臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：國小教師團隊發展創意教學運作模式之研究
作者：羅幼蓮
作者(外文)：Yu-lein Lo
校院名稱：國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱：人類發展與家庭學系
指導教授：洪久賢
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2006
主題關鍵詞：教師團隊；創意教學；自發性教師團隊；行政組成教師團隊；teacher team work；creative teaching；spontaneous teacher team；administrative teacher team
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:52
國小教師團隊發展創意教學運作模式之研究
摘要
本研究旨在了解國小教師團隊發展創意教學的歷程，分析自發性教師團隊與行政組成教師團隊發展創意教學的發展歷程與運作模式，進一步比較其中的差異情形，並針對影響教師團隊發展創意教學的相關條件進行分析。
本研究以行動研究法，實踐國小教師團隊發展創意教學之理論與實務，型塑運作模式；其中進行兩階段不同的團隊模式：第一年以自發性教師團隊為研究主體，研發綜合活動領域創意教學課程；第二年是以學校行政單位組織教師團隊，發展跨領域創意教學課程。
依據本研究的目的，歸納研究的發現與結果如下：
一、自發性教師團隊發展創意教學的歷程與影響
（一） 自我導向的教師團隊。
（二） 成員共同建構團隊知識系統、目的系統與心理支持系統。
（三） 教師團隊的發展歷程：教師團隊歷經「形成期」、「建立期」、「發展期」、「衝突期」與「成效期」；教師團隊的發展歷程中，初期形成的磨合與接近末期的衝突期是團隊的考驗，其中「時間」與「教師團隊的獎賞制度」是團隊面臨的最大挑戰。
（四） 總和大於個別總數的團隊運作模式：為「雁行團隊」的最佳模式。
（五） 對於學校文化的影響：營造樂於經驗分享的校園文化，同時促進具有創意風氣的校園氣氛，皆為正向的影響，但是在初期易產生次文化團體的負面影響。
二、行政組成教師團隊發展創意教學的歷程與影響
（一）規劃之團隊。
（二）成員態度決定團隊成效：依團隊成員態度可分為「獨立領導者」、「強力推動者」、「積極參與者」、「消極嘗試者」、「冷眼觀望者」與「局外人」；結果積極參與者順利完成創意課程，並獲得肯定。
（三）行政整合人力資源之策略，發展全校創意課程與校務：
1.組織「課程發展委員會」，規劃本位課程藍圖，協助團隊設計創意教學課程主題方向，提供團隊目的系統的支持。
2.行政設定團隊目標，分組之後由各組教師進行課程研發，提供成員專業自主空間與決策模式。
3.規劃專業成長的機會與時間，提供教師知識系統的支持，充實教師創意教學專業知能。
4.集中教學研討時間，可以讓團隊成員充分討論與反思，避免時間零散。
5.協助教師參與研習與進修等機會，建立課程發展諮詢管道與情感支持。
6.安排教師資訊與數位媒體應用知能的研習，幫助團隊教師教學歷程保留與存取、以利紀錄與回顧，得以協助思考課程意義。
7.提供教學相關資源與人力的支援，包括學校、社區、社會的各項支援與人力。
8.實施彈性課表與協同教學的安排，以利統整課程的進行。
（四）教師團隊發展的歷程：歷經「形成期」、「建立期」、「發展期」與「成效期」等階段，衝突皆持續存在；衝突型塑團隊的合作機制，其中有教師對行政領導的不滿與教師團隊成員間的衝突。
（五）營造共榮共存的學校文化
三、兩種不同模式的教師團隊之互動情形，除上述不同情形之外，在成員參與動機方面，自發性教師團隊主要為內在動機，而行政組成教師團隊為外在動機之使然；在成員的選擇方面，前者為自願參與，後者為被迫參加；在工作坊的功能方面，前者為直接支持，後者為間接支援；在領導者領導模式方面，前者為民主扁平式彈性領導，後者為半民主式的階層領導；團隊激盪效能方面，前者為整體搭配的團隊，後者為整體搭配不良的團隊。
四、影響教師團隊發展創意教學的條件，包括學校環境脈絡、教師團隊的成員特質、教師團隊的團隊領導、教師團隊之知識系統、教師團隊之目的系統、教師團隊的心理支持系統與團隊之產出。
七個教師團隊發展的條件，在團隊發展的過程中，具有相互影響與互為輔助的功能，同時引發團隊動力造就團隊行為，完成團隊任務。
根據研究結果，對現場教師、縣市政府教育局與學校行政單位、師資培育單位與學術研究機構，提出具體建議，並對研究進行省思，提出後續研究之建議。
This research aims to understand the development of creative teaching in teacher team of elementary school, to examine the development process and operational patterns of the spontaneous teacher team and teams formed by administrative arrangements in developing creative teaching, to probe into the differences between these two types of team and to analyze the relevant conditions that affect the development of creative teaching for teacher team.
