:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:國小特殊優良教師彰權益能之個案研究
作者:鍾榮進
作者(外文):Chung, Jung-Chin
校院名稱:臺北市立大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:張煌熙
張德銳
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2016
主題關鍵詞:特殊優良教師教師彰權益能專業發展專業自主Excellent teacherTeacher empowermentProfessional developmentProfessional autonomy
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(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:293
摘 要
本研究的主要目的,乃在探討國小特殊優良教師彰權益能的情況、發展歷程、影響因素、成效及困境。為了達成上述目的,本研究以兩位國小特殊優良教師為對象,採用質化研究取向之個案研究法,主要蒐集資料方法為訪談,輔以觀察與文件分析。本研究經過兩年時間探究,獲得幾個主要發現,歸納如下之結論:
一、國小特殊優良教師彰權益能的重心在於參與決策、專業自主、地位與影響、合作與支持、專業成長、自我效能等六種範疇,其在此六種範疇均有良好的
表現
(一)參與決策:1.兩位個案教師在此方面的共同點為參與學校各層次決策會議的管道及機會甚多,能秉持專業良知表達意見及作決定;2.教師意見屬諮詢成分較大,視其專業能力適度參與學校決策並盡力配合執行之。
(二)專業自主:1.兩位個案教師在此方面的共同點為皆能發揮專業自主及專業能力,能充分掌握教室層級實施的課程與教學,盡心盡力於教學工作之完成;
2.兩位個案教師專業自主權的運用,皆能考量情境與認知而採用各種不同的策略。
(三)地位與影響:1.兩位個案教師皆能認真教學,以教學成果及專業能力贏得學生、家長及同事的肯定及尊重;2.兩位個案教師擁有高度地位與影響力,而此高度地位與影響力皆同樣來自於能力的展現,而非權力的爭取。
(四)合作與支持:1.兩位個案教師皆能積極主動的與同儕間互相合作與支持,彼此分享經驗及協助解決問題;2.兩位個案教師皆能獲得學校行政方面的支持,讓同儕間的合作與支持,以及其它各種活動得以順利進行。
(五)專業成長:1.兩位個案教師皆能善用各種專業成長管道,不斷充實自我專業知能,並回饋所學於教學,提升教學品質;2.兩位個案教師皆能因應個人特質、理念、意願及需求,選擇合適專業成長方式,發揮最大效用。
(六)自我效能:1.兩位個案教師皆能肯定自我的教學,能有效提升學生學習表現,擁有高度的自我效能;2.兩位個案教師能分別透過各種經驗及訊息來源之作用,提升教師自我效能。
二、國小特殊優良教師彰權益能的發展歷程,因應不同情境脈絡而有不同路線,各時期之間乃是相互影響、彼此交流而建構成一種動態多元的體系
(一)教師彰權益能發展歷程,包含醞釀期、行動期、成就期三個時期,各時期分別有不同的特徵:1.醞釀期,此時期的特徵是教師處於處於摸索及調適狀態,感覺能力不足,或受到限制,難以伸展,以致產生挫折感,或遇到困難,自己難以解決,因此經過自我覺察後,想尋找出路或解決之道,以脫離困境。2.行動期,此時期的特徵是教師積極嘗試改變及付諸行動,採用自己認為可行的方法或方式,提升個人的能力,並將所增長的能力運用於改進教學及協助解決問題。3.成就期,此時期的特徵是教師受到高度肯定及感到價值感,感覺自己是重要的、有成就的,以及有力的,有自我實現的感覺,能持續精進,發揮更大影響力,提升學校的教育品質,追求更高層次的成就感。
(二)教師彰權益能發展發展歷程並非完全直線單向進行,而是具有多元性及循環性,前期的發展成為後期發展的基礎,不同領域及發展階段會產生交互作用。
(三)教師彰權益能發展歷程,能力的發展重於權力的取得。
三、國小特殊優良教師彰權益能的影響因素有教師個人因素、教師組織因素、學校因素及社會因素,其中以教師個人因素的影響最為深遠
四、國小特殊優良教師彰權益能具有正面積極的成效,有助於學生學習表現、教學工作滿意、教育品質、學校效能及教師集體效能各方面之提升
(一)展現高度教師自我效能,運用多元教學方法與策略,提升學生學習表現。
(二)肯定自我價值,從教學中獲得成就感,對教學工作滿意。
(三)轉化情境,促進教育公義,提升教育品質。
(四)同儕合作分享,提升教師集體效能。
(五)發揮專業及影響力,提升學校效能。
五、國小特殊優良教師彰權益能的困境有待克服,以促進教學及教育品質的提升
(一)時間不足,難以充分貢獻所長。
(二)統一的課程內容太多,影響教學品質。
(三)缺乏特定專業知能,影響決策參與的意願。
(四)校長強勢領導,教師意見表達亦難以改變既定政策,對參與決策感到無奈。
(五)家長觀念溝通不易,不利教師教學理念之推展。
最後,根據研究結果對學校、教師及未來的研究提出建議。
關鍵字:特殊優良教師、教師彰權益能、專業發展、專業自主
Abstract
In this study, the author examined the current status of elementary schools’ excellent teacher empowerment with respect to the empowerment development process, influencing factors, achievements, and dilemma encountered by the teachers. Two excellent teachers were chosen from elementary schools as research subject. Qualitative research method was employed to examine the research subjects. Data was gathered using interviews, observations, and document analysis. After two years of research, findings were acquired and summarized into conclusions as follows:
I. The evaluation of elementary school’s excellent teacher empowerment comprises 6 dimensions, namely, participation in decision-making, professional autonomy, positions and influence, cooperation and supports, professional development, and self-efficiency. The research subjects conformed to all requirements stated in 6 dimensions.
