本研究聚焦於探討國小雙語體育教師在教材建構歷程中的經驗、策略與挑戰。隨著臺灣雙語政策推動，體育教師需在語言與學科整合的脈絡下調整或自編教材。本研究採質性研究法，以臺南市執行雙語教育中程計畫或部分領域雙語教學計畫之國小為研究場域，立意取樣 8 位具雙語體育教學經驗之教師，進行半結構式訪談。研究焦點包括教材建構的方法與語言策略、資源使用模式、課堂實踐與教材調整機制，以及不同教學年資階段之差異。研究結果顯示，教師的教材建構歷程呈現由「翻譯既有教材」逐漸發展為「概念導向與能回應體育課本質」的軌跡。語言融入策略以關鍵詞彙化、語言降階、簡短指令句與全肢體反應教學法 ( Total Physical Response, TPR ) 示範為核心。資源使用上，教師普遍常用 YouTube、雙語平臺、共備社群與 AI 工具，並隨經驗累積由大量搜尋走向精準選用。此外，教材建構與課堂實踐呈現循環關係，教師會根據學生反應持續修正語言與活動流程。研究亦指出語言負荷、活動節奏與語言精準度(何時、如何融入)為主要挑戰，惟夥伴、跨校交流以及雙語體育相關網站可提供重要支持。本研究結果可作為未來雙語體育教材設計、專業成長機制與政策推動之參考。

This study investigates the experiences, strategies, and challenges faced by elementary school bilingual physical education (PE) teachers in the development of instructional materials. With the implementation of Taiwan’s bilingual education policy, PE teachers are required to design or adapt teaching materials that integrate language with content. Adopting a qualitative research approach, this study targeted elementary schools in Tainan City participating in the Bilingual Education Medium-Term Plan or Partial-Subject Bilingual Teaching Programs. Eight bilingual PE teachers were selected through purposive sampling, and semi-structured interviews were conducted. The research focused on teachers’ methods of material development, language integration strategies, resource use patterns, classroom enactment, mechanisms of instructional adjustment, and differences across teaching experience levels. The findings suggest that teachers’ material development evolves from “translating existing materials” toward a “concept-driven approach that aligns with the nature of PE instruction.” Core language integration strategies include key vocabulary selection, language simplification, short commands, and the use of Total Physical Response (TPR). Regarding resource use, teachers commonly rely on YouTube, bilingual teaching platforms, collaborative preparation groups, and AI tools. As they gain experience, teachers shift from extensive searching to selective and efficient resource utilization. Additionally, material development and classroom practice are cyclical, as teachers continuously revise language use and activity design based on students’ responses. The findings also show that teachers face challenges such as language load, the pacing of activities, and the accuracy of language use—particularly regarding when and how to incorporate English. Nevertheless, support from teaching partners, cross-school collaboration, and online resources for bilingual PE play a crucial role. The results of this study provide insights into future bilingual PE material development, teacher professional development initiatives, and bilingual education policy implementation.

王俊成 (2021)。體育雙語實施現況之探討－以參與沉浸式計畫國民小學為例 〔未出版的碩士論文〕。國立臺中教育大學。
江蕙伶、張繼寧（2011）。持續專業發展（CPD）。臺灣師資培育電子報，25，1–6。取自 https://teacher.edu.tw/packages/tted/web/epaper/combine/combine25.pdf
林子斌（2021）。雙語教育 : 破除考科思維的20堂雙語課。親子天下。
侯雅文、林政逸（2021）。我國中小學實施CLIL教學模式現況、問題與解決策略。臺灣教育評論月刊，10（6），118-124。
洪榮昌（2019）。偏鄉小校縮小城鄉教育落差可行性策略之初探。臺灣教育評論月刊，8（4），135-138。
孫佳婷 (2023)。全身肢體反應教學法：論其內涵與雙語體育教學中之實踐策略。中華體育季刊，37(4)，343-358。
張秀娟、陳易芬（2020）。跨語言實踐在國小雙語教學實施的可能性探討。臺灣教育評論月刊，9(12)，69-75。
張媛甯、邱美雲（2010）。臺南市國民小學教師專業成長與學校效能關係之研究。學校行政，（69），63–82。https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.201009.0063
張德銳、郭淑芳（2011）。我國中小學教師專業發展實務與研究的問題與展望。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊, 4(2), 21–43. https://doi.org/10.6764/JTEPD.201112.0021
戚居清（2018）。Make it Possible：國小全英語授課之SOP。臺灣教育評論月刊，7（2），112-118。
陳錦芬（2023）。臺灣雙語教學之教學方針與策略。教育實踐與研究，36（1），163-187。
陳錦芬、楊啟文 (2022)。運動百靈果Bilingual-PE。國立臺北教育大學。
教育部 (2014)。十二年國教課程網要總綱。取自https://www.naer.edu.tw/PageSyllabus?fid=52
教育部 (2018)。教育部推動雙語國家。取自https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=D33B55D537402BAA&s=FB233D7EC45FFB37
教育部國民中小學課程與教學資源整合平臺（CIRN）（2015a）。國民中小學部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫。教育部。取自 https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/WebContent/index.aspx?sid=1192&mid=14333
教育部課程與教學資源整合平臺（CIRN）（2015b）。教師專業發展。教育部。取自 https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/WebContent/index.aspx?sid=11&mid=12520
黃琇屏（2021）。公立中小學雙語教育實施現況與挑戰。臺灣教育評論月刊，10（12），6-11。
楊怡婷（2022）。學校推動雙語教學之挑戰與因應。臺灣教育評論月刊，11（1），81-86。
葉若蘭、翁福元（2021）。雙語教育推動的挑戰與配套措施建議。臺灣教育評論月刊，10（12），19-26。
鄒文莉（2021）。雙語教學的概念與實踐－成功大學鄒文莉教授專訪報導。師友雙月刊，626，6-13。
鄒文莉、高實玫（2018）。CLIL教學資源書：探索學科內容與語言整合教學。書林書店。
鄒文莉、黃怡萍（2022）。臺灣雙語教學資源書：全球在地化課程設計與教學實踐。書林書店。
臺北市政府教育局（2019）。臺北市自編CLIL雙語補充教材。https://sites.google.com/view/tp-clil/Life-Curriculum
