約 486,747 件
https://w.atwiki.jp/nfu-unofficial/pages/11.html
www.fish-u.ac.jp/nyuugaku/syllabus/R3 honka syllabus-gakugai.htm を参照
https://w.atwiki.jp/icugakuy/pages/24.html
Week 3 Apr. 19 Social Relationships and Adaptation to Life Stress II Discussion Questions 1. For what kinds of potential confounds do social support researchers need to be vigilant in their investigations? What approaches are useful in dealing with these confounds? 2. Many researchers are keenly interested in identifying the underlying mechanisms that account for the hypothesized beneficial effects of social support. What mechanisms have been postulated to account for the association between social support and physical health? between social support and mental health? How might these causal mechanisms be studied empirically? 3. How might these causal mechanisms be studied empirically? 4. Some researchers have argued that individuals needs for social support and their response to social support will differ at different stages in the process of adapting to a major life stress. What kinds of temporal models have been proposed? How persuasive do you find these models to be? 5. Much of the research on social support examines contemporaneous associations between current social support and current health status. Yet the etiology of many illnesses has a long time course. How should social support be investigated to reflect the temporal course of various kinds of physical or mental illness? 6. Similarly, experiences in social relationships unfold over a person’s life time. To what extent might the cumulative effects of such experiences differ from the effects of current social relationships and interactions? How might we attempt to capture such cumulative effects? Reading Assignment Cohen, S. (l988). Psychosocial models of the role of social support in the etiology of physical disease. Health Psychology, 7, 269-297. Cohen, S., Doyle, W.J., Turner, R., Alper, C. M., Skoner, D. B. (2003). Sociability and susceptibility to the common cold. Psychological Science, 14, 389-395. Jacobson, D. E. (1986). Types and timing of social support. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 27, 250-264. Seeman,T. E., McEwen, B. S. (1996). Impact of social environment characteristics on neuroendocrine regulation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 58, 459–471. Thoits, P. A. (1982). Conceptual, methodological, and theoretical problems in studying social support as a buffer against life stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 23, 145-159. Uchino, B., Caciopo, J. T., Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K. (1996). The relationship between social support and physiological processes A review with emphasis on underlying mechanisms and implications for health. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 488-531. Cacioppo, J. T., Berntson, G. G., Sheridan, J.F., McClintock, M. K. (2000). Multi-level integrative analyses of human behavior Social neuroscience and the complementing nature of social and biological approaches. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 829-843. (optional) Kennedy, J., Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., Glaser, R. (1990). Social support, stress, and the immune system. In B. R. Sarason, I. G. Sarason, G. R. Pierce (Eds), Social support An interactional view (pp. 253-266). New York Wiley. (optional) Week 4Social Support Current Controversies, Critiques, and Intriguing Issues Apr. 26 1) Researchers differ in the extent to which they view social support as an objective or subjective state. What is the nature of this controversy? What kind of evidence would tend to substantiate each perspective? Why does this distinction matter for research? for potential interventions? In a related vein, a consensus is emerging among many researchers that "perceived support" matters more for well-being than "received support." What is the strength of the empirical evidence for this claim? 