Action research methodology was employed to gain an insight into the theory and practice of the development of creative teaching in teacher team of elementary school and to form the operational patterns. Two types of teams are identified: one is the spontaneous teams formed by teachers voluntarily in order to develop comprehensive activities for creative teaching curriculum and another is the teacher teams formed by administrative arrangements in order to develop cross-disciplinary creative teaching curriculum.
Based on the purpose of this research, the following major findings as follows:
1. Development & impacts of creative teaching development from spontaneous teacher teams.
（1）Form self-oriented teacher teams.
（2）The collective efforts to construct a team knowledge system, purpose system and psychological support system.
（3）The development process of the teacher teams comes in the stages of formation, establishment, collisions and effects. Throughout the course of development, the frictions during the initial formation and the conflicts toward the end of the process pose great challenges. Among them, the biggest challenges are “time” and the “incentives system” of the teacher teams.
（4）The best model for the Flying Geese Teams is that the sum is bigger than the aggregation of the individuals.
（5）It creates a campus culture where experience sharing is appreciated. Meanwhile, it generates positive impacts to the school by instilling creativity. However, negative impacts to the subculture groups are likely at the initial stage.
2. Development & impacts of creative teaching development from teacher teams organized by administrative arrangements
(1) Design team.
(2) The attitude of the team members decides the effectiveness of the team. The different types of member attitudes are “independent leaders”, “power promoters”, “active participators”, “passive attempters,” “indifferent onlookers” and “outsiders”. In the end, the active participators finished the creative curriculum and were recognized for their achievements.
(3) The strategy to integrate human resources and to develop creative curriculum and campus affairs for the whole school:
a. To organize a curriculum development committee to map out the blueprint of curriculum for various subjects, to assist the team in designing the subjects and setting the directions of the creative teaching course and to provide systematic support to the team purpose.
b. To set up the team goals with administrative arrangements, to allow each team to develop their own curriculum and to provide the autonomy with members to exercise discretions and make decisions.
c. To organize the opportunities and schedules for professional developments, to provide systematic support to the teachers’ knowledge and to enhance the competences in creative teaching.
d. To consolidate the timeslots for collective teaching reviews to allow the members to fully discuss and reflect the issues, in order to avoid an inefficient use of timeslots scattered around.
e. To assist teachers to participate in seminars and trainings and to develop course development channels and emotional support.
f. To arrange the study of information technology and digital media applications, to assist the teachers to record the process and retrieve data where necessary, and to help them ponder on the meanings of this curriculum.
g. To provide relevant resources and human resources from the school, community and society to support teaching.
h. To implement flexible class schedule and collaborate teaching support in order to facilitate the teaching course.
(4) During the process of formation, establishment, development and effectiveness, conflicts always remain. The cooperation mechanism of the conflict-based teams includes the conflicts from the teachers toward the administrative leaders and the conflicts between team members.
(5) Development of a collaborative, co-dependent campus culture
3. In terms of the above mention differences for the two types of teams, they also differ in participation motivations. It is mainly internal motivations for the spontaneous teams and the external motivations for the administratively arranged teams. In terms of member selections, the former members participate on a willing basis whereas the latter members are forced into the team. In terms of workshop functions, the former members offer direct support whereas the latter members offer indirect support. In terms of the leadership style, the former exhibit a flexible, flat structure whereas the latter is a hierarchical semi-democratic leadership. In terms of team effectiveness, the former is an integrated effort while the latter is a mismatched teamwork.
4. Conditions that impact the teacher teams to develop creative teaching：Campus environments and networks, member characteristics, team leadership, knowledge system, purpose system, psychological support system, team output.
