研究生: |
謝雅玲 |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
幼兒園合班老師的互動關係-以兩個班級為例 Interaction Relationship Between Kindergarten Co-teachers in one class--Taking Two Classes as Examples |
指導教授: | 林育瑋 |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
人類發展與家庭學系 Department of Human Development and Family Studies |
論文出版年: | 2004 |
畢業學年度: | 92 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 186 |
中文關鍵詞: | 幼兒園教師 、互動關係 、調適歷程 、合作教學 、個案研究 |
英文關鍵詞: | early childhood teacher, interaction relationship, the process of adjustment, collaborative teaching, case study |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:1263 下載:212 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究藉由深入觀察、訪談兩組合班老師,瞭解幼教老師與搭檔在面臨角色與責任重疊時,兩人的互動關係與調適的歷程,進而探討增進合班老師互動的有利因素,希望不僅能讓自己勇於面對新搭檔,也能提供其他幼教老師增進互動關係的參考方向。本研究的發現如下:
一、 合班老師的互動關係與調適歷程
A所小玲及小葉在教學方面,剛開始均由小玲主教,但在兩人的努力之下,在搭擋第十三週已轉變為主副教輪流的情況。在幼兒方面,因為這個班是小玲由幼幼班帶起,幼兒與小玲較為親密,但也在兩人的努力下,半學期之後小葉與幼兒關係漸佳。在家長溝通方面,因為園內單一窗口的制度與兩人的協調,幾乎都由小玲負責與家長聯繫,直到搭擋第二年十二月小葉開始參與值班工作,增加了與家長互動的機會,使得兩人與家長互動漸趨平均。而在全園活動的配合上,兩位老師從一開始搭班即呈現互相協助的關係。
B園文文及芸芸在教學方面,一開始即是主副教輪流的方式,但在教學互動上顯得默契不足,直到搭擋第三年文文卸下行政及芸芸在教學上的成長,彼此默契漸佳,搭擋第四年時兩人已能協同教學。在幼兒方面,剛開始因為兩人標準不同,使得幼兒常規不易掌握,搭擋第三年因為文文遭到家長中傷,讓文文省思到「班級是兩位老師的,兩人對幼兒的態度應該一致」,經由兩人的溝通及策略的運用,至搭擋第五年,兩人在處理幼兒問題行為的標準已漸趨一致。在家長溝通方面,同樣因為家長中傷事件讓文文意識到「班級是兩位老師的」,在溝通之後,已由以文文為主,漸漸轉變為兩人均可以與家長溝通。在全園事務的配合方面,兩位老師也從一開始搭檔就能彼此協助與支持。
二、 增進合班教師互動的有利因素
以A所來說包含具備良好個人人格特質、教學理念相近、能主動溝通、先前經驗的正向影響以及園內組織氣氛等因素;以B園來說包含具備良好個人人格特質、能主動溝通、先前經驗的正向影響以及搭擋時間長等因素。
最後綜合研究發現,研究者針對幾項要點進行討論,並分別針對幼教老師、行政管理者、師資培育機構、教育主管機關以及後續研究提出幾項建議,及研究者本身的省思。
The research was to study two groups of teachers who both worked in one kindergarten classroom as a co-teacher, and to find out how and what they interact with each other and make a adjustment while facing with the problems. Furthermore, this study would help early childhood teachers understand the advantages of increasing the interaction with their co-teachers. It not only allowed the teachers to face their problems more easily, but also provided other early childhood teachers with some advice on how to make the interactions more effective. The findings are as follows:
The interaction relationship and the process of adjustment with the co-teachers
At Kindergarten A, teachers Lin and Yeh were observed. In regards to teaching, Lin, an experienced teacher, would be the head teacher of the class at the beginning of co-teaching. After thirteen weeks, they started the process of rotating the head teaching job and the co-teaching job. Most students were closer to Lin because she had been their teacher since they were preschoolers; and it was easy for Lin to deal with new students as well. Lin helped Yeh deal with the problems and Yen was also willing to change the situation. Under this kindergarten’s system, Lin was the main person to contact the parents, but Yeh started to try actively to communicate with the parents from December of the second year. Eventually, Yeh established the good interaction relationship with the parents as Lin. In regards to working on school activities, both teachers had already worked well in a way of facilitation when they started co-teaching.