2) What does research on “invisible” support suggest about the kinds of interpersonal processes or transactions in close relationships that are most beneficial to health? The research on invisible support has been conducted primarily with healthy adults. Do you think the findings from this work generalize to ill individuals, such as those coping with chronic illness? Why or why not? 3) The effects of social support have not always been found to be positive, particularly in studies of emotional health or mental health. Stress-buffering effects appear inconsistently, and instrumental support has been associated in some research with negative, rather than, positive outcomes. How should we reconcile this work with generalizations that prevail in the literature about the beneficial effects of social support? 4) What implications for our research designs, sampling strategies, assessment procedures, and data analyses stem from consideration of the chronicity of some human disorders? For example, in studying the role of social support in predicting levels of depression, how might our results change if we include vs. exclude individuals with a history of chronic depression. More generally, how might our understanding of the association between interpersonal processes and health be affected by systematic attention to the chronicity (or stability) of the outcomes under investigation? 5) On what conceptual grounds has research on social support been criticized? On what methodological grounds has this research been criticized? Which of these various criticisms do you find most compelling? How might these (or other) criticisms be addressed in future research? Reading Assignment Bolger, N., Zuckerman, A., Kessler, R. C. (2000). Invisible support and adjustment to stress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 953-961. Burton, E., Stice, E., Seeley, J. R. (2004). A prospective test of the stress-buffering model of depression in adolescent girls No support once again. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72, 689-697. Coyne, J. C., Bolger, N. (1990). Doing without social support as an explanatory concept. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 148-158. Kessler, R. (1992). Perceived support and adjustment to stress Methodological considerations. In H. O. F. Veiel U. Baumann (Eds.), The meaning and measurement of social support (pp. 259- 271). Washington, DC Hemisphere. Lakey, B., Cassady, P. F. (1990). Cognitive processes in perceived social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1-7. Lieberman, M. A. (1986). Social supports - the consequences of psychologizing. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 54, 461-465. Monroe, S. M., Johnson, S. L. (1992). Social support, depression, and other mental disorders. In retrospect and toward future prospects. In H. O. F. Veiel U. Baumann (Eds.), The meaning and measurement of social support (pp. 93-105). Washington, DC Hemisphere. Dunkel-Schetter, C., Bennet, T. L. (1990). Differentiating the cognitive and behavioral aspects of social support. In B. R. Sarason, I. G. Sarason, G. R. Pierce (Eds), Social support An interactional view (pp. 267-296). New York Wiley. (optional) Week 5A) Social Networks, Health, and Mortality May 3 B) Loneliness and Health A) Discussion