研究生: |
戴進明 Dai, Gin-Min |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
桃園縣國民中小學實施教學視導之研究-以「優質教學研討會」為例 A study of execution of teaching methods development in Taoyuan primary and junior high schools—using “quality teaching seminar” as an example |
指導教授: |
游進年
Yu, Chin-Nien |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
教育學系 Department of Education |
論文出版年: | 2004 |
畢業學年度: | 92 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 216 |
中文關鍵詞: | 優質教學研討會 、教學反省 、教學視導 |
英文關鍵詞: | Quality teaching seminar, Reviewing teaching skill, Teaching methods experiment and development |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:190 下載:3 |
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 |
本研究旨在探討桃園縣國民中小學實施「優質教學研討會」教學視導的實際情形。首先係了解中壢、楊梅地區教師對「優質教學研討會」教學視導之看法,其次則分析視導區學校辦理「優質教學研討會」協助教師教學反省之情形,再其次則比較不同學校辦理「優質教學研討會」的差異情形,最後是探討學校實施「優質教學研討會」的實際與挑戰。
本研究兼採文件分析、參與觀察並輔以訪談進行交叉檢視,所得量化資料進行平均數、百分比、t考驗、單因子變異數分析,並實施質性資料之歸納整理。
本研究結論如下:
一、教師對優質教學研討會的看法:(一)教師認為優質教學研討會教學視導,可以促進教師教學經驗的交流及分享,並藉由研討會來反省並改進教學技巧;(二)教師參與優質教學研討會,能達到同儕視導的功能,協助教師省思自我的教學情境,並反思自己的教學設計;(三)教師經由優質教學研討會的反省、對話,能協助教師建立自我的實踐智慧,並將理論化的知識在個人化的教學中驗證。
二、優質教學研討會的實際辦理情形:(一)優質教學研討會不是評鑑教師教學的好壞,係提供教師教學反省的行政服務;(二)優質教學研討會改進傳統的教學觀摩,是教師合作、協同反省的機制;(三)教師參加優質教學研討會教學演示,是一種自我的挑戰,可以提升自已的教學能力。
三、優質教學研討會協助教師教學反省的差異情形:(一)優質教學研討會協助教師教學反省所呈現之多元現象,與教師對觀察工具的了解與使用情形有關;(二)學校行政協助教師教學反省所呈現之差異情形,與教師的意願與觀念有關;(三)學校辦理「優質教學研討會」協助教師教學反省,國小教師的知覺情形高於國中教師。(四)校長協助教師教學反省的情形,呈現被動與主動的差異現象。
四、優質教學研討會協助教師教學反省之實際與挑戰:(一)學校需排除教師的疑慮,改進影響優質教學研討會辦理的相關因素,協助教師建構同儕學習的學校文化;(二)校長參與優質教學研討會是回歸到課程與教學領導者的角色;(三)錄影是教學反省歷程中一個很好的途徑,能協助教師了解自己的教學模式、師生互動,讓老師做更深層的教學反省。
本研究建議如下:
一、對教育行政機關的建議,包含秉於專業分工需要,檢討教學視導形式;建立督學進修機制,型塑督學專業形象等六項。
二、對學校教學視導的建議,包含建構不流於形式、能協助教師教學反省之學校視導制度;鼓勵各學年或各領域擇期辦理「優質教學研討會」等七項。
三、對教師的建議,包含要求教育行政秉於專業分工,建立能協助教師教學反省之視導制度;秉於教學專業,協同同儕進行教學反省等四項。
四、對未來的研究建議則包含研究對象及研究方法的建議等兩項。
This research aims at analyzing the result of “quality teaching seminar” discussing teaching methods development and experiment in Taoyuan primary and junior high schools. It focuses on the following dimensions:
(1)understanding the ideas and opinions of “quality teaching seminar” from teachers in Changli, and Yanmei districts.
(2)helping teachers in the experimental schools of “quality teaching seminar” submitting their suggestions.
(3)comparing the difference among schools executing “quality teaching seminar”.
(4)discussing the difficulties and challenge of conducting “quality teaching seminar” among all schools.
This research methods include document analysis, on-site observation involvement, and in-depth-interview. 645 questionnaires from 645 teachers of 73 schools in academic year of 2001 attending “good-quality teaching seminar” in academic year of 2001 to 2002 in Changli, and Yangmei districts were analyzed. The raw data was administered by SPSS10.0 for Windows. In addition, 3 principals, 1 chief director, 6 teachers were interviewed by means of semi-structured interview style.