At Kindergarten B, teachers Wen and Yuen were observed. The first year of co-teaching, Wen was already a ten-year experienced teacher and Yuen just graduated from the teacher’s college. The two teachers rotated teaching at the very beginning when they started to co-teach. However, it appeared to lack the spirit of working as a team because Wen was busy in her administrative work as a kindergarten director. This situation lasted about two years. After the one-year-break of not co-teaching together, Wen unloaded her administrative work, and at the meantime Yuen made progress on teaching in the third year. In the fourth year, they had already learned how to facilitate well with their co-teaching. For the students, the two teachers showed different standards towards the students for the first two years. Actually, this situation made their work harder because it was not easy to manage the class. It caused an incident where Wen received some accusations from the parents in the third year, which made Wen realize that she should manage the class together with Yuen. Through the communications and the changes of managing the class, they finally agreed upon the same standards on how to manage their class by showing their students the same attitude or playing different roles according to the situations. They almost had the same standards towards their students in the fifth year. Since the incident happened, both teachers tried to improve the situation, and after some adjustments, they received the same amount of communication the parents. In regards to working on school activities, both teachers were able to support each other and work well together since they taught together. Wen was a good role model for learning.
The Advantages of Improving the Interactions with Co-teachers
Referring to facilitate and improve the interaction relationship with co-teachers, some factors were found. At Kindergarten A, both teachers showed their good personality traits, had the same teaching ideals, participated in active communications, and were able to carry forth the positive influences from their former experiences and atmospheres of the kindergarten. At Kindergarten B both teachers again showed their good personality traits, participated in active communications, and carried forth the positive influence from their former experiences, along with the results of long-term co-teaching.
In conclusion, the researcher brought out various points for discussion, submitted some suggestions for the teachers, administrators, teacher’s colleges and the government, and offered her reflections on education.
(一) 中文部分
人際關係與溝通(曾瑞貞、會玲岷譯)(1996)。台北市:揚智。(原著出版年:1995)
工作中的人際溝通(曾憲才譯)(1996)。台北市:唐山。
王淑莉(2000)。人際關係與關通。台北市:三民。
丹尼爾‧高曼(1998)。EQⅡ:工作EQ(李瑞玲、黃慧真、張美惠譯)。台北市:時報文化。(原著出版年:1998)
台北市立師範學院(1994)。當前幼稚園教育問題及意見之調查研究。市立師範學院。
呂翠夏(2001)。幼稚園的合作教學-以一個班級為例。台南師院學報,34,475-492。
呂翠夏(1998)。如何與你的夥伴教師合作。成長幼教季刊,9(2),21-26。
谷瑞勉(1999)。幼稚園班級經營一反省性教師的思考與行動。台北市:心理。
谷瑞勉(1997)。幼稚園班級經營-精熟與初任幼兒教師知能與實作之比較。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(報告編號:NSC86-2413-H153-001)未出版。
江麗莉(1999)。幼稚園搭檔教師合作關係的建立:協同行動研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(報告編號:NSC88-2413-H134-011),未出版。
江麗莉(1998)。幼稚園同班搭檔教師間合作關係。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(報告編號:NSC87-2413-H134-002),未出版。