Questions 1. A sizable literature has emerged that links involvement in social networks to mortality. Although specific studies vary, they share many features in common. How would you describe a typical study? What potential confounds and alternative explanations have been considered in these studies? Have any been overlooked? How has the association between social network indicators and mortality been interpreted (what explanations have been offered)? What appear to be promising directions for advancing this literature, either conceptually or methodologically? 2. Much of the evidence in this literature is derived from longitudinal studies that were initiated before the evolution of sophisticated approaches to conceptualizing and measuring social support and social network involvement. Yet, across these studies, an assortment of relatively "crude" measures of support/involvement has proved to be rather effective in predicting mortality. What should we make of the fact that these simple measures perform as well as they do? 3. The literatures on the health effects of social support and the health effects of loneliness have developed largely in isolation of each other. Should these literatures be integrated in some fashion? Do they offer distinctive or duplicative (redundant) conceptual perspectives and empirical findings? For example, is loneliness synonymous with a lack of social support? If not, how do they differ? 4. What health effects of loneliness have been documented in the literature? What mediating mechanisms have been posited to account for these effects? Reading Assignment Berkman, L. F., Syme, S. L. (1979). Social networks, host resistance, and mortality A nine- year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. American Journal of Epidemiology, 109, 186-204. Berkman, L. F., Glass, T., Brissette, I., Seeman, T. E. (2000). From social integration to health Durkheim in the new millenium. Social Science and Medicine, 51, 843-857. Hawkley, L. C., Cacioppo, J. T. (2002). Loneliness and pathways to disease. Brain, behavior, and immunity. Marangoni, C., Ickes, W. (1989). Loneliness A theoretical review with implications for measurement. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 93-128. Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., Bernston, G. C. (2003). The anatomy of loneliness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 71-74. (optional) Week 6 May 10 Social Relationships as a Source of Social Control Discussion Questions 1. What is the historical origin of researchers interest in social control? How has social control generally been defined in the sociological literature? How does social control differ conceptually from health-related social support? How could health-related social control and social support be distinguished empirically? 2. Through what specific mechanisms is social control believed to affect health outcomes? How could these various mechanisms be studied, and their distinctive effects distinguished? 3. Some theorists believe that social control has dual effects (on health behavior and psychological well-being, respectively). What does this mean? How might the dual effects hypothesis be investigated? In the assigned readings, social role obligations are posited to promote better health behavior. Can you think of circumstances when this would not be true? How might we elaborate "social control theory" to provide a basis for predicting when social role obligations would have beneficial vs. detrimental effects on health behavior? 