(I) Participation in decision-making: 1. both research subjects had many ways and opportunities to participate in all levels of decision-making meetings in schools, and expressed their opinions in the meetings based on their professional consciousness, and thus decisions were made; 2. teachers’ opinions were intended for reference; teachers participated in school’s decision-making process with their professional competency, and carried out the resolutions with their best efforts.
(II) Professional autonomy: 1. both research subjects made best use of their professional autonomy and professional abilities, and carried out their teaching assignments in classrooms in order to accomplish their tasks; 2. both research subjects employed different strategies to cope with different situations and different cognitions whenever they made use of their professional autonomy.
(III) Positions and influence: 1. both research subjects were dedicated to their teaching assignments, their professional abilities and accomplishments were recognized by students, parents, and colleagues; 2. both research subjects were promoted to high positions and earned their influences after they demonstrated their professional competency; they never fought against any colleague for power.
(IV) Cooperation and supports: 1. both research subjects cooperated with their peers and supported them proactively, sharing experience with their peers and helping them to solve the problems; 2. both research subjects received supports from schools’ administrative departments, allowing them to help their peers and to carry out all activities successfully.
(V) Professional development: 1. both research subjects developed their professional abilities in everyway possible, and thus improved their professional competency and upgraded their teaching skills; 2. both research subjects chose the most suitable methods based on their personal traits, concepts, intensions, and their needs in order to develop their professional abilities; both research subjects made best use of their professional competency.
(VI) Self-efficiency: 1. both research subjects were confident in their teaching skills; both research subjects helped students to improve their academic performance, and thus demonstrated their self-efficiency; 2. both research subjects learned from various experiences and information, and thus improved their self-efficiency.
II. Elementary schools’ excellent teacher empowerment evolves in many ways, depending on the situations and contexts involved in the development process. All influencing factors affect and interact with each other in all stages and thus create a dynamic and diversified system.
(I) The development process of teacher empowerment is divided into three stages, namely, incubation stage, action stage, and achievement stage. All stages feature different characteristics. 1. In the incubation stage, teachers are adapting themselves to the schools, feeling incompetent or restricted and are unable to make best use of their talents, and have no way overcome their frustrations and difficulties. In this stage, teachers are aware of their dilemma and try to overcome it. 2. In the action stage, teachers try to change their situations, using the feasible methods to enhance their abilities. In this stage, teachers enhance their abilities in order to improve their teaching skills and solve problems for themselves. 3. In the achievement stage, teachers feel their achievements have been recognized and have a sense of self-fulfillment. In this stage, teachers feel they have achieved something important, they have the power to pursue self-fulfillment, they can continue to improve their professional competency, they have more influence than before, they can upgrade education quality for the schools, and they are ready to pursue a higher level of self-fulfillment.
(II) The development process of teacher empowerment does not move like a straight line. Pluralism and cycle are involved in this process. The development in the early stage serves as the foundation in the later stage. Different influencing factors interact with each other in different stage.
(III) In the development process of teacher empowerment, it is more important to develop competency than to fight for power.
III. Elementary schools’ excellent teacher empowerment is subject to a number of influencing factors, such as teachers’ personal factors, teachers’ organizational factors, schools, and social factors. Teachers’ personal factors impose the most far-reaching influence on the teachers themselves.