The conditions of the team development for the seven teachers’ teams impact and assist each other during the process. Meanwhile, this process triggers the team motivations and in turn, creates the team actions and completes the team missions.
Based on the research findings, this paper proposes suggestions for onsite teachers, city and county education authorities, the school administrations, teachers’ training units and academic research organizations. Reflections upon the research findings and the suggestions for follow-up research work are made.
參考文獻
壹、中文文獻
吳思華（2001）。知識經濟社會總體指標。台北：經建會。
吳清山（2005）。學校行政研究。台北：高點教育。
吳嘉文譯（1999）。成功團隊。譯自The Mescon Group。台北： 洪葉。
吳靜吉(1998)。新編創造思考測驗研究第二年期末報告。台北：教育部訓育委員會。
吳靜吉(2002)。創造力在教育研究的回顧與展望。2002年教育研究回顧與展望學術研討會。台北：國立政治大學教育學院
李弘暉（1997）。團隊原理。中國行政評論，6（2），73~86。new window
李坤崇（2001）。綜合活動學習領域教材教法。台北：心理。
李聲吼（1996）。建立有效的工作團隊。人力發展月刊，34，61-65。
杜明城(譯)（2000）。Csiksentmihalyi,M.著。創造力。台北：時代。
林志忠（2001）。九年一貫課程與協同教學。輯於國立暨南國際大學教育學程中心主編，教育改革的微觀工程—小班教學與九年一貫課程，179-202。高雄：高雄復文。
洪榮昭（2002）。創意教學成效指標。URL http://www.ccda.org.tw。
孫敏芝（1996）。國小教室生活面貌探討：質化研究經驗之旅。輯於黃正傑等著，質的教育研究：方法與實例（頁183-217）。台北：漢文。
高新建（1998）。學校本位課程發展的多樣性。載於中華民國程與教學學會主編，學校本位課程發展與教學創新。台北：揚智。
張世忠（2000）。教學原理—統整與運用。台北：五南。
張世彗（2003）。創造力―理論、技術/技法與培育。台北市。
張明輝（1998）。學校行政革新專輯。台北：師大書苑。
張潤書（1985）。組織行為與管理。台北： 五南圖書出版公司。
郭進隆譯（1994）。第五項修練—學習型組織的藝術與實務。台北：天下文化。
陳向明（2003）。社會科學質的研究。台北：五南。new window
陳惠民（1998）。高效率團隊： 實務操演手冊。台北：科技圖書。
曾志朗（2000）。國民中小學九年一貫課程相關問題專案報告。台北：教育部。
游家政（1999）。國民教育課程綱要的內涵及其對教師的衝擊。花師院刊，29，7-18。
黃政傑（1997）。從課程角度看教師專業發展。輯於課程改革的理念與實踐。台北：漢文書局。new window
黃瑞琴（1999）。質的教育研究法。台北：心理。
楊坤原（2001）。創造力的意義及其影響因素簡介。科學教育月刊，239，3-11
楊美齡譯（1997）。組織遊戲。譯自 Craig R. Hickman, C. R. (1994): The organization game: An interactive business game where you make or break the company. 台北： 天下文化。
楊智先（2000）。教師工作動機、選擇壓力、社會互動與創造力之關係。創造力實踐歷程研討會論文集，679-697。
葛中俊譯（1996）。團隊工作的原理：經理工作指南。譯自Spiegel &Torres (1994).台北：業強。
詹志禹（2002）。創造力教育政策白皮書-小學階段。教育部顧問室。
賈春琦（1999）。團隊型組織在國民中學學校行政應用之研究。中等教育，49（6），20-22。
劉彥廷（1995）。管理組織行為。台北：台灣西書。

貳、外文文獻
Adams, P. E. (1997). Beginning science teacher cognition and its origins in the preservice secondary science teacher program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 34(6),633-653.
Amabile, T. M. (1983).The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loveing what you do. California Management Review, 40(1), 39-58.
Amason, A.C., & Mooney, A.C. （2000）. Past performance as an antecedent of top management team conflict: The effects of financial condition on strategic decision making. International Journal of Conflict Management, 10, 340-359.
Anderson, R. H. (1996). Teaching in a world of change. Harcourt: Brace & World.
