研究生: |
廖財明 Liao Tsai Ming |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
特殊教育學校校長教學領導之研究 A Study on Principals' Instructional Leadership in Special Educational Schools |
指導教授: |
魯先華
Lu, Shen-Hwa |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
教育學系 Department of Education |
論文出版年: | 2009 |
畢業學年度: | 97 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 133 |
中文關鍵詞: | 特殊教育學校校長 、教學領導 |
英文關鍵詞: | Special educational principal, instructional leadership |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:163 下載:9 |
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 |
摘 要
本研究旨在(一)了解特殊教育學校校長教學領導之現況。(二)探討不同背景教師所覺知之特殊教育學校校長實施教學領導之差異。依據研究結果提出建議,提供特殊教育學校校長教學領導實務之參考。
本研究以問卷調查法,研究者以自編問卷調查國內17所特殊教育學校與啟智學校647名特殊教育教師,有效資料共計545份,問卷回收率84.23%。所蒐集之資料以描述統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析進行資料處理與分析。本研究結果如下:
一、特殊教育學校校長其教學領導之現況堪稱良好。
二、特殊教育學校校長以學生為中心作為實踐自我教學領導之最高指標。
三、目前特殊教育學校對於實施教師評鑑的制度屬於萌芽階段。
四、特殊教育學校校長重視公共關係的發展,爭取社會資源以利推動校務發展。
五、目前特殊教育學校校長教學領導之角色,由教學視導已轉變為教學領導之風格。
六、目前特殊教育學校校長之教學領導仍有進步空間。
七、不同背景變項的特殊教育學校校長、主任、組長、導師、專任教師所知覺「校長教學領導」現況差異不一。
依據文獻分析與研究結果對教育行政機關、特殊教育
學校校長及教師與未來相關研究,提出下列建議:
一、 對教育主管機關之建議
(一) 建立教師專業成長與評鑑機制
(二) 督促學校符合時代教育趨勢
(三) 強化校長教學領導之培訓體系
二、 對特殊教育學校校長之建議
(一) 不斷積極進修充實教學領導專業知能
(二) 鼓勵且協助教師參與學校校務
(三)建立學校本位教師專業成長與教學評鑑之制度
三、 對特殊教育學校教師之建議
(一) 建立正確觀念促成教師專業成長與教學評鑑之制度
(二) 協助校長教學領導,以提升教學效能
四、 對未來研究之建議
(一) 研究主題方面
未來研究建議可針對特殊教育學校教師教學評鑑制度之建置與實施情形,以供特殊教育學校校長作為其教學領導之指標。
(二) 研究方法方面
研究方法可增加質性研究,收集更深入的個人感受,輔助量化研究典範的不足之處。
(三) 研究對象方面
未來研究可收集學生、學生家長、社區機構與教育行政單位對於校長教學領導之覺知程度,全面性探討特殊學校校長教學領導之現況。
Abstract
The purposes of this research were (1)to understand the status quo of instructional leadership of principals in special education schools in Taiwan, (2)to explore the difference of perceptions of principals’ instructional leadership among educators of different variables and to make some recommendations for improvement of principals’ instructional leadership.
This study was proceeding with survey study of “principals’ instructional leadership which edited by the writer. 647samples were chosen from 17 special educational schools in Taiwan. They were principals, department deans, department assistants deans, homeroom teachers and non-homeroom teachers. Finally 545data were collected and the return rate was up to 84.23% . The data were analyzed by proceeding with describing statistic, T- test, one way ANOVA, and the conclusions of this research were as follows:
1. The status quo of principals’ instructional leadership in special education schools in Taiwan was good.
2. The upper target for the special education principals in self- instructional leadership focus on the students.
3. The system of the teachers’ evaluation was just beginning.
4. The special education principals paid much attention to the development of the public relationship in order to get much social resource to push the school growth.
5. The role style of instructional leadership of principals in special education schools transform instructional superintend to instructional leadership.
6. There was much space in progress for the instructional leadership of principals in special education schools.
7. There is a significant difference of the perception for the different variables of the principals, department deans, department assistants deans, homeroom teachers and non-homeroom teachers in principals’ instructional leadership. According to the conclusions above there were some suggestions for reference in the future.