IV. Elementary schools’ excellent teacher empowerment serves many purposes in a positive and constructive manner, and is beneficial for students’ academic performance, teaching assignment, education quality, schools’ efficiency, and teachers’ group efficiency, for example,
(I) Creating a high level of self-efficiency through pluralistic teaching methods and strategies, and at the same time improving students’ academic performance,
(II) Helping teachers to recognize their values, to establish a sense of self-fulfillment, and to be satisfied with their teaching assignments,
(III) Transforming the situations, promoting the justice of education, and upgrading education quality,
(IV) Enhancing cooperation and sharing between peers, and improving teachers’ group efficiency, and
(V) Improving professional competency and influence, and upgrading schools’ efficiency.
V. A number of dilemmas remain to be solved in order to improve teaching efficiency and upgrade education quality, for example,
(I) Faced with time pressure, teachers are unable to make best use of their professional competency,
(II) Faced with the excessive content required by the unified curriculum, teachers have hard time improving teaching quality,
(III) Without the professional competency in certain areas, some teachers are reluctant to participate in the decision-making meetings,
(IV) Some headmasters maintain a dominant leadership, do not accept teachers’ opinions, and refuse to change their policies. Consequently, teachers feel helpless and are unwilling to attend the decision-making meetings, and
(V) Teachers have hard time communicating with some parents, and are restricted to employ new teaching methods.
Lastly, recommendations were made based on the research results, and were presented to the schools, teachers and subsequent researchers for their reference.
Keywords: Excellent teacher, Teacher empowerment, Professional development,
Professional autonomy
中文部分
丁一顧(2011a)。大學與中學夥伴協作實施歷程與成效之研究。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊,4(2),45-6。new window
丁一顧(2011b)。淺談中小學教師夥伴合作學習。教師天地,175,38-43。
王文科(1999)。教育研究法。臺北市:五南。new window
王如哲、林明地、張志明、黃乃熒、楊振昇(1999)。教育行政。高雄市:麗文。
王秀玲、林新發、康瀚文、梁玟燁、蔡麗華(2008)。國民中學教師專業權能、知識管理對教學創新行為影響之研究。初等教育學刊,29,23-56。new window
王秀玲、林新發、蔡麗華、梁玟燁、康瀚文(2005)。國民中學教師專業權能、教學創新行為對教學效能影響之研究—以臺灣北部地區三縣市為例。行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫成果報告。(編號:NSC93-2413-H-152-003)未出版。
王受榮(1992)。我國國民中小學教師效能感及其影響因素之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。new window
王為國(1995)。國小教師專業自主:一所國小的個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
王秋絨(1990)。弗雷勒批判的成人教學模式研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。new window
王國華、段曉林、張惠博(1998)。國中學生對科學教師學科教學之知覺。科學教育學刊,6(4),363-381。new window
王淑慧、林子堯(2008)。國中生活科技教師教學表徵之案研究。工業科技教育學刊,1,11-18。
王順合(2012)。通識教育改革下科技大學通識學事教師之增權益能(未出版之博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。new window
王筱怡(2011)。以整合型科技接受模式探討屏東縣國小特教教師參與網路專業成長社群進行教師專業成長之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立屏東教育大學,屏東縣。
王麗雲、潘慧玲(2000)。教師彰權益能的概念與實施策略。教育研究集刊,44,173-199。new window
王麗雲、潘慧玲(2002)。種子與土壤:校長與教師在學校革新中的角色與作法。載於潘慧玲(主編),學校革新:理念與實踐 (頁101-137)。臺北市:學富。new window