Bales, R.F., & Slater, P.E.(1955). Role-differentiation in small decision-making groups. In T. Parsons (Ed,). Family, socialization, and interaction process (pp. 250-306). Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Bedient, D., Scolari, J. & Kowalewski, P （2003）. Phi Delta Kapan, 84（7）,534-536.
Belbin, R. M. (1991). Management teams. Oxford: Butter worth. Heinemann. Blake.
Black, S. (Sep 2003). The creative classroom. American School Board Journal, 68-70.
Blanchard, K., Carew, D., & Parisi-Carew, E. (1996). How to get your group perform like a team. Training & Development Journal, 50(9),34-37.
Bluck, R. (1996). Library training guides- Team management. British: Library Association publishing.
Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (1984). Modern approaches to understanding and managing organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bonk, C. J., & Smith, G. S. (1998). Alternative instructional strategies for creative and critical thinking in the accounting curriculum. Journal of Accounting Education, 16(2), 261-293.
Buckley, F. J. (2000). Team teaching: what, why, and how? Thousand Oaks : Sage.
Calderwood, & C.E. Zsambok (Eds.), Decision making in action: Models and methods (pp. 327-345). Brooks Air Force Base, TX: U.S. Air Force Human Resources Laboratory.
Campbell, D. T.（2002）. Evolutionary epistemology. In P.A. Schilpp（Eds.）, The Philosophy of Jar Popper. La Salle : Open Court.
Carr, C. (1992). Team power: Lessons form America’s top companies on putting team power to work. Englewood Cliffs, NJ Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Cates, C. (1979). Beyond muddling: Creativity. Public Administration Review, 39, 527-532.
Chan, D. W., & Chan, L. (1999). Implicit theories of creativity: Ateacher’sperception of student characteristics in Hong Kong. Creativity Research Journal, 12(3), 185-195.
Conley, S., Fauske., J. & Pounder, D.G.（2004）. Teacher work group effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly,40(5).663-703.
Cropley, A. J. (2001). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23(2), 72-79.
Cross, R., & Cross, S. (1983). Focus on team teaching. Michigan: Michigan Association of Middle School Education.
Crow, G. M.,& Pounder,D.G. (2000). Interdisciplinary teacher teams: Context, design, and process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 216-254.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R.J.Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Creativity (pp.313-338). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi,M. & Wolfe, R.（2000）.New conceptions and research approach to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monk, R. J. Sternberg, & R. F. Subotnik（eds.）（2000）. International Handbook of Giftedness and Talent. （pp.81-94.）NY: Elsevier.
Daft, R. L. (1998). Organization theory and design (6th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.
Davies, T., & Gilbert, J. (2003). Modelling: Promoting creativity while forging links between science education and design and technology education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(1), 67-82.
Davis, G. A. (1992). Creativity is forever (3rd ed.). Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing.
de Bono, E（1986）. Cort thinking: Teacher’s notes （2nd ed.）. Oxford, England: Pergamon.
de Bono, E（1992）. Serious creativity. London:Harper Collins Publishers.
Deming, W. E. (1992) .The nw eonomics for idustries, gvernment and eucation. MA: MIT Press..
Edmondson, A（1999）. Psychological safty and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly,44,50-383.
Eisenberger, R., & Selbst, M.（1994）.Does reward increase or decrease creativity? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66,111—1127.
ERIC (1966). 2004年4月26日，取自http://www.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/Database/ dbchk.htm
Erickson, K. A., & Rose, R. L. (1973). Management teams in educational administration ideals？ practical？ both？OSSC Bulletin, 17 (4), 1-26.( ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 084 662).
Ernest, K. F. (1991). Effectiveness of an interdisciplinary team teaching organization on student achievement and student attitudes toward school in selected middle schools. The University of Idaho. ACC9135950.
Fauske, J.,&Schelble, R. (2002). Valuing teacher teams in school reform. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Feldman, R. S. (1998). Social psychology (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
Fine G.A.(1979). Small groups and culture creation: The idioculture of little league baseball teams. American Sociological Review, 44,733-745.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creativitive cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fleishman, E.A., & Quaintance, M.K. (1984). Taxonomies of human performance. Orlando, FL: Academic.