4. How has social control typically been studied? From what limitations do these approaches suffer? How have researchers attempted to grapple with the threat of selection (or “social drift”) in their studies of the health effects of being married, being a parent, etc.? What alternative methodologies seem promising for investigating the health effects of social control in personal relationships? 5. How might we seek to integrate theoretical and methodological perspectives on social support and social control in studying interpersonal processes and health? For example, to what extent might efforts to provide social support and efforts to exercise social control within a relationship represent compatible versus incompatible relationship functions? How could we investigate these joint effects in empirical studies? 6. Some forms of health-related “influence” in social networks serve to undermine, rather than foster, sound health practices. Examples might include peer initiation into substance use or peer undermining of compliance with medical regimens. This sometimes been termed “negative social control.” Do you think this is a useful construct, or is it redundant with existing constructs that address the same phenomena? How might existing theoretical perspectives be developed to allow us to develop hypotheses about the presence and effects of positive vs. negative forms of social control in social networks? Reading Assignment Burman, B., Margolin, G. (1992). Analysis of the association between marital relationships and health problems An interactional perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 39-63. Helgeson, V. S., Novak, S. A., Lepore, S. J., Eton, D. T. (2004). Spouse social control efforts Relations to health behavior and well-being among men with prostate cancer. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 53-68. Hughes, M., Gove, W. R. (l981). Living alone, social integration, and mental health. American Journal of Sociology, 87, 48-74. Lewis, M. A., Rook, K. S. (1999). Social control in personal relationships Impact on health behaviors and psychological distress. Health Psychology, 18, 63-71. Rook, K. S. (1990). Social networks as a source of social control in older adults lives. In H. Giles, N. Coupland, J. Wiemann (Eds.), Communication, health, and the elderly (pp. 45-63). Manchester, England University of Manchester Press. Umberson, D. (1987). Family status and health behaviors Social control as a dimension of social integration. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 28, 306-319. Tucker, J. S. (2002). Health-related social control within older adults’ relationships. Journal of Gerontology Psychological Sciences, 57, P387-P395. (optional) Westmaas, J. L.,. Wild, T. C., Ferrence, R. (2002). Effects of gender in social control of smoking cessation. Health Psychology, 21, 368–376. (optional) Week 7 May 17 Social Relationships as a Source of Stress/Conflict Discussion Questions 1. Why is it important to consider the implications for health of negative as well as positive aspects of social network involvement? 2. How have the negative aspects of social ties been conceptualized? What categorizations or taxonomies have been developed? How do these taxonomies compare with those developed by social support researchers? What approaches have been developed for assessing negative social exchanges? 3. How has the association between negative social exchanges and health (physical or emotional) typically been studied? What are some of the limitations of this approach? What alternative approaches appear promising? 