The conclusions of this research are as follows:
1.Teachers consider the experiment and development of “quality teaching seminars” is very important for the improvement of teachers’ professional teaching skill and promoting the exchange and sharing of teachers’ lecturing experience, and improving teaching skill via the seminars.
2.Teachers attending the “quality teaching seminar” can witness and share different new ideas from other teachers in addition to reviewing and appraising on each items discussed among all teachers, and help teachers design their own teaching patterns.
3.Teachers mostly support that the “quality teaching seminars”, should be held semester.
4.After the schools are responsible for holding, and planning the “quality teaching seminars” of each category, and age group, the teachers can review through the discussion in the seminars. The biggest achievement is for the teachers to inspect their own teaching patterns, and understand their own drawbacks, and strengthen their teaching profession, and apply their knowledge and teaching theories on individualized teaching styles.
5.Though the teachers highly confirm the efficiency of the “quality teaching seminars”, the schools still need to diminish the teachers’ doubt, and improve the related factors affecting the “quality teaching seminars”, and establish a school culture for teachers to learn among colleagues.
6.The ways for assisting the teachers to review their own teaching skills are composed of multi-directions.
7.The schools use administration resource to help the teachers distinguishing the differences among all teachers’ teaching styles.
8.The principals help the teachers telling the differences among all teachers’ teaching styles.
9.The “quality teaching seminars” were not aimed at appraising whether the teachers are excellent or not, but at helping the teachers review themselves by offering administration resources.
10.The way to improve traditional teaching seminars by holding the new “quality teaching seminars” is the best mechanism for cooperation and review.
11.It is a challenge for the teachers to improve their own teaching skills by attending the “quality teaching seminars”.
12.Video-recording is highly recommended for reviewing teaching skill and can help the teachers understand their own teaching patterns, and help improve the mutual reaction between the teachers and students and help the teachers gain further review.
The suggestions of this research are as follows:
1. The suggestion for education administration institutions: (1) The teaching seminars shall be reviewed by respecting the professional skill of each field. (2) The mechanism of promoting the teachers to re-educate and the professional image of improving teaching skills shall be established. (3) The experiment and development of teaching seminars shall be established for promoting the teachers to learn teaching skills among colleagues. (4) The teachers are encouraged to learn from their colleagues and to review and improve their own teaching skills. (5) The experiment and development of the teaching seminars shall be employed to improve the teachers’ professional teaching skill.
2. The suggestions for the schools assisting the teachers review their own teaching patterns: (1) It is necessary to establish a practical, and useful “learning-among-colleagues” environment benefiting the teachers’ professional skill growth. (2) The teachers of each age group are encouraged to attend the “quality teaching seminars”. (3) It is necessary to choose a proper timing for holding the “quality teaching seminars” to avoid wasting of administration resource. (4) The teachers are encouraged and assisted to establish teaching history files. (5) The teachers are encouraged to invent new teaching skills. (6) The video-recording shall be employed to assist the teachers review their own teaching. (7) The principals shall act as leading roles by attending the “good-quality teaching seminars”.
3. The suggestions for the teachers: (1) The professionalism of each teaching category shall be respected for assisting the teachers to review their own teaching skills. (2) The teachers shall learn teaching skills among their colleagues under the principles of professional teaching. (3) The teaching portfolios shall be established for promoting professional teaching skills. (4) The teaching patterns composed of multi directions shall be established for cultivating the students ‘various abilities.