Fleishman, E.A., & Zaccaro, S. J.(1992) Toward a taxonomy of team performance functions. In R. W. Swezey & E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp.31-56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Fryer, M., & Collings, J. A . (1991). British teachers’ views of creativity. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 25(1), 75-81.
Gardner, K., & Moran, J. D. Ⅲ. (1997). Family adaptability, cohesion, and creativity. In M. A. Runco & R. Richards (Eds.), Eminent creativity, everyday creativity, and health (pp. 325-332). Greenwich, CT: Ablex.
Gardner,H.（1988）. Creativity : An interdisciplinary perspective. Creavivity Research Journal,1, 8-26.
Gardner,H.（1993）. Creating minds. NY: Basic books.
Gersick, C.(1988). Time and transition in work teams: Toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 9-41.
Getzels,J.W., & Csikszentmihalyi,M.（1972）. The creative artist as an explorer. In J. McVicker Hunt(Ed.), Human intelligence（pp.182-192）. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Gibbins, R.（1999）.Conflict and unity: An introduction to canadian political Life (2nd ed.). Scarborough, Ontario: Nelson Canada,.
Gladstein, D. L.（1984）. Groups in context: A model of task group effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly,29:499-517.
Glatthorn, A. A. (1987). Curriculum leadership. Ill.: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Greenberg,J., & Baron,R.A. (1995). Behavior in organizations (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Gruber, H.E. (1988). The evolving systems approach to creative work. Creativity Research Journal, 1, 27-51.
Gruber,H.E., & Wallace,D.B.（1999）. The case study method and evolving systems approach for understanding unique creative people at work. In R.J.Sternberg（Ed.）, Handbook of Creativity. (pp.69-92) .United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Guildford, J. P.（1950）. Creativity. American Psychologist,5,444-454.
Guildford, J. P.（1967）. The nature of human intelligent. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Guildford, J. P.（1971）. Creativity and its cultivation. N.T:Harper and Row.
Guilford, J. P. (1984). Varieties of divergent production. Journal of Creative Behavior, 18, 1-10.
Hackman, J. R. (1986). The psychology of self-management in organizations. In M. S. Pollack & R. O. Perloff (Eds.), Psychology and work: Productivity change and employment (pp. 89-125). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hackman, J. R. (1987). The design of work teams. In J.W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hackman, J. R. (1990).Groups that work (and those that don’t): Creating conditions for effective teamwork. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980).Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hackmann, D. G., Petzko,V. N.,Valentine, J.W., Clark, D. C., Nori, J. R.,& Lucas, S. E. (2002). Beyond interdisciplinary teaming: Findings and implications of the NASSP National Middle Level Study. NASSP Bulletin, 86(632), 33-47.
Hargreaves, A.(1994). Changing teachers, changing time: Teachers’ work and culture in the postmodern age. London:Cassell
Harvey, D. & Brown, D. R. (1996). An experiential approach to organization development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Haustein, H. D. (1981). Human resources, creativity and innovation. Behavior Science, 26 (3), 243-255.
Hayes, N. (1997). Successful team management. New York: International Thomson business press.
Hellriegel, D., Slocum, J.W. Jr. & Woodman, R.W.（2001）. Organizational Behavior .Work Stress.
Helmreich, R.L., & Foushee, H.C.(1993). Why crew resource management? Empirical and theoretical bases of human factors training in aviation. In E.L. Wiener, B.G.. Kanki, & R. L. Helmreich (Eds). Cockpit resource management (pp 3-45). New York, NY: Academic.
Henkin, A.B., ＆ Wanat, C.L.. (2003). Social skills of principals: A profile in context. Journal of School Leadership, 6(4), 399-423.
Hennesy, B. A. & Amabile, T. M.（1999）. Consensual assessment. In Encyclopedia of Creativity. MA: Addison-Wesley.
Higgins, J. M. (1996). Innovate or evaporate: Creative techniques for strategists. Long Range Planning, 29(3), 370-380.
Hinsz, V.B. (2004). Metacognition and mental models in groups: An illustration with metamemory of group recognition memory. In E. Salas & S.M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 33-58). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hocevar, D. (1980). Intelligence, divergent thinking, and creativity.Intelligence, 4, 25-40.