王艷蕉(2011)。國民中學教師賦權增能與學校組織氣氛知覺相關之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北科技大學,臺北市。
全國教師會(2000)。全國教師自律公約。臺北市,全國教師會。
江展塏(1995)。國民小學校長領導型式與教師教學自我效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立師範學院,臺北市。
行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。臺北市:行政院教改會。
何榮杰(2008)。國民中學體育科教師專業發展需求之研究—以臺中市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
何福田、羅瑞玉(1992)。教育改革與教師專業化。載於中華民國師範教育學會(主編),教師專業。臺北市:師大書苑。
吳正成(1999)。臺東縣國民小學教師教學信念與實踐之探究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺東大學,臺東縣。
吳庚(2015)。行政法之理論與實用(增訂十三版)。臺北市:三民。new window
吳明清(1998)。教育研究:基本觀念與方法之分析。臺北市:五南。
吳芳容(2011)。國小教師專業學習社群與教師集體效能感關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立雲林科技大學,雲林縣。
吳淑任(2008)。國小學校轉型領導與教師集體效能感之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中正大學,嘉義縣。
吳清山(1997)。學校效能研究。臺北市:五南。new window
吳清山(1998)。學校行政、教師會和家長會互動模式之研究。臺北市:臺北市政府教育局。
吳清山(2004)。提升教師素質之探究。教育研究,127,5-17。
吳清山、林天祐(2003)。增權益能。教育研究月刊,113,160。
吳清山、高家斌(2009)。臺灣近二十年學校效能研究論文取向分析。教育研究月刊,188,5-26。new window
吳靜宜(2010)。學校組織氣氛、教師權能、教師集體效能與學校經營績效關係之研究-以臺中縣公立國中為例(未出版之碩士論文)。大葉大學,彰化縣。
呂書碧(2003)。國民小學教師賦權增能知覺與學校衝突知覺關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。輔仁大學,臺北縣。
宋汪儒(2015)。臺中市國小音樂教師專業成長現況與需求之研究文(未出版之碩士論)。中臺科技大學,臺中市。
宋秋美(2005)。臺北市國小英語教師學科教學知識之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育學報,6 (7),63-94。new window
李奉儒(2001)。教育基本法理念的解析。教育研究月刊,86,28-43。new window
李奉儒(2003)。P. Freire的批判教學論對於教師實踐教育改革的啟示。教育研究集刊,49(3),3-30。new window
李怡諄(2013)。新竹縣國民小學教師參與教師組織與學校教育品質之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立東華大學,花蓮縣。
李俊湖(2007)。教師專業成長。研習資訊,24(6),97-102。new window
李美華(1998)。社會科學研究方法。臺北市:時英。
李員如(2008)。國民中學校長課程領導與教師賦權增能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
杜美智(1996)。國小社會科教師課程決定之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立花蓮師範學院,花蓮縣。
沈姍姍(1995)。教師增權的意義與條件剖析。載於中華民國教育學會(主編),教師權力與責任(頁137-147)。臺北市:師大書苑。
沈姍姍(1996)。專業主義、教師權力與教育行政體制關係:教師權力消長的動態分析。新竹師院學報,9,103-128。new window
車文博(2001)。人本主義心理學。臺北市:東華。
邢泰釗(1999)。教師法律手冊。臺北市:教育部。
周淑卿(2001)。課程決定的賦權迷失—集中化與離中化的探討。教育研究集刊,47,91-106。new window
周淑卿(2002)。教師與學生在課堂發展歷程中的處境—系統論與概念重建論的觀點。教育研究集刊,48(1),133-151。new window
周淑卿(2004)。課程發展與教師專業。臺北市:高等教育。
林天祐(2005)。教師行動研究準則:普及化的基石。學校行政,35,1-16。
林吉城(2008)。雲林縣國民中學健康與體育學習領域教師教學自我效能與教師有效教學之調查研究未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學健康促進與衛生教育研究所,臺北市。
林秀聰(1998)。賦能策略應用於機關之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
林佩璇(2000)。個案研究及其在教育研究上的應用。載於中正大學教育研究所(主編),質的研究方法(頁199-221)。高雄市:麗文文化。
林佳慧(2004)。在國中資深國文科教師學科教學知識之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中山大學,高雄市。
林明地(2004)。教育行政體系與教師會組織之互動:組織多元分析架構的運用。現代教育論壇,10,523-528。
林美淑(2005)。國中自然科教師學科教學知識成長之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
林偉人(1999)。淺論學校本位課程發展。國教之友,51(2),3-12。
林淑華(2000)。國小教師參與學校教師會的功能需求、運作策略與組織滿意之關係研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院,屏東縣。
林進材(1997)。教師知識的內涵、建構及其在師資培育上的應用。中等教育,48 (1),34-39。new window
林順智(2005)。國民小學教師參與學校本位專業發展情形與教學效能相關之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,臺中市。
邱憶惠(2002)。國小級任教師知識之個案研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。new window
金來儀(2007)。國小教師專業發展與工作壓力之調查研究(未出版之碩士論文)。大葉大學,彰化縣。
姜添輝(1999)。教師專業與教育改革。師鐸,15,75-82。
姜添輝(2002)。九年一貫課程政策影響教師專業自主權之研究。教育研究集刊,48,157-195。new window
姜添輝(2010)。批判教學論的要點及其對師生互動的啟示。教育資料與研究雙月刊,95,1-26。new window