臺南市政府教育局（2021）。臺南市雙語教育中程計畫（110–113 學年度）。臺南市政府教育局。https://tbeerc.tn.edu.tw/modules/tadnews/page.php?ncsn=9&nsn=88
廖偉民（2020）。2020年臺灣公立國小推展雙語教育之探討。臺灣教育評論月刊，9（9），90-96。
劉佳鎮 (2022) 。雙語體育教學現況與師資培育之挑戰。 臺灣教育評論月刊， 11(8)，38-41。
遠見天下文化教育基金會（2023）。CLIL可以唷~教學資源共享社群。https://tw100-2023.cwgv.org.tw/contents/results_demo?id=98
鄭文文、湯堯（2024）。高等教育雙語政策影響EMI教師教學與學生學習之探討。臺灣教育評論月刊，13（1），116-123。
穆柏安（2023）。淺談國民中學雙語教育。臺灣教育評論月刊，12（1），145-148。
謝傳崇、沈芷嫣（2022）。歐洲國家英語融入學科（CLIL）教學的困境與因應之道。臺灣教育，733，1-18。
簡雅臻、龔慧懿（2024）。雙語課程的語言使用與教學。於簡雅臻（主編），雙語教學課堂實踐指南（113–138頁）。書林出版有限公司。
羅文杏（2022）。臺灣雙語教師知能及增能課程規劃。臺灣教育評論月刊，11（8），12-15。
羅美蘭、田耐青（2024）。雙語課程的規劃。於簡雅臻（主編），雙語教學課堂實踐指南（1–32頁）。書林出版有限公司。
羅凱暘 (2009)。從教學研究焦點談提升體育教學效能實務。學校體育，111，27-32。
Berliner, D. C. (1988). The development of expertise in pedagogy. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED298122.pdf
Brawn, J. R. (2024). Creating immersive language learning environments for young learners. American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research, 8(5), 165–169.
Burns, M. (2021). Technology in education: Background paper for 2023 Global Education Monitoring Report [Technical report]. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16651.98082
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). A window on CLIL. In CLIL: Content and language integrated learning (pp. 1–10). Cambridge University Press.
Cummins, J. (1998). Immersion education for the millennium: What have we learned from 30 years of research on second language immersion? In M. R. Childs & R. M. Bostwick (Eds.), Learning through two languages: Research and practice. Second Katoh Gakuen International Symposium on Immersion and Bilingual Education (pp. 34–47). Katoh Gakuen. https://archive.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/strategies/CUMMINS/CUMMINS.PDF
Curle, S., Sahan, K., Jablonkai, R., Mittelmeier, J., & Veitch, A. (2020). English in higher education – English medium Part 1: Literature review. British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/L020_English_HE_lit_review_FINAL.pdf
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction-A growing global phenomenon. British Council. https://www.britishcouncil.es/sites/default/files/british_council_english_as_a_medium_of_instruction.pdf
Garton, S., & Graves, K. (Eds.). (2014). International perspectives on materials in ELT. Springer.
Genesee, F. (Ed.). (1994). Educating second language children: The whole child, the whole curriculum, the whole community. Cambridge University Press.
Grigoraș, C.-P., & Dejica, D. (2023). Teaching EFL to the digital-born generation: Challenges and expectations. Professional Communication and Translation Studies, 16, 160–165.
Huang, Y.-P., & Tsou, W.-L. (2023). CLIL development in bilingual education in Taiwan: Past, present, and future. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 26(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.6384/CIQ.202301_26(1).0001
Hylén, J. (2006). Open educational resources: Opportunities and challenges. In Proceedings of Open Education (pp. 49–63). OECD. https://www.knowledgeall.net/files/Additional_Readings-Consolidated.pdf
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
McGrath, I. (2016). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching (2nd ed.). Edinburgh University Press.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Macmillan Education.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nathan, J. (2016). Peer Interactions in New Content and Language Integrated Settings. London, Springer Cham Heidelberg.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional Development for Language Teachers: Strategies for Teacher Learning. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511667237
Ruslin, Mashuri, S., Abdul Rasak, M. S., Alhabsyi, F., & Syam, H. (2022). Semi-structured interview: A methodological reflection on the development of a qualitative research instrument in educational studies. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 12(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-1201052229
Schon, A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco：Jossey-Bass.
Tomlinson, B. (2012). Materials development for language learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 45(2), 143-179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444811000528
Tran, T. H. T., Burke, R., & O'Toole, J. M. (2021). Perceived impact of EMI on students’ language proficiency in Vietnamese tertiary EFL contexts. IAFOR Journal of Education: Language Learning in Education, 9(3), 7–24.