Houtz, J.C., Selby, E., Esquivel, G. B., Okoye, R.A., & Peters, K. M. (2003). Creativity styles and personal type. Creativity Research Journal, 15(4), 321-330.
Hutchinson, L. M., & Beadle, M. E. (1992). Professors’ communication styles: How they influence male and female seminar participants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8, 405-418.
James, R.K., Lamb, C.E., & Bailey, M. A. (2000).Integrating science, mathematics, and technology in middle school technology-rich environments: A study of implementation and change. School Science and Mathematics, 100(1), 27-35.
Janz, B. D., Colquitt, J. A.,& Noe, R. A. (1997). Knowledgeworker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50(4), 877-904.
Jehn,K.A.& Mannix E.A.（2001）.The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance. Academy of Management Journal,44(2).238-251.
Judd, C. M.,&Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis: Estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Evaluation Review, 5(5), 602-619.
Jung, D. I. (2000). Transformational and transactional leadership and their effects on creativity in groups. Creativity Research Journal,13(2), 185-195.
Katzenbach ,J. R.＆ Smith ,D. K.（1993）. The wisdom of teams: Creating the High-performance organization(p.84) New York: Harper Collins.
Kenny, D. J. (2003). Using Edward de Bono's six hats game to aid critical thinking and reflection in palliative care. International Journal of Parrative Nursing, 9(3), 105-112.
Kruse, S. D.,&Louis, K. S. (1997).Teaching teaming in middle schools: Dilemmas for a schoolwide community. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33(3), 261-289.
Kurtzberg, T. R., & Amabile, T. M. (2001). From Guildford to creative synergy: Opening the black box of team-level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(4), 285-294.
Landow, G.P. (1990). Hypertext and collaborative work: The example of intermedia. In J.Galegher, R.E.Kraut & C. Egido(Eds.), Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work (pp.407-428). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Larson, C.E., & Frank Lafasto (1989). Teamwork: What must go right/What can go wrong. Newbury Park. Cal: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Lawler, E. E. (1986). High involvement management. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Leithwood,K.A.,Steinbach,R.,& Ryan,S.（1997）. Leadership and team learning in secondary schools. School Leadership & Management,17（3）,321.
Lewis, J. P. (1993). How to build and manage a winning project team. N.Y.: American Management Association.
Lipsitz, J. S. (1984). Successful schools for young adolescents.NewBrunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
Losada, M., Sanchez., P., & Noble, E.E. (1990). Collaborative technology and group process feedback: Their impact on interactive sequences in meetings. In Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work CSCW’90 (pp. 53-64). CA. Los Angeles.
Louis, K. S., Marks, H.,&Kruse, S. D. (1994). Teachers’professional community in restructuring schools. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Lubart, T. I. (2000). Models of the creative process: past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3&4), 295-308.
Maehr, M.L., & Midgley,C.（1996）. Transforming school cultures. Westview.
Maeroff,G.I.（1993）.Team building for school change: Equipping teachers for new roles. N.Y.: Teachers College Press.
Maira, A., & Scott,M.P.(1997). The accelerating organization: Embracing the human face of change. N.Y.: McGraw-Hill Cop.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709-734.
McCoy, J. M., & Evans, G. W. (2002). The potential role of the physical environment in fostering creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 14 (3&4), 409-426.
McIntosh,F. D. (1996). Teaming by designer: A1l teams for real people. Chicago: IRWIN.
McIntyre, R.M., & Dickinson, T.L.(1992). Systemic assessment of teamwork processes in tactical environments (Report submitted to Naval Training Systems Center under Contract No. N61339-91-C-0145). Norfolk. VA: Old Dominion University.
Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structure of organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Mohrman, S. A., & Lawler, E. E. (1992). Applying employee involvement in schools. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 14(4), 347-360.
Montebello, A. R., & Buzzotta, V. R. (1993). Work team that work. Training & Development, 47(3), 59-64
Morgan, B.W., Glickman, A.S., Woodard, E.A., & Salas, E.(1986). Measurement of team behayiors in a Navy environment ( Tech. Rep. No. NTSA TR-86-014). Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University, Center for Applied Psychological Studies.
Morganett, L. (1991). Good teacher-student relationships: A key element in classroom motivation and management. Education, 112, 260-264.