施互琴(2004)。教師教學實務知識之研究—以國小四年級自然與生活科技教師為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
柯怡如(2007)。教學研究會與教師專業發展關聯性之研究-以臺北縣市公立國民中學為例(未出版之碩士論文)。銘傳大學,桃園縣。
柯素月(2001)。國民小學學校教師會之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
柯進雄(1997)。學校行政領導。臺北市:商鼎。
洪文芳(2014)。國中教師彰權益能、專業承諾與學校效能關係之研究—以中部三縣市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
洪宏蔚(2009)。澎湖縣國小教師數學學習領域有效教學行為、自我效能與教學效能相關之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。
洪孟華(2003)。國小教師增權賦能之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義市。
洪慈蔚(2013)。走在增權賦能的道路上-高中團隊教師增權賦能之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
洪嘉鴻(2003)。國民小學教師增權與教師自我效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
研究誠信新加坡聲明(2010年7月)。科學通報,55(27-28),2784。取自http://www.singaporestatement.org/Translations/SS_Chinese_CSB.pdf
胡惠燕(2007)。高雄市國民中學教師在職進修態度與專業發展關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
秦夢群、吳勁甫、簡瑋成 (2014)。群體層次教師組織公民行為、教師彰權益能與學校效能關係之研究。教育與心理研究,37(1),1-35。new window
孫志麟(1991)。國民小學教師自我效能及其相關因素之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學教育,臺北市。new window
孫志麟(2001)。教師自我效能與教學行為的關係-實徵取向的分析。國立臺北師範學院學報,14,109-140。new window
孫志麟(2009)。建立信心:教師自我效能七部曲。臺北市:學富。
徐正光(1975)。兩因素理論與工作態度研究。思與言,13(4),228-236。new window
徐金章(2006)。臺北市國民小學教師會運作績效與學校效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北市。
翁安明(2003)。國民小學社會領域教師課程決定之研究-以澎湖地區為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南師範學院,台南市。
高義展(1998)。學校行政官僚體制與教師專業自主關係之探討:以學校教師會為例。教育研究資訊,6(4),30-47。new window
高榮成(1994)。化學實習教師學科教學知識之探究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
康美文(2003)。新竹市國小體育教師專業發展需求研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北巿立體育學院,臺北市。
張文祺(2011)。桃竹苗地區國民小學教師專業學習社群、學校組織文化與教師專業成長關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學,新竹市。
張在山(1981)。實用企業管理學。臺北市:世界。
張明輝(1999)。學校教育與行政革新研究。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
張建成(2002)。批判的教育社會學研究。臺北市:學富。
張春興(1996)。教育心理學。臺北市:東華。
張淑宜、辛俊德(2011)。學習社群與教師專業表現關係之研究。臺中教育大學學報:教育類,1,83 - 103。new window
張稚美(1998)。終身學習與教師增權。文教新潮,3(4),30-38。
張萬億(2007)。臺北縣公立國中教師知覺學校教師會組織功能與教師專業自主相關之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
張德銳(1995)。對「教師專業素質之提升」一文之評論。教改通訊,14,36-38。
張德銳(2000)。師資培育與教師評鑑。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
張德銳(2011年,12月)。教師彰權益能在教學輔導教師制度中的發展與實踐。「臺北市立高級中等以下學校教學輔導教師設置方案教學輔導教師在臺北實施經驗暨學術論文發表會」發表之論文,臺北市國語實驗國民小學。new window
張德銳、李俊達(1999)。以學校為中心的教師專業成長。研習資訊,16(6),25-32。
張德銳、郭淑芳(2011)。我國中小學教師專業發展實務與研究的問題與展望。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊,4(2),21-43。new window
張德銳、王淑珍、何嘉惠(2012)。國民中小學教師彰權益能之影響因素與成效困境之研究。行政院國科會補助專題研究計畫(編號:NSC101-2410-H-030-087),未出版。
張德銳、王淑珍、何嘉惠(2014)。教師權益能的現況、歷程、成效與困境之研究:以八位國小資深優良教師為例。教育研究與發展期刊,10(1),23-52。new window
張潤書(2014)。行政學。臺北市:三民。
張慶勳(2000)。國小校長轉化、互易領導影響學校組織文化特性與組織效能之研究。高雄市:復文。new window
張寶丹(2004)。國小教師專業發展與形象知覺之研究─以高雄縣為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院,屏東縣。
教育基本法(1999年6月23日)。
教育基本法(2013年12月11日)。
教育部(1998)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市:教育部。new window
教育部(2012)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市:教育部。new window
教育部(2005)。教育部補助試辦教師專業發展評鑑實施計畫。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2013)。各級學校資深優良教師獎勵要點。取自http://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContentDetails.aspx?id=GL000619&KeyWordHL=&StyleType=1