1. Suggestions for educational administrative institutions
(1)Set up the growth of the teachers’ profession and teachers’ evaluation.
(2)Press the school to catch up with the educational trend
(3)Strengthen the training programs of principals’ instructional leadership.
2. Suggestions for principals in special education schools.
(1)Enhance knowledge of the professional leadership
(2)Encourage and help the teachers to pay attention on the school affairs.
(3)Build up the growth of the school-based teachers’ profession and the system of teaching evaluation
3. Suggestion for teachers
(1)Set up the positive concept and establish the system of teaching evaluation and strength the teachers’ profession progress.
(2)Help the principals to carry out the instructional leadership
4. Suggestion for future research
(1)In terms of the research subject; The research can focus the establishment of teachers teaching evaluation system and practicing status.
(2)In terms of research methodology: Future research can add the quality research to get more deep personal feelings and to help the weakness of the quantity research
(3)In terms of the research object: The research on gathering survey can push its frontier by incorporating other members.(e.g.,educational administrative personnel, parents, community institution personnel)
參考文獻
一、 中文部分
行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。台北:行政院教育改革委員會
李玉林(2001)。桃園縣國小校長教學領導角色知覺與實踐之研究。台北:國立臺北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
李安明(1997)。我國國民小學校長教學領導之研究。行政院國科會專題研究。NSC86-2413-h-134-006。
李宜芳(2002)臺北市國民小學校長教學領導現況與因應策略之研究---以國九年一貫課程為例。臺北:國立臺北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
李新寶(2001)。國民小學校長教學領導行為與教師教學效能之研究。新竹:國立新竹師範學院學校行政碩士班碩士論文(未出版)。
汪成琳(2001)。特殊教育學校校長教學領導與教師教學效能關係之研究。彰化:國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
吳國榮(2003)。國民小學校長教學領導行為指標建構之研究。南投:暨南國際大學教育政策與行政研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
吳清山(1992)。學校效能研究。台北:五南圖書出版有限公司。
吳清基(1990)。精緻教育理念。台北:師大書苑。
吳雨錫(2002)。國民小學校長教學領導與教師專業成長關係之研究。臺中:臺中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
林明地(2002)。校長教學領導實際:一所國小的參與觀察。教育行政論壇第五次研討會會議手冊。
林惠煌(2002)臺北縣國民小學校長教學領導與學校校能關係之研究。臺北:國立臺北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
林純媛(2004)。雲嘉地區國民小學校長教學領導與學校校能關係之研究。嘉義:國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
教育部(2007)。九十六年度特殊教育統計年報。台北:教育部。
張明輝(1998)。學校行政新專輯。台北:國立臺灣師範大學。
張慈娟(1997)。國民小學校長教學領導與學校效能之研究。新竹:國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
張德銳(1992)。國民小學教師評鑑之研究。新竹:國立新竹師範學院。
張碧娟(1999)。國民中學校長教學領導、學校教學氣氛與教師教學效能關係之研究。台北:國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文(未出版)。
陳美言(1997))。國民小學校長教學領導與教師教學自我效能關係之研究。台北:台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
葉佳文(2006)。臺灣地區公立高中校長教學領導、教師組織承諾與教師教學效能關係之研究。台北:國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文(未出版)。
曾增福(2004)。桃園縣國民中學校長教學領導與學校效能關係之研究。台北:國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
楊振昇(1999)。我國國小校長從事校長教學領導概況、困境及其因應策略之分析研究。暨大學報,3(1),183-236。
趙廣林(1996)。國民小學校長教學領導之研究。屏東縣:國立屏東師範學院教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
魯先華(1994)。國民中學校長教學領導之研究。台北市:國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
蔡秀媛(1998)。台北市國民小學校長教學領導及其相關因素之研究。台北:國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)
歐曉玟(2001)。彰化縣國民小學校長教學領導之研究。台中:國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
鮑世青(2001)。國民小學校長與教師對「校長教學領導」行為知覺度之研究。新竹:國立新竹師範學院學校行政碩士班碩士論文(未出版)。
謝建成(2001)。台北縣國民小學校長教學領導與教師專業成長之調查研究。台北:國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
二、 英文部分
Bloom Benjamin (1981) All our children learning Mc.Graw-Hill. New York .