Muncey, D. E., & McQuillan, P. (1996). Reform and resistance in schools and classrooms. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Naquin,C.E. & Tynan,R.O.（2003）. The team holo effect: why teams are not blamed for their failures. Journal of Applied. Psychology,88(2),332-340.
Nieva, V.F., Fleishman, E. A., & Rieck, A.M.(1978). Team dimensions: Their identity, their measurement, and their relationships. Bethesda, MD: Advanced Research Resources Organization.
Olmstead, J.A. (1992). Battle staff integration (ID A Paper P-2560). Alexandria, VA: Institute for defense analysis. Orasanu, J., & Salas, E.(1993). Team decision making in complex environments.
Osborn, A F.（1963）. Applied imagination（3nd ed.）. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Perrow, C. (1986). Complex organizations: A critical essay. New York: Random House.
Pounder, D. G. (1998). Teacher teams: Redesigning teachers’ work for collaboration. In D. G.Pounder (Ed.), Restructuring schools for collaboration: Promises and pitfalls (pp. 65-88). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Pounder, D. G. (1999). Teacher teams: Exploring job characteristics and work-related outcomes of work group enhancement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35(3), 317-348.
Pounder,D.G. (1997).Teacher teams: Promoting teacher involvement and leadership in secondary schools. High School Journal, 80, 117-124.
Quick, T. L. (1992). Successful team building. New York: American Management Association. (pp.16-17).
Quinn, G., & Restine, L. N. (1996). Interdisciplinary teams: Concerns, benefits and costs. Journalof School Leadership, 6(4), 494-511.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. In S.G. Isaksen (Ed ), Frontiers of Creativity Research (pp.216-2220. New York: Bearly Limited.
Rice, R.E., & Shook, D.E.(1990). Voice messaging, coordination, and communication. In J. Galegher, R.E. Kraut, & C. Egido (Eds.), Intellectual teamwork: Social and technological foundations of cooperative work. (pp. 327-350). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Richardson, A. G. (1988). Classroom learning environment and creative performance: Some differences among Caribbean territories. Educational Research, 30, 224-227.
Robbins, S. P.（1998）. Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies, applications. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hill Inc.
Robbins, S. P.（2000）. Organization Behavior. New York: Prntice-Hall Inc.
Rowan, B. (1990). Applying conceptions of teaching to organizational reform. In R. F. Elmore& Associates (Eds.), Restructuring schools: The next generation of educational reform (pp. 31-58). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Roy, P.（1997）. A framework for object-oriented constraint satisfaction problems. ACM Press.
Ruffell Smith, H.P.(1979). A simulator study of the interaction of pilot workload with errors, vigilance, and decisions (Report No. TM-78482). Moffett Field, CA: NASA-Ames Research Center.
Saint,O.H., & Wallace, D.（2003）.Learning communities of practice for strategic advantage. New York: Elsevier Science.
Salas, E.(1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training, in R. W. Swezey and E. Salas eds. Team: Their Training and Performance, Norwoo., NJ: Blex Publishing Corporation, 3-29.
Schein, E.H. (1965). Organizational psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Schmidt, W. H., & Finnigan, J. P. (1993). TQM manager: A practical guide for managing in a total quality organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. N. Y.: Doubleday.
Shallcross, D. J. (1981). Teaching creative behavior: How to teach creativity to children of all ages. Englewood Cliffs. N.J.: Prentzice-Hall, Inc.
Shalley, C. E.（2002）. Effects of goal difficulty, goal-setting method, and expected external evaluation on intrinsic motivation, Academy of Management Journal, 30(3)：553-563.
Shalley, C., & E （2002）. How valid and useful is the integrative model for understanding work groups’creativity and innovation? Applied Psychology: An International Review,5(3),406-411.
Shnok, J. H. (1997). Team-based organization: developing a successful team environment. Homewood: Business One Irwin.
Siau, K.L.（1996）. Group creativity and technology. Journal of Creative behavior,29(3),201-216.
Simonton, D. K. (1994). Greatness: Who makes history and why. New York: Guilford.4"
Simonton, D. K.(1984). Genius,creativity & leadership. Cambridge: Harvard Univ.Press.
Simonton, D. K.（1999）. Creativeness—Who makes history and why. N.J.:Lea.