教師法(1995年8月9日)。
教師法(2014年6月18日)。
梁玟燁(2004)。臺北縣市國民中學教師專業權能、教學承諾與教學效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北師範學院,臺北市。
梁福鎮(2006a)。教育哲學─辯證取向。臺北市:五南。
梁福鎮(2006b)。我國教師專業發展的現況、問題與對策。教育科學期刊,6(2),77-90。new window
莊錦堂(2004)。國民中學教師參與決定方式與彰權益能之研究-以桃竹苗地區為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
許全來(2004)。國民小學課程決定回饋機制運作之研究-以臺中市國民小學為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中師範學院,臺中市。
許如菁(2001)。教師權能的描繪與分析:一所國民小學及其學校教師會的經驗(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中正大學,嘉義縣。
許金聲、劉鋒譯(1987)。自我實現的人(原作者:A. H. Maslow)。上海市:三聯。
許獻元(2003)。網路之團體互動對團體效能與團體表現之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣科技大學,臺北市。
許籐繼(2000)。學校組織權力重建之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。new window
許藤繼(2001)。學校組織權力重建。臺北市:五南。
連晨帆(2007)。權力與真實利益下的在地知識:一個學校本位課程決定的敘說探究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學,屏東縣。
郭生玉(1996)。心理與教育研究法。臺北市:精華。
郭昭佑(2000)。學校本位評鑑。臺北市:五南。new window
郭昭佑、陳美如(2002)。英美兩地學校本位課程評鑑方案比較研究。教育學刊,19,235-257。new window
郭逸瑄(2003)。高級中學校長領導行為與教師賦權增能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學,臺北縣。
陳君武(2006)。學校課程發展委員會對教師彰權益能提升之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
陳志成(2003)。國民中小學教師會參與學校行政決定之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義市。
陳志和(2003)。桃園縣國民小學教師彰權益能情形之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
陳昀仟(2006)。九年一貫課程改革後小學教師課程決定權之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。
陳怡容、徐明志(2007)。教師專業成長的新思維。國民教育,47(6),68-75
陳欣民、劉嘉茹與柳賢(2010)。機率課程中教師彰權益能之敘事探究。屏東教育大學學報-教育類,34,177-210。new window
陳俊文(2007)。教師會組織氣氛與其會員參與學校行政決定程度與滿意度之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義市。
陳美玉(1999)。教師專業學習與發展。臺北市:師大書苑。
陳美如、郭昭佑(2001)。教師如何從事課程評鑑:從賦權增能評鑑理念談起。教育研究月刊,88,83-93。new window
陳素蘭(2003)。台北市國民小學教師參與學校行政決定程度、類型及滿意度之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台北師範學院,臺北市。
陳軒孟(2006)。創造性問題解決與多元智慧教學模式對國小學童創造力之影響-以兒童詩教學為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學,屏東縣。
陳國泰(2006)。國小自然與生活科技資深專家教師學科教學知識的發展之個案研究。屏東教育大學學報,25,117-156。new window
陳雅昕(2015)。國小教師同儕壓力、社會支持與自我效能之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立大學,臺北市。
陳雅珍(2007)。國小專家教師音樂科學科教學知識之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。
陳聖謨(1999)。國民小學教師教學反省之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。new window
陳嘉彌(1997)。接受創新程度的理論與應用。教學科技與媒體,31,36-48。new window
陳夢妮(2009)。國小教師工作壓力、權能感受與工作滿意度之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
陳蕙雯(2008)。一位國小教師以議題中心教學法增進學生理性決定知能之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。
陳穎蓁(2010)。桃園縣國小社會學習領域教師專業成長與教學效能之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台東大學,臺東縣。
陳藝分(2011)。高雄市國民小學教師自我效能感與有效教學行為之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。
陳麗華 (1995)。實習教師的社會科教學推理---結構與意識的辯證。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
陳馨蘭(1998)。教師人格特質、自我效能、學生行為信念與班級經營風格之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
彭富源(1997)。學校教師會與教師專業自主(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
彭運石(2001)。走向生命的顛峰-馬斯洛的人本心理學。臺北市:城邦文化。new window
曾富明(2006)。臺北縣國民中學教師彰權益能與學校效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
曾翠雪(2006)。屏東縣國民小學社會領域教師專業發展之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學,屏東縣。
游象昌(2009)。教師專業發展評鑑與教師賦權增能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。
