家政」三種上課模式之學校二年級（下學期）學生（總共抽選六十個班級）。
　　根據分析所得資料的結果，本研究發現：
　　1.大多數之受訪的工藝與家政教師贊成男、女皆上工藝與家政，但不贊成二者合併為一個科目。
　　2.以全體受訪學生而言，其對現行之工藝與家政課的學習尚稱滿意但未達到很滿意的程度。
　　3.針對「只上工藝課」、「只上家政課」或「工藝與家政課兩者皆上」等三種模式而言，其對學生職業成熟的影響並無顯著的差異。
　　4.對前述之三種上課模式的學生而言，全體都傾向於贊成男、女生都上工藝與家政課。
　　綜合本研究的發現與相關文獻的論述，我國未來實施男、女生皆上工藝與家政的作法，仍是值得嘗試的；惟在實際推行時，宜注意：
　　1.教師方面：工藝課程應由工藝教師專任，家政課程由家政教師專任。
　　2.教材方面：需新編教材，而在新教材編妥之前，可由原工藝及家政課本中選取適當教材。

《詳全文》

Curriculum Models for Junior High School Students to Take Industrial Arts and Home Economics Author: Ta-Wei Lee, Wei Lin(Dept. of Industrial Arts Edu., NTNU)

Abstract：

Due to the concept of sex-stereotyping and the traditionally man-dominated job market, the arrangement of "industrial arts for boys, home economics for girls" has long been consid-ered as a matter of course. However, according to the nature of the future world of work and life style, there would be no difference between the role of men and that of women. In other words, the career development patterns and experience of both sex might be the same or sim-iliar.
Recently, some junior high schools in Taiwan have already offered industrial arts and home economics for both boys and girls to expand their career exploration experience.
The major purposes of this study were: (1) to find out the opinion of junior high school administrators and industrial arts / home economics teachers on offering industrial arts and home economics courses for both girls and boys ; (2) to explore the curriculum models of in-dustrial arts and home economics which are currently being adopted ; and (3) to find out the effects of different curriculum models on students' learning satisfaction and vocational maturity.
The conclusions reached were : (1) most students were satisfied with the current course content of industrial arts or home economics, but not "very satisfied" ; (2) most industrial arts and home economics teachers agreed that industrial arts and home economics should be of-fered for both boys and girls, but they did not think it is necessary to combine these two courses as one ; (3) in terms of the effects on students' learning satisfaction and career matu-rity, there was no significant difference among the three curriculum models : "industrial arts on-ly", "home economics only", and "both industrial arts and home economics" ; and (4) most stu-dents tended to agree that either boys or girls should take both industrial arts and home eco-nomics.