參考文獻
壹、中文部份
王妙里(2001)。反思教學中教師內省智慧的探索。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
王延煌(2002)。教改,是改革,更是教育。師友,426,29-33。
王淑怡(2002)。國民小學教師教學效能指標之建構。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
古博文(2000)。英國教育視導制度之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育系碩士論文,未出版,臺北。
行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996):教育改革總諮議報告書。
呂木琳(1998)。教學視導-理論與實務。台北:五南。
利一奇(2002)。國小教師實施同儕教練之行動研究。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
李珀(2000)。教學視導。台北:五南。
李崙熙(2002)。中、韓國民小學學本位教學視導之比較研究─以台北市及漢城市為例。國立政治大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
呂淑芝(2002)。臺中市國民中小學學校本位教學視導之研究。暨南國際大學教育政策與行政研究所碩士論文,未出版,南投。
何宋錦(2002)。高屏區國民中學學校本位教學視導之研究。致遠管理學院教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台南。
阮靜雯(2000)。國民小學學校本位教學視導與教師專業成長之研究。國立政治大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
吳和堂(2001)。國中實習教師教學反省與專業成長關係之量的研究。教育學刊,17, 65-84。
吳培源(1999)。英國教育視導制度。高雄:高雄復文圖書。
林志成(2001)。反教育的學校行政之哲學省思。學校行政雙月刊,14,19-27。
林進材(1999)。促進教師教學效能的途徑。教育實習輔導,4(4),45-50。
林進材(2002)。教學效能的研究發展及其在教學與研究上的意義。教育研究,104,32-43。
周衷蓮(2002)。我國縣市政府教學視導實施之研究。暨南國際大學教育政策與行政研究所碩士論文,未出版,南投。
邱錦昌(1995)。教育視導之理論與實際。台北:五南。
范熾文(2001)。轉型領導與學校本位課程發展。學校行政雙月刊,14,42-53。
施偉隆(2002)。教師教學思考歷程之價值觀-以一位國小教師為例。嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義。
秦玉友(2002)。課程理解-課程改革與課程實施終日建凸顯的問題。課程與教學季刊,5(4),75-88。
高博銓(2002)。杜威<民主與教育>在課程上的啟示。課程與教學季刊,5(2),65-80。
孫志麟(1999)。教師自我效能:有效教學的關鍵。教育研究資訊,6,170-187。
梁坤明(2002)。運用臨床視導於教學觀摩。北縣教育,41, 68-70。
許正宗(2002)。國民小學初任教師臨床視導之個案研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
許啟耀(2003)。教學檔案製作的分享。教師天地,122,28-31。
陳美如(2002)。促發課程改革的永續機制:「教師即課程評鑑者」的理論探究。載於中華民國師範教育學會(主編),新時代師資培育的變革-知識本位的專業(頁65-106)。高雄:復文。
陳惠邦(2002)。初等教育專論-新世紀教育家的信念與實踐。台北。元照。
陳聖謨(1999)。國民小學教師教學反省之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育系博士論文,未出版,高雄。
陳麗華(1995)。國小實習教師的社會科教學推理之研究:結構與意識的辨證。台北:師大書苑。
陳麗華(2001)。教學反省。載於黃正傑(主編),教學原理(3版,頁403-420)。台北:師大書苑。
教育部(1999)。我國教育視導制度改進之研究。台北。教育部。
教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。台北。教育部。
單文經、高新建、游家政、蔡清田、張明輝、王麗雲等(譯)(2000)。James G. Henderson & Richard D. Hawthorne著。革新的課程領導。台北:學富。
彭新維(2001)。國民小學教師教學省思之質性研究--以台北市一所學校為例 。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
張玉成(2001,七月)。「九年一貫課程實施成效之視導」。資料登載於國立台北師範學院主辦之「全國各縣市政府教育局視導人員九年一貫課程研習」研習手冊,台北。
張明輝(無日期)。改進中小學教育視導的相關課題。教改通訊,21,27-29,2002年1月10日,取自:
http://web.ed.ntnu.edu.tw/~minfei/artical/artical(eduadmin)-2.html
張芳全(1998)。教育政策理念與實務。台北。元照。
張德銳(1998)。以教師同儕合作化解教學專業的危機。教師天地,93,12-16。
張德銳(1999)。教師臨床視導的技巧--職前教師及在職教師適用。課程與教學季刊,2(2),131-136。
張德銳(2000)。師資培育與教師評鑑。台北:師大書苑。
張德銳(2002)。以教學檔案提昇教師教學效能。教育研究,104,25-31。
張德銳(2003)。中學教師教學專業發展系統的實施展望。教師天地,122,66-72。
張煌熙(2001)。始于小,成其大:從教學研究會到教學專業化。教師天地,114,22-27。
張清濱(1993)。台灣省教育視導績效評估之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
張慶勳(2001)。學習型學校組織文化與領導。學校行政雙月刊,14,29-41。
黃光雄編譯(1989)。教育評鑑的模式。台北。師大書苑。
黃超陽(2001)。為教學生涯留點痕跡:淺談教師「教學檔案」。師友,410,78-80。
游家政(2000)。學校課程的統整及其教學 。課程與教學季刊,3(1),19-38。
曾煥淦(2000)。台灣地區縣市督學基本能力之研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
湯志民(1993)。現代教學革新的趨向與策略。載於台灣省政府教育廳(編印),二十一世紀中小學教育發展。(頁255-288)。台中:台灣省政府教育廳。
葉金裕(民92)。國民小學教師有效教學行為之研究-以澎湖地區國小教師為例。台南師範學院教師在職進修課程與教學碩士論文,未出版,台南。
葉興華(2002)。談教學檔案的應用與製作。課程與教學通訊,9,14-19。
萬榮輝(2002)。國小資深教師實施同儕視導之研究 。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
潘世尊(2000)。教師教學與課程發展的連結:從自我反省、協同反省、到協同行動研究。課程與教學季刊,3(3),103-120。
鄭長河(2000)。一位國中數學教師專業成長個案研究。國立高雄師範大學數學研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