4. Some research has sought specifically to compare the effects on health of negative versus positive social interactions. How have these effects typically been compared? What conclusions about these effects have emerged from work conducted thus far? From what kinds of limitations does this "comparative" research suffer? 5.What explanations have been offered for the apparently disproportionate effects of negative social interactions that have been documented in some studies? What other explanations seem plausible? How might these explanations be tested? 6. What does existing research suggest about the covariation between positive and negative interaction within particular dyads, within a social network? How persuasive is this research? How might it be improved? 7. What directions for future research seem most promising? Reading Assignment Coyne, J. C., Wortman, C. B., Lehman, D. R. (1988). The other side of support Emotional overinvolvement and miscarried helping. In B. H. Gottlieb (Ed.), Marshaling social support Formats, processes, and effects (pp. 305-330). Newbury Park, CA Sage. Ewart, C. K., Taylor, C. B., Kraemer, H. C., Agras, W. S. (1991). High blood pressure and marital discord Not being nasty matters more than being nice. Health Psychology, 10, 155-163. Finch, J. F., Okun, M. A., Pool, G. J., Ruehlman, L. S. (1999). A comparison of the influence of conflictual and supportive social interactions on psychological distress. Journal of Personality, 67, 581-621. Rook, K. S. (1990). Stressful aspects of older adults social relationships An overview of current theory and research. In M.A.P. Stephens, J. H. Crowther, S. E. Hobfoll, D. L. Tennenbaum (Eds.), Stress and coping in later life families (pp. 173-192). Washington, DC Hemisphere. Rook, K. S. (1998). Investigating the positive and negative sides of personal relationships Through a lens darkly? B. H. Spitzberg W. R. Cupach (Eds.), The dark side of close relationships (pp. 369-393). Mahwah, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum. Harris, T. O. (1992). Some reflections on the process of social support and nature of unsupportive behaviors. In H. O. F. Veiel U. Baumann (Eds.), The meaning and measurement of social support (pp. 171-190). Washington, DC Hemisphere. (optional) Kessler, R. C., McLeod, J. D., Wethington, E. (1985). The costs of caring A perspective on the relationship between sex and psychological distress. In I. G. Sarason B. R. Sarason (Eds.), Social support Theory, research and applications (pp. 491-506). The Hague, the Netherlands Martinus Nijhoff. (optional) Schuster, T. L., Kessler, R. C., Aseltine, R. H., Jr. (l989). Positive interactions, negative interactions, and depressed mood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 423-438. Week 8 May 24 A) Determinants of Social Support Person and Environmental Factors B) Special Topics (TBD based on class members’ interests) – e.g., gender differences; interpersonal processes in the context of chronic illness Discussion Questions 1. Some theorists argue that social support resides more in the eye of the beholder than in the responses of the immediate social environment - that social support is a stable, trait-like characteristic that emerges from early experiences with caregivers (parents and others). What links do they postulate? How has attachment theory been applied to the study of social support? 2. What role might social skill (or social competence) play in shaping the kind of social supoprt a person has? Based on the study by Cohen et al., does social competence) appear to influence levels of social support or to account for the stress-buffering effects of social support? What further research would be valuable in examining the implications of individual differences in social skill? 