湯志民(2001)。知識經濟與教育轉型。教育資料與研究,41,13-16。new window
馮怡君(2008)。高中古典散文情境教學研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
馮琬婷(2008)。桃園縣國中教師彰權益能與工作滿意度關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。中原大學,桃園縣。
黃乃熒(2002)。以教師彰權益能觀點探究學校權力生態-以一所國中教評會為例。師大學報,47(1),59-82。new window
黃立欣(2003)。學校層級課程決定之研究-以青水中學自然領域為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
黃光雄(主譯)(2001)。質性教育研究—理論與方法(Robert C. Bogdan 與 Sari Knopp Biklen 原著)。嘉義市:濤石。
黃建翔、吳清山(2013)。國民中學教師專業發展、專業承諾與教學效能關係之研究-以TEPS資料庫為例。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊,2,117 - 140。new window
黃政傑(2000)。課程評鑑。臺北市:師大書苑。
黃哲彬(2004)。國民小學校長賦權增能行為與學校效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。new window
黃清秀(2006)。國中教師的課程取向、課程決定與專業成長需求之研究-學校本位課程的實踐(未出版之碩士論文) 。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
黃凱陽(2009)。台北縣國民中學學校教師會運作對學校效能影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學,臺北縣。
黃富順(1989)。成人學習特性及其在教學上的意義。社教雙月刊,31,23-28。
黃景良(1998)。國民中學教師參與管理之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
黃煥榮(2009)。行政學講義。2013年6月8日,取自: http://researcher.nsc.gov.tw/lp.asp?mp=1514&ctNode=561&CtUnit=525&BaseDSD=7
新北市教育局(2014)。新北市103學年度國民小學藝術才能美術班招生鑑定簡章。2014年12月18日,取自http://www.jcps.ntpc.edu.tw/mediafile/709/news/83/2014-3/2014-3-7-12-24-45-nf1.pdf
楊子恆(2005)。F. Herzberg雙因子理論與教師教學效能之實證研究分析-以臺北縣國民小學教師為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。
楊乃靜(2011)。以整合性科技接受模式探討屏東縣國小英語教師利用網路社群進行教師專業成長之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學,屏東縣。new window
楊洲松(2000)。後現代知識論與教育。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
楊深耕(2003)。以馬濟洛(Mezirow)的轉化學習理論來看教師專業成長。教育資料與研究,54,124 - 131。new window
楊喬涵(2007)。高職教師賦權增能知覺與專業成長需求關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北科技大學碩,臺北市。
楊雅婷(2006)。臺北市立國民中學教師彰權益能之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
萬榮輝(2002)。國小資深教師教師同儕視導之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北師範學院,臺北市。
葉家欣(2005)。馬斯洛的人本思想及其在公共行政之探究意涵(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北大學,臺北縣。
葉梅蘭(2012)。彰化縣國小教師彰權益能與學校效能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學,彰化縣。
董保成(1999)。教育法與學術自由。臺北市:元照。
董家寧(2007)。臺北縣國民小學校長行政決定方式與教師賦權增能關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。輔仁大學,臺北縣。
詹董水(2012)。國民小學校長對教師賦權增能與教師工作壓力之關係─以互惠關係為調節變項(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。
詹鍾松(2003)。地方教師會組織運作與功能(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台中師範學院,臺中市。
廖文彥(2006)。雲林縣中等學校體育教師專業發展需求之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立體育學院,臺北市。
廖惠珍(2009)。國民小學教師彰權益能與學校效能關係之研究—以桃園縣為例(未出版之碩士論文)。中原大學,桃園縣。
廖運楨(2002)。臺灣地區公立國民小學教師賦權增能(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹師範學院,新竹市。
甄曉蘭、簡良平(2002)。學校本位課程發展權力重整問題之批判分析。教育研究集刊,48(1),65-93。new window
趙怡婷(2004)。學校教師會參與學校行政決定之研究—以桃園縣國民小學為例(未出版之碩士論文)。中原大學,桃園縣。
劉月娥(2000)。國民小學教師專業決定與教師教學效能感之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立師範學院,臺北市。
劉妙真(2005)。幼稚園教師工作壓力、社會支持與職業倦怠之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院,屏東縣。
劉建男(2005)。臺北市國民小學教師賦權增能與組織承諾關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學,臺北縣。
劉春榮(1996)。國民小學教師專業自主知覺、教師組織功能需求與教師專業承諾研究。高雄市:復文。new window
劉春榮(1997)。師資培育與教師專業承諾研究。教育資料集刊,22,85-95。new window
劉義勇(2005)。國民小學學校教師會組織功能與運作策略關係之研究-以中部四縣市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立暨南國際大學,南投縣。