Simplicio, J. S. C. (2000). Teaching classroom educators how to be more effective and creative teachers. Education,120（4）,675-681.
Smith, S. (1997). Building that team: Readymade tools for team improvement. England: Kogan Page.
Smolensky, M. W., Carmody, M.A., & Halcomb, C. G. (1990). The influence of task type, group structure and extraversion on uninhibited speech in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior,6. 261-272.
Smylie, M. A., Conley, S.,&Marks, H. (2002). Exploring new approaches to teacher leadership for school improvement. In J. Murphy (Ed.), The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st century (pp. 162-188). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
Spiegel, J. & Torres. C.（1994）. Manager’s official guide to team working. Peifeiffer & Company.
Starko, A. J. (1995).Creativity in the classroom: School of curious delight, New York: Longman.
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31, 197-224.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful intelligence: How practical and creative intelligence determine success in life. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1995).Defying the crowd: Cultivating creativity in a culture of conformity. NY: Free Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg.(eds).（1999）.Handbook of Creativity.（pp.3-15）NY:Cambridge.
Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (1996). How to develop student creativity. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Sternberg,R.J.（1999）. Handbook of creativity. NY：Cambridge.
Stone, J. (1997). Increasing effectiveness: A guide to quality management. London: The Flamer Press.
Tesluk, P. E., & Mathieu, J. E. (1999). Overcoming road blocks to effectiveness: Incorporating management of performance barriers into models of work group effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 200-217.
Tinsley, H. E. A., & Eldredge, B. D. (1995). Psychological benefits of leisure participation: A taxonomy of leisure activities based on their need gratifying properties. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42(2), 123-132.
Tjosvold, D. (1993). Team organization: An enduring competitive advantage. N. Y.: Wiley.
Tjosvold, D., & Tjosvold, M. M. (1991). Leading the team organization: How to create an enduring competitive advantage. N. Y.: Lexington
Torrance, E. P. (1963).Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Torrance, E. P. (1966). Torrance tests of creative thinking: norms-technical manual. Princeton, N.J.: Research Edition Personnel Press,Inc.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Norms and technical manual: Torrance tests of creative thinking (Revised edition), Bensenville, IL Scholastic Testing Service.
Torrance, E. P. (1979). The search of satori & creativity. Buffalo, New York: Creative Education Foundation, Inc.
Torrance, E. P. (1988).The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Nature of Creativity (pp.43-57).NY: Cambridge University Press.
Torrance, E. P., & Myers, R. E. (1997). Creative learning and teaching. NY: Dodd Mead.
Troxclair, D. A. (2000). Differentiating instruction for gifted students in regular education social studies classes. Roeper Review, 22(3), 195-198.
Tuckman, B.W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 384-399.
Tuckman, B.W., & Jensen, M.C. (1997). Stages of small group development revisited. Group and Organizational Studies, 2, 419-427.
Vinokur-Kaplan, D. (1995). Treatment teams that work (and those that don’t): An application of Hackman’s group effectiveness model to interdisciplinary teams in psychiatric hospitals. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31(3), 303-327.
Vosberg, S. K. (1998). Mood and the quality of ideas. Creativity Research Journal, 11(4), 315-331.
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. NY: Harcour Brance and World.
Wellins, R. S. & William, C. B., & Jeanne, M. W. (1991). Empowerment Team: Creating Self-Directed Work Groups That Improve Quality, Productivity, and Participation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset or burden in the classroom? Creativity Research Journal, 8, 1-10.
Williams, F. (1980). Creativity assessment packet . NY：Buffalo, DOK.
Wood,J.M.（1999）. Early luteracy instruction and educational technologies： Three classroom-based models. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation of the Graduate School of Education of the Havard University.
Woolfolk, A. E., & McCune,N. L. (1980). Educational psychology for teachers (2nd Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall.
Yeager, J. F. (1994). Shaping the culture: Organizational development through team building. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No.ED384 198)
Zsambok, C. E., Klein, G., Kyne, M., ＆ Klinger,D.W.（1993）. How teams excel: A model of advanced team decision making. In Performance Technology-1993, Selected Proceedings of the 31st NSPI Conference. Chicago: NSPI.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1028（臺灣：1025，外國：3） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1641614 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67440480
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上