3. How might features of the social environment and broader social structure influence the kind of social support people have? 4. TBD Reading Assignment Berkman, L. F., Glass, T., Brissette, I., Seeman, T. E. (2000). From social integration to health Durkheim in the new millenium. Social Science and Medicine, 51, 843-857. Cohen, S., Sherrod, D. R., Clark, M. S. (1986). Social skills and the stress-protective role of social support. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 963-973. Collins, N. L., Feeney, B. C. (2004). Working models of attachment shape perceptions of social support Evidence From experimental and observational studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 363-383. House, J. S., Umberson, D., Landis, K. (1988). Structures and processes of social support. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 293-318. (Note This was listed as an optional reading for Week 2) Sarason, B. R., Pierce, G. R., Shearin, E. N., Sarason, I. G., Waltz, J. A. (1991). Perceived social support and working models of self and actual others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 273-287. Week 9Loss or Disruption of Important Social Relationships May 31 Reading Assignment TBD Week 10 Jun. 6 Applications The Design and Evaluation of Interventions Discussion Questions 1. What can practitioners/interventionists learn from theoretical and empirical work on interpersonal processes and health? What kinds of quandaries do practitioners face in seeking to draw upon research to guide their interventions? 20 2. What can researchers learn from interventions that seek to enhance people s emotional or physical health by influencing their social relationships in some way? 30 3. What kinds of underlying assumptions (explicit or implicit) have guided researchers efforts to derive recommendations for intervention from their work? To what extent do these assumptions appear warranted? 30 4. How can we encourage greater collaboration among basic researchers, applied researchers, and practitioners? What kinds of barriers appear to interfere with meaningful collaboration? 20 5. What lessons can be drawn from existing intervention studies, including those that have been unsuccessful? Do common themes or issues cut across these "failed" intervention studies? 20 6. Why do correlational studies and intervention studies of social support processes sometimes yield dissimilar results? 20 Reading Assignment Gottlieb, B. H. (1992). Quandaries in translating support concepts to intervention. In H. O. F. Veiel U. Baumann (Eds.), The meaning and measurement of social support (pp. 293-309). New York Hemisphere. Helgeson, V. S., Cohen, S. (1996). Social support and adjustment to cancer Reconciling descriptive, correlational, and intervention research. Health Psychology, 15, 135-148. Heller, K., Thompson, M. G., Trueba, P. E., Hogg, J. R., Vlachos-Weber, I. (1991). Peer support telephone dyads for elderly women Was this the wrong intervention? American Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 53-74. (See also commentaries published in the same issue.) Kiesler, C. A. (1985). Policy implications of research on social support and health. In S. Cohen L. Syme (Eds.), Social support and health (pp. 347-364). Orlando, FL Academic Press. Rook, K. S. Dooley, D. (1985). Applying social support research Theoretical problems and future directions. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 5-28. Source Books and Special Journal Issues Cohen, S., Syme, S. L. (Eds.) (1985). Social support and health. Orlando, FL Academic Press. Cohen, S., Underwood, L. G., Gottlieb, B. H. (Eds.) (2000). Social support measurement and intervention A guide for health and social scientists. New York, NY Oxford University Press. . Duck, S. (Ed.) (1988, 1997). Handbook of personal relationships. Chichester, England Wiley. Duck, S., Silver, R. C. (Eds.) (1990). Personal relationships and social support. Newbury Park, CA Sage. Gottlieb, B. H. (Ed.) (1981). Social networks and social support. Beverly Hills, CA Sage. Gottlieb, B. H. (1983). Social support strategies. Beverly Hills, CA Sage. Gottlieb, B. H. (Ed.) (1988). Marshaling social support Formats, processes, and effects. Newbury Park, CA Sage. House, J. S. (l981). Work stress and social support. Reading, MA Addison-Wesley. Knipscheer, C. P. M., Antonucci, C. C. (Eds.) (1990). Social network research. Amsterdam Swets Zeitlinger. Milardo, R. (Ed.) (1988). Families and social networks. Newbury Park, CA Sage. Pierce, G. R., Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. B. (1996). Handbook of social support and the family. New York Plenum. Pilisuk, M. (1986). The healing web Social networks and human survival. Hanover, NH University Press of New England. Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I.G., Pierce, G. R. (Eds.) (1990). Social support An interactional view. New York Wiley. Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R. (Eds.) (1985), Social support Theory, research and applications. The Hague, the Netherlands Martinus Nijhoff. Spitzberg, B. H., Cupach, W. R.. (1998). The dark side of close relationships. Mahwah, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum. Vaux, A. (l988). Social support Theory, research, and intervention. New York Praeger. Veiel, H. O. F., Baumann, U. (Eds.) (1992). The meaning and measurement of social support. Washington, DC Hemisphere. The following special journal issues that focused on social support or social networks Journal of Social Issues, 1984 (vol. 40, no. 4) and 1985 (vol. 41, no.1) Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1990, (vol. 9, no. ) Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1990 (vol. 7, no. 4) and 1992, (vol. 9, no. 3) Communication Research, 1992 (vol. 19, no. 2)
https://w.atwiki.jp/drmasakotani/pages/29.html
実戦ビジネス英語 ● 目標 英語でのビジネスミーティングに貢献出来る英語力をListening/speaking両面から強化する。 TOEICスコアアップも実現する。 ● スケジュール 毎週土曜日、午前10 35-12 20 週1回のスクーリングです. 毎日の練習を行い、クラスは練習の成果発表の場となります 参加初日は自由にきめられます。まず内容確認のためにトライアル参加の予定をご連絡ください、トライアル参加のための予習教材をeメールいたします。トライアル参加の予習は1週間おこなってください。 連絡先: mkotani2009@gmail.com ● スクーリング内容 クラスでは発表・発言中心でビジネス英語の習得を目指します。 60分 Listening Comprehension Summary 発表 1週間前に配布したListening練習用の MUST教材 MP3ファイルを使って ネーティブスピードで 意味が取れるよう練習します。transcriptと日本語翻訳が提供されるので、lisening練習が進んだ時点で内容確認をしておいてください。クラスでは、各自サマリーを発表します、弱点・強化項目をコーチします。 15分 Improvization ぶっつけ本番でTechTalkの1ページを詠みます。発音し、次にサマリーを発表します。 10分 Shadowing 1週間前に配布したshadowing練習用の MP3ファイルを使って Shadowingを各自実演します。 耳で聞いた英語を発音する練習です。リズム感のある生き生きとした英語が発音できるように1週間練習します。 Word数は100語を超える長いshadowingです。英語発音のenvelopeが作られます。 20分 Discussion in English ビジネスの現場レベルの発言ができるように、英語で自分の意見を表明して先生と生徒が英語でディスカッションします。MBAコースで行われるケーススタディーのクラスディスカッション形式でおこないます。題材は1週間前に配布したListening練習用の MUST教材 MP3ファイルです。語彙の辞書引き、内容に関する簡単なリサーチ、自分の賛成・反対意見・提案などをまとめる、発言の概要を考えメモを作っておく、がクラス参加の前提条件になります。 クラスでは、先生が教材の内容を確認します。そのあと、生徒を指名して発言を要請し、生徒は自分の意見を表明します。先生は、生徒の発言の後、英語表現・用語、語彙の発音、発言内容・方向性、などに関して指導します。先生はケーススタディーの指導教官の役割に加えて、ビジネス会議に参加している同僚や上司としての役割も果たし、生徒の発言の英語を分析しコーチします。 このstudent-tutor-interactionを繰り返し、実践英語のレベルアップを計ります。この間、他の生徒は各自のノートブックに meeting minutesを書きます。 imageプラグインエラー ご指定のファイルが見つかりません。ファイル名を確認して、再度指定してください。 (teaching_thumbnail.jpg)
https://w.atwiki.jp/knowledgenote/pages/51.html
【syllabus】 講義の摘要。講義要目。学年あるいは学期中の授業・講義の計画や内容の概略を各時限ごとに記したもの。
