近年來，雙語教育與在地文化融入課程受到越來越多關注。隨著臺灣2030雙語政策與十二年國教課綱的推動，許多學校開始將英語融入校訂課程，並結合地方特色發展課程。然而，位於臺灣南部一所偏鄉小學的學生，仍面臨一些問題，例如英語學習動機不足、缺乏真實使用英語的機會，以及課程內容與生活經驗連結不足。為改善上述問題，專題導向學習（Project-Based Learning, PBL）強調真實情境、探究歷程與做中學，因此逐漸被視為具有潛力的教學方式。然而，目前較少研究探討PBL如何實際運用於國小雙語彈性課程，以及學生在課程中的投入表現與所面臨的挑戰。因此，本研究旨在探討研究者如何運用PBL進行課程設計、學生如何投入於PBL任務，以及學生與教師在課程實施過程中遭遇哪些困難與挑戰。
本研究採用個案研究法，以臺灣南部一所公立偏鄉小學五年級學生為研究對象，該班原有18位學生，惟其中一位學生因未取得家長同意，其資料未納入分析。在17位取得家長同意的學生中，另選取6位學生參與半結構式訪談。本研究設計並實施一套結合在地稻米文化與英語學習的雙語彈性課程，課程主題為「踏進社區尋米趣」。資料蒐集方式包括課堂觀察、學生學習單與作品、半結構式訪談，以及教師反思札記。
研究結果顯示，融入專題導向學習七大核心要素的課程，透過真實的學習經驗，有助於促進學生在學習在地稻米文化時的行為、情意、認知與能動性投入。其中，以行為投入最為明顯。真實且具操作性的活動亦有助於提升學生的情意、認知與能動性投入。學生對於稻田探索、割稻體驗以及製作碗粿等活動展現高度興趣。然而，在課程實施過程中，學生與教師亦面臨多項挑戰，包括實作活動的困難、科技設備與技術問題、課程時程調整，以及地方知識與社區資源協調等問題。根據研究結果，本研究提出相關教學啟示與實務建議，以供未來雙語彈性課程設計及專題導向學習實施之參考。

In recent years, bilingual education and the integration of local culture into curriculum have received increasing attention. With the promotion of Taiwan’s Bilingual 2030 Policy and the implementation of the 12-Year Basic Education Curriculum Guidelines, many schools have started to develop bilingual alternative curricula that integrate English learning with local culture. However, students at a rural elementary school located in southern Taiwan face several problems, such as low motivation for learning English, limited opportunities to use English in meaningful situations, and weak connections between classroom learning and daily life. To address these problems, Project-Based Learning (PBL), which emphasizes authenticity, inquiry, and learning by doing, has gradually been considered a useful teaching approach. However, few studies have explored how PBL could be implemented in bilingual alternative curricula at the elementary level. In addition, limited research has examined how students engaged in PBL tasks and what challenges they encountered during the learning process. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate how the teacher designed and implemented the PBL curriculum, how students engaged in PBL tasks, and the difficulties and challenges both students and the teacher encountered during the implementation process.
This study adopted a case study approach. The participants were 17 fifth-grade students from a rural public elementary school in southern Taiwan. The class originally consisted of 18 students. However, one student's data was excluded because parental consent was not obtained. Among the 17 students whose parents provided consent, six students were selected to participate in semi-structured interviews. A bilingual alternative curriculum integrating local rice culture and English learning, titled “Explore the Value of Rice by Traveling Around the Community,” was designed and implemented. Data were collected through classroom observations, student worksheets and artifacts, semi-structured interviews, and teacher reflective journals.
The findings showed that the PBL curriculum, which incorporated the seven essential elements, provided authentic learning experiences that supported students’ behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and agentic engagement in learning about local rice culture. Among the four dimensions of student engagement, behavioral engagement was the most evident. Authentic and hands-on activities supported students’ emotional, cognitive, and agentic engagement. Students showed strong interest in paddy field exploration, rice-harvesting experiences, and making Taiwanese rice cakes (wa-gui). However, both students and the teacher encountered several challenges during implementation, including difficulties with hands-on tasks, technological problems and device limitations, curriculum schedule adjustments, and issues related to local knowledge and coordination with community resources. Based on these findings, this study offers pedagogical implications and practical suggestions for future bilingual alternative curriculum design and PBL implementation.

Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan. (n.d.). Rice: Production process. Agriculture and Food Education Information Network. https://fae.moa.gov.tw/map/food_item.php?type=AS04&id=169
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.
Guli Rice. (n.d.). Rice planting process: Breeding, ploughing, transplanting, field management, field drying, and harvesting. https://gulirice.com/plant-step/
Hussein, B. (2021). Addressing collaboration challenges in project-based learning: The student's perspective. Education Sciences, 11(8), 434. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080434
Larmer, J., Mergendoller, J. R., & Boss, S. (2015). Setting the standard for project-based learning: A proven approach to rigorous classroom instruction. ASCD.
Ministry of Education. (2014). The 12-year basic education curriculum guidelines: General guidelines. https://www.naer.edu.tw/
National Development Council. (2022). Bilingual 2030 policy blueprint (Updated ed.). https://www.ndc.gov.tw/
National Development Council. (2024). Bilingual 2030 policy booklet (2nd ed.). https://www.ndc.gov.tw/
PBLWorks. (2023). What is PBL? Gold standard project design. https://www.pblworks.org/what-is-pbl/gold-standard-project-design
PBLWorks. (2023). What is PBL? https://www.pblworks.org/
Tainan City Government. (2021). Tainan City bilingual education promotion report. https://www.tainan.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=16907&s=7755365
Taiwan Rice Promotion Association. (2018, May 10). Not just rice! Creative and diverse rice dishes challenge the taste buds. https://www.taiwanme.org.tw/article_detail.php?id=50&page=9
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds. & Trans.). Harvard University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE.
Zhong, J., Ismail, L., & Lin, Y. (2025). Investigating EFL students’ engagement in project-based speaking activities: From a multi-dimensional perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1598513. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1598513