賴政國(2001)。國小教師臨床教學視導之行動研究。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
歐用生(1996)。課程和教學改革。台北:師大書苑。
歐用生、楊慧文(1998)。新世紀的課程改革-兩岸觀點。台北:五南。
劉益麟(2002)。同儕視導的實踐與反省-台北市安安國小教學現場實錄。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
劉淑雯(2003)。教師建立教學檔案之實務與經驗分享。教師天地,122,32-37。
簡毓玲(2001)。國民小學校長教學視導對教師教學效能影響之研究 。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
謝文全(1999)。教學視導的意義與原則--並以英國教學視導制度為例。課程與教學,2(2),1-14。
羅清水(2000)。教學視導在教師專業發展的意義。研習資訊,17(2),1-9。
羅綸新(2002)。師資培育發展教師反思教學能力之途徑。國民教育研究學報,8,205-224。
顧瑜君(2002)。實踐取向之教師專業成長-在職進修模式之變革之解析。課程與教學季刊,5(4),1-18。
貳、英文部份
Acheson, K. A & Gall, M. D. (1997). Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers:Preservice and inservice applications(4th ed.). New York:Congman
Beach, D. M. & Reinhartz, J.(1989). Supervision:Focus on instruction.
New York:Haper & Row.
Calderhead, J. & Gates, P. (ed.)(1993). Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development. London: The falmer Press.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge & action research. London. The Falmer Press.
Cornbach, L. J.(1982). Designing evaluation of educational and social programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Glickman, C. D.(1981).Development supervision: Alternative practices for helping teachers improve instruction.(Eric Document Reproduction Service No.206487)
Goldhammer, R.(1969). Clinical supervision. New York: Holt, Rinohart and winston.
Guba, E. G.& Lincoln, Y. S.(1989).Fourth generation evaluation. CA:Sage.
Hatton, N. & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education,11 (1),33-49
Hopfengardner,. D.& Walker, R.(1984)Collegial supoprt-an alternative to principal-Led supervision of instruction, NASSP Bulletin.pr:35-39
Iwanicki, E. F.(1990). Teacher evaluation for school improvement. In J. Millman &. Darling-Hammond(Eds.).The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teacher (pp.158-174). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Natriello, G.(1990). Intended and unintended consequences: Purpose and effects of teacher evaluation. In J. Millman & L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teacher (pp.34-45). Newbury Park, CA:SAGE
Oliva, P. F.(1976). Supervision for today,s, schools. New York:Haper & Row.
Pollard,,A&Tann, S.(1993). Reflective Teaching in the primary school:A handbook for the classroom. London:Cassell.
Richert, A. E.(1992). The content of student teachers, reflections within different structures for facilitating the reflective process. In T. Russell & H. Munby(Eds.), Teacher and teaching:From classroom to reflection. London: The Falmer Press.
Schon, D.(1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books
Schon, D.(1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Franciscoca:Josse-Bass.
Sergiovanni, T. J(1987). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective. Boston, Allyn and Bacon.
Shulman, L. S(1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1),1-22.
Suchman.(1967). Evaluation research: Principles and practice in public service and social program. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Wildom, T. M. ,Niles, J. A., Magliaro, S. G., & McL.aughlin, R. A(1990). Promoting reflective practice among beginning and experienced teachers. In R.T.Clift, W. R. Houston, & M,C. Pugach(Eds.), Encouraging reflective practice in education: An analysis of issues and programs, (139-162). NY: Teachers College Press.