https://w.atwiki.jp/idoh/pages/39.html
人の移動研究の新たな展開をめざして ―蘭信三編著『帝国以後の人の移動』合評会― 開催日時:2013年12月7日 12時30分~18時30分(開場12時) 会場:東京大学駒場キャンパス18号館ホール チラシはこちら.pdf このたび刊行される、蘭信三編著『帝国以後の人の移動』(勉誠出版)は、20世紀半ばから現在までの時期を中心に、旧日本帝国とその勢力圏をはじめとする多様な地域・民族の事例を様々な方法で分析した論考が並ぶ大部の著書となった。いずれの論考もグローバリゼーションのなかの人の移動の活性化やポストコロニアリズムに関わる現代的問題関心を意識したものとなっており、人の移動研究の可能性や今後の課題について考える素材を与えている。そこで同書の刊行を受けてその執筆者を招き、第一線で活躍する関連分野の研究者とともに同書の合評会の場を設けた。多くの方々の参加のもとに同書を素材とする議論を深めていくことを呼びかける。 登壇者 高橋 均(東京大学大学院教授) 木村 健二(下関市立大学経済学部教授) 川喜田 敦子(中央大学文学部准教授) 権 香淑(恵泉女学園大学非常勤講師) 五十嵐 泰正(筑波大学大学院人文社会科学研究科准教授) 内海 愛子(大阪経済法科大学アジア太平洋研究センター長) 李 昌益(韓国国立済州大学校教授在日済州人センターセンター長) 司会:遠藤 泰生(東京大学大学院総合文化研究科教授) 主催:科研基盤B 「移民とその故郷:非同化適応戦略とトランスナショナリズム表象」(代表・高橋 均) 後援:東京大学グローバル地域研究機構アメリカ太平洋地域研究センター __
https://w.atwiki.jp/kuwana/pages/52.html
学科名 普通科 教 科 科 目 標準単位数 1 年 2 年 3 年 4 年 国語 国語総合 4 2 ○ 2 ○ 〃 国語表現1 2 2 〃 国語表現2 2 2 〃 基礎国語1 学校設定 2 〃 基礎国語2 学校設定 2 地歴 世界史A 2 3 〃 日本史A 2 3 公民 現代社会 2 2 ○ 2 〃 政治・経済 2 3 数学 数学1 3 3 ☆ 3 ☆ 〃 数学2 4 3 ※ 3 ※ 理科 理科総合A 2 2 2 〃 理科総合B 2 2 ○ 2 ○ 保健体育 体育 7~8 2 2 2 1 〃 保健 2 1 ○ 1 ○ 芸術 音楽1 2 2 ○ 〃 音楽2 2 2 外国語 英語1 3 3 ☆ 3 ☆ 〃 リーディング 4 3 3 家庭科 家庭基礎 2 2 ○ 2 情報 情報A 2 2 〃 ITリテラシー 学校設定 3 ※ 〃 メディアデザイン 学校設定 3 ※ 各学年 科目単位数の合計 19 総合的な学習の時間 1 ホームルーム 1 週当たりの授業時数 21 教育課程表内の単位数をクリックするとシラバスがご覧いただけます。 学校設定科目は、本校独自に授業を設定しているものです。 なお、基礎国語は1クラスを3つのグループに分け、 3名の教員がついて授業をしています。 ☆印は特別授業1時間を含みます。 1クラスを3つのグループに分けて行う、自学自習を中心とした、 少人数での授業です。 各グループに教員が1人ずつ付ききめ細かな指導を行っています。 ※印は1科目の選択 ○印は外国籍生徒の取り出し授業をおこなっています。 ギリシャ文字は、算用数字にして表示してあります。 - since 2011.3.14
https://w.atwiki.jp/v-sw/pages/550.html
あいさつ状 件名:Re あいさつ状 返信なし グルメ 件名:Re グルメ 返信なし ごきげん伺い 件名:Re ごきげん伺い 返信:どこを走るんだ? 件名:Re どこを走るんだ? 返信:『The World』好き 件名:Re 『The World』好き 返信:『カナード』 件名:Re 『カナード』 返信なし 座右の銘 件名:Re 座右の銘 返信:シラバスらしい 件名:Re シラバスらしい 返信:『カナード』 件名:Re 『カナード』 返信:ボランティア 件名:Re ボランティア 返信なし フラワーギフト 件名:Re フラワーギフト 返信:感謝 件名:Re 感謝 返信:いやし 件名:Re いやし 返信:1人暮らし? 件名:Re 1人暮らし? 返信なし .hack//G.U. Topページへ
https://w.atwiki.jp/maekoku/pages/67.html
本学ではネット上で確認できる。 授業予定、授業の目的、評価方法などが載っている。 履修する時には、成績はレポートで決まるのか、テストで決まるのか、出席の配点はどうかなどを意識すると良いかもしれない。
https://w.atwiki.jp/kuwana/pages/57.html
学科名 普通科 教 科 科 目 標準単位数 1 年 2 年 3 年 4 年 国語 国語総合 4 2 2 〃 国語表現1 2 2 〃 国語表現2 2 2 〃 基礎国語1 学校設定 2 〃 基礎国語2 学校設定 2 地歴 世界史A 2 3 〃 日本史A 2 3 公民 現代社会 2 2 2 〃 政治・経済 2 3 数学 数学1 3 2 3 ☆ 〃 数学2 4 3 ※ 3 ※ 〃 数学活用 2 1 ☆ 理科 理科総合A 2 2 2 〃 理科総合B 2 2 〃 地学基礎 2 2 保健体育 体育 7~8 2 2 2 1 〃 保健 2 1 1 芸術 音楽1 2 2 〃 音楽2 2 2 外国語 英語1 3 3 ☆ 3 ☆ 〃 リーディング 4 3 3 家庭科 家庭基礎 2 2 2 情報 情報A 2 2 〃 ITリテラシー 学校設定 3 ※ 〃 メディアデザイン 学校設定 3 ※ 各学年 科目単位数の合計 19 総合的な学習の時間 1 ホームルーム 1 週当たりの授業時数 21 教育課程表内の単位数をクリックするとシラバスがご覧いただけます。 学校設定科目は、本校独自に授業を設定しているものです。 なお、基礎国語は1クラスを3つのグループに分け、 3名の教員がついて授業をしています。 ☆印は特別授業1時間を含みます。 1クラスを3つのグループに分けて行う、自学自習を中心とした、 少人数での授業です。 各グループに教員が1人ずつ付ききめ細かな指導を行っています。 ※印は1科目の選択 ギリシャ文字は、算用数字にして表示してあります。 - since 2011.3.14
https://w.atwiki.jp/kuwana/pages/19.html
学科名 普通科 教 科 科 目 標準単位数 1 年 2 年 3 年 4 年 国語 国語総合 4 2 ○ 4 ☆ ○ 〃 国語表現1 2 2 〃 国語表現2 2 2 〃 基礎国語1 学校設定 2 地歴 世界史A 2 3 〃 日本史A 2 3 公民 現代社会 2 2 ○ 2 〃 政治・経済 2 3 数学 数学1 3 3 ☆ 3 ☆ 〃 数学2 4 3 ※ 3 ※ 理科 理科総合A 2 2 2 〃 理科総合B 2 2 ○ 2 ○ 保健体育 体育 7~8 2 2 2 1 〃 保健 2 1 ○ 1 ○ 芸術 音楽1 2 2 ○ 〃 音楽2 2 2 外国語 英語1 3 3 ☆ 3 ☆ 〃 リーディング 4 3 3 家庭科 家庭基礎 2 2 ○ 2 情報 情報A 2 2 〃 ITリテラシー 学校設定 3 ※ 〃 メディアデザイン 学校設定 3 ※ 各学年 科目単位数の合計 19 総合的な学習の時間 1 ホームルーム 1 週当たりの授業時数 21 教育課程表内の単位数をクリックするとシラバスがご覧いただけます。 学校設定科目は、本校独自に授業を設定しているものです。 なお、基礎国語は1クラスを3つのグループに分け、 3名の教員がついて授業をしています。 ☆印は特別授業1時間を含みます。 1クラスを3つのグループに分けて行う、自学自習を中心とした、 少人数での授業です。 各グループに教員が1人ずつ付ききめ細かな指導を行っています。 ※印は1科目の選択 ○印は外国籍生徒の取り出し授業をおこなっています。 ギリシャ文字は、算用数字にして表示してあります。 教育課程変更のご案内 平成22年度入学生より 基礎・基本学習を充実させるため、国語の科目変更をおこないます。 1年生 変更点 科目 H21 入学生まで(単位数) H22 入学生〜(単位数) 国語総合 4単位 2単位 基礎国語1 ー 2単位 2年生 変更点 科目 H21 入学生まで(単位数) H22 入学生〜(単位数) 国語総合 4単位 2単位 基礎国語2 ー 2単位 3,4年生の変更はありません。 - since 2010.4.1