江麗莉(1997a)。幼教準教師在集中教育實習期間的關注焦點與困擾問題。初等教育學報,5,55-80。
江麗莉、鐘梅菁(1997b) 。幼稚園初任教師困擾問題之研究。新竹師院學報,10,1-22。
江麗莉(1995)。幼稚園初任教師困擾問題之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(報告編號:NSC84-2411-H-134-006),未出版。
吳嫈華(1995)。兩個老師恰恰好-幼稚園每班兩名教師的必要性及搭配的藝術。新幼教,8,42-43。
林育瑋(2003)。幼教教師的人際互動關係。來!說我們的故事:幼教師的專業成長。台北市:心理。245-262。
林育瑋(1996)。幼教師的專業成長歷程。臺北師院學報,9,803-832。
哈禮斯(1994)。我好,你也好(二版)(洪志美譯)。台北市:遠流。(原著出版年:1969年)
思牧(1991)。一山容不得二虎。成長幼教季刊,2(1),19-21。
徐西森、連廷嘉、陳仙子、劉雅瑩(2002)。人際關係的理論與實務。台北市:心理。
高敬文、成長兒童學園教師(1994)。課程的誕生。雲林:豐泰文教基金會。
袁麗珠(1993)。幼稚園教師面臨的倫理兩難問題之研究。國立台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
教育部(2003年5月28日)。九十一年各級學校概況表。台北市:教育部。取自教育部資訊網,http://www.edu.tw/。
教育部(2003年6月25日)。幼稚教育法。台北市:教育部。2003年11月12日,取自教育部資訊網,http://www.edu.tw/。
教育部中部辦公室(2002)。台灣省教育部統計年報。
國語日報出版中心主編(2001)。新編國語日報辭典。台北市:國語日報。
張銀鳳(2000)。兩位帶班老師相處之哲學。幼教資訊,118,56-57。
張春興(1998)。張氏心理學辭典。台北市:東華。
張美雲(1996)。工作價值觀、任教職志與工作環境因素對幼師離職或異動之影響。私立中國文化大學兒童福利研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
張宏文、邱文芳編著(1996)。實用人際關係學。台北市:商鼎文化。
黃瑞琴(2001)。質的教育研究方法。台北市:心理。
彭欣恰(2000)。新進教師適應歷程之研究。國立台灣師範大學家政系教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
黃惠惠(1996)。自我與人際溝通。台北市:張老師文化。
莊淑玲(2003)。幼稚園教師面對合班搭檔衝突之詮釋、因應。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所幼兒教育教學碩士,未出版,台北市。
楊玉儀(2001)。幼稚園班級的靈魂人物-兩位老師的默契。幼教資訊,126,33-35。
楊俐容(1998)。教室裡的春天。成長幼教季刊,9(2),27-31。
游淑芬(1993)。幼兒園老師心內想啥物,你感知?成長幼教季刊, 4(3), 56-59。
廖梓辰(2002)。家庭人際互動與家庭和諧、幸福感之相關研究。國立屏東師範學院教育心理與輔導學系研究所碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
宇(1997)。新手上路、跌了又起。新幼教3月號,29-31。
歐姿秀(1998)。幼教老師同班共處問題面面觀。成長幼教季刊,9(2),17-20。
歐用生(1996)。教師專業成長。台北市:師大書苑。
陳雅美(2001)。從實習教師到初任教師-幼稚園教師人際情境、實務知識、及專業發展歷程之研究(Ⅱ)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告(報告編號:NSC 89-2413-H-152-007),未出版。
陳雅美(1999)。幼稚園方案教學團體討論之分析研究:兩個不同教室之比較。國立台北師範學院學報,12,535-570。
陳淑娟、江麗莉(2001)。兩位老師的搭檔。幼教資訊,122,34-36。
陳淑芳(2000)幼教專業倫理手則之案例教學(一)。幼教資訊,118,41-46。
陳珮蓉(1998)。幼稚園初任教師專業成長歷程之研究。國立台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
陳皎眉、鍾思嘉(1996)。人際關係。台北市:幼獅文化。
蔡菁菁(2003)我、合班老師、園長-談幼師的人際關係及我的自處知道。來!說我們的故事:幼教師的專業成長。台北市:心理。223-244。
蔡秋桃(1990)。中國幼稚園教師關注之調查研究。幼兒教育年刊,3,173-211。
鄭玉玲、練雅婷(2003)。兩個女人的故事。來!說我們的故事:幼教師的專業成長。台北市:心理。201-222。
鄭佩芬(2000)。人際關係與溝通技巧。台北市:揚智。
鄭青青、林芝蓉、巫佳蓉(2000)。他們的故事-合作帶班的心路歷程。幼教資訊,118,50-55。
鄭立俐(1998)。幼稚園實習教師集中實習困擾問題及調適方法之研究--一位大四實習教師的經驗。國立台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
二、英文部分
Bauwens,J.,& Hourcade,J.J.(1995).Cooperative teaching:Rebuilding the schoolhouse for all students. Austin ,TX:PRO-ED.
Cook,L.,& Friend, M.(1996).Co-teaching :Guidelines for creating effective practices .In E.L. Meyern , G.A. Vergason ,& R.J.Whelan (Eds) , Strategies for teaching exceptional children in inclusive settings (pp.155-182) Denver:Love.
Duck,S.W.,& Sants,H.(1983).On the origin of specious :Are personal relationship really interpersonal states? Journal of social and Clinical Psychology,1,27-41.
Da Costa,J.L.(1995).Teacher collaboration:The roles of trust and respect. Paper presented at the 1995 American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, April l8-22,1995, San Fran-cisco,Ca (ED384607).
Walther-Thomas, C., Korinek , L., McLaughlin, V.L.,& Williams, B . T. (2000). Collaboration for Inclusive Education: Developing Successful Programs. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.