Cawelti, G. (1987). How effective instructional leaders get results(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 328 935).
Collins, C. R.(1987). Teacher and principal perception of the effect of principal’s engagement in selected instructional leadership functions on student achievement. ProQuest-Dissertation Abstracts, 1988, No. AAC .
De Bevoise, W. (1984). Synthesis of research on the principal as instructional leader. Educational Leadership, 41(5), 14-20.
Duke, D .L.(1982). What can principals do? Leadership functions and instructional effectiveness. NASSP Bulletin, 65, 1-12.
Dwyer. D. C.(1986). Understanding the principal’s contribution to instruction. Peabody Journal of Education, 63, 3-18.
Edmonds (1979). A discussion of the literature and issues related to effective schooling. St, Louis. Mo. Cemrel, Inc.
Greenfield W.(Eds.) (1987), Instructional leadership:concept issues,and controversies(pp.179-203).Boston
:Allyn and Bacon.
Hallinger, P.(1992). The evolving role of American principal:From managerial to instructional to transformational leaders, Journal of Educational Administration, 30, 35-48.
Hallinger, P., & Murphy, J. F. (1987). Assessing and developing principal instructionalleadership. Educational Leadership, 45(1), 54-61.
Ibrahim, A. S.(1985). Instructional leadership Behaviors of High School Principals. Department Heads and Other administrative Staff as Perceived by Teachers and Principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University.
Johnston, J. K. (1993). Three case studies of elementary school principals identified as instructional leaders. (From ProQuest-Dissertation Abstracts, 1993, No. AAC 9237664)
Keefe, J. W. & Jenkins, J. M. (Eds.). (1984). Instructional leadership handbook. Virginia:NASSP.
Korporall,A,R. (1984) .The tasks and functions of the elementary principal. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, California.
Krug, F. S. (1986). The relationship between the instructional management behavior ofelementary school principal and student achievement. [CD-ROM]. Abstract From:ProQuest File: Dissertation Abstracts Item: 8628337.
Krug, S. E. (1992). Instructional leadership: A constructivist perspective. EducationAdministration Quarterly, 28(3), 430-443.
Larsen (1987) Identification leadership behaviors and impact of their implementation on academic achievement.(ERIC Document Reproduction Serice No. ED 281 286)
Litchfield, D. (1986). If you want me to be an instructional leader, just tell me what an instructional leader does. Peabody Joural of Education, 63, 202-205.
Marsh, D. D.(1992). Enhancing instructional leadership lessons from the California school leadership academy. Education and Urban Society, 25, 386-409.
Moorthy, D.(1992). The Canadian principal of the ,90s manager or instructional leader?or both?Education Canada, 32, 8-11.
Murphy, J.(1990). Principal instructional leadership. in P. W. Thurston & L. S. Lotto (eds.)Advances in educational administration, vol. I, part B (pp. 163~200). London: JAIPress.
Pantelides, J. R.(1991). An exploration of the relationship between specific instructional leadership behaviors of elementary principals and student achievement. 【CD-ROM】. Abstract From:ProQuest File:Dissertation Abstracts Item: AAC: AAC9426819.
Peterson, K. D. (1987). Administrative control and instructional leadership. In W. Greenfild (ED.), Instructional leadership: Concepts, issues, and ontroversies (pp.139-152) . Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Rossow,LF.(1990)The Principalship:Dimension in instructional leadership. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice-Hall,Inc.
Russell, J. S.(1985). Linking the behaviors and activities of secondary school principals to school effectiveness: A focus on effective and ineffective behaviors. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 258322)
Short, P. M., & Spencer, W. A. (1989). Principal instructional leadership. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED307667)
Snyder, K. J. (1983). Instructional leadership for productive schools. Educational Leadership, 40, 32-37.
Taylor,B.O.(1986).How and why successful elementary principals address strategic issues. (Report No.MF01/pc02)paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.San Francisco,Ca.(ERIC Documevt Reproduction Service No.ED 278 124).
Weber, J. R. (1989). Leading the instructional program.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED309513)
Willis, D. B., & Bartell, C. A. 1990). Japanese and American principals: A comparison of excellence in educational leadership. Comparative Education, 26 , 107-123.