劉麗玲、郭重吉(2001)。國中資深理化教師教學表徵之個案研究。科學教育,11,144-159。
歐用生(2003a)。課程典範再建構。高雄市:麗文。new window
歐用生(2003b)。誰能不在乎課程理論?教師課程理論的覺醒。教育資料期刊,28,373-387。
歐自偉(2003)。國小社會學習領域課程小組課程決定之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北師範學院,臺北市。
潘安堂(2001)。國民小學教師授能與工作滿意度關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。暨南國際大學,南投縣。
潘慧玲(2006)。彰權益能評鑑之探析。當代教育研究季刊,14(1),1-24。new window
潘慧玲(2007)。教師增能。臺北市:心理。
潘慧玲、王麗雲(2000,12月)。我國國民中小學學校成員權能感現況與成因調查研究:以教師會作為研究焦點。潘慧玲(主持人),學校革新之研究。新世紀教育發展願景與規劃學術研討會,臺北市。
潘靜儀(2007)。國小自然與生活科技領域專家教師學科教學知識與教 學決策之詮釋性研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。
蔡佳璋(2013)。國民小學教師自我效能感與正向管教實踐之相關研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義縣。
蔡玫君(2004)。臺北縣國小教師健康與體育學習領域專業發展現況之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北師範學院,臺北市。
蔡進雄(2000)。轉型領導與學校效能。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
蔡進雄(2001)。新世紀學校行政的發展方向。臺東師院學報,12(下),1-18。new window
蔡進雄(2003)。授權抑或授權賦能?論校長如何運用授權賦能領導。人文及社會學科教學通訊,13(5),62-79。
蔡進雄(2006)。國民小學校長情緒智力影響集體教師效能感之研究。教育資料與研究雙月刊,72,103-118。new window
鄭卉玶(2011)。國民小學分布式領導對教師賦權增能影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。
鄭惠觀(2005)。國語文多元智慧教學對國小學童語文創造力之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。明道管理學院,彰化縣。
鄭詩釧(2005)。國民中小學組織文化與教師專業發展關係之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。new window
盧宛秀(2010)。彰化縣國小社會領域教師人格特質、教師專業發展對教師自我效能影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺東大學,台東縣。
錢富美(2002)。國小教師參與學校本位課程發展具備之專業知能及其影響因素之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺中師範學院,臺中市。
戴韋嘩(2012)。臺北市國民小學教師彰權益能與教師專業承諾關係之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學,臺北市。
謝文全(1993)。學校行政。臺北市:五南。
謝文全(1997)。教育行政—理論與實務。臺北市:文景。
謝慶順(2005)。臺北市國小體育教師賦權增能與工作滿意度相關之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。臺北市立體育學院,臺北市。
謝寶梅(1995)。國小教師自我效能感之調查研究。初等教育研究所輯刊,3,79-96。
鍾任琴(1997)。國小教師權能感及其影響因素之研究。嘉義師院學報,11,157-185。
鍾任琴(1998) 。中小學教師專業權能及其相關變項之研究:教師權能之理論建構與實證分析。臺北市:五南。new window
鍾任琴(2000)。教師專業權能之研究—理論建構與實證分析。臺北市:五南。new window
鍾任琴、黃增榮(2000)。中小學教師權能量表編製之研究。朝陽學報,5,345-372。new window
鍾榮進(2014)。學科教學學科教學知識之呈現—以一位國小社會領域教師為例。新竹教育大學教育學報,30(1),1-44。new window
韓諾萍(2002)。國小教師參與學士後在職進修之動機與其專業發展情形之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台東師範學院,臺東縣。
簡良平(2002)。學校課程決定:理論與實證。臺北市:師大書苑。new window
顏惠君(2004)。學習領域課程小組課程決定之個案研究-以國中語文領域國文科為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。
羅云辰(2004)。國民小學教師參與行政決定與教師增權益能之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中正大學,嘉義縣。
關依婷(2009)。以F.Herzberg雙因子理論探討社福機構人員之工作滿意度(未出版之碩士論文)。實踐大學,臺北市。
饒見維(1999)。九年一貫課程與教師專業發展之配套實施策略。邁向課程新紀元—九年一課程研討會論文集(下)(頁305-323)。臺北市:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
饒見維(2003)。教師專業發展─理論與實務。臺北市:五南。
龔素丹(2009)。國民小學校長權力運用、教師專業權能與學校教育品質關係之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。new window

英文部分
Apple, M. W. (1988). Work, class and teaching. In J. Ozga (Ed.), Schoolwork: Approaches to the labour process of teaching (pp﹒99-115). Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
Apple, M. W. (2000, October). Curriculum, teaching, and politics of educational reform. Paper presented in The Curriculum and Instruction Forum in Taitung, Taiwan.
Ashcrafi, K. L. (2000). Empowering "professional" relationship. Management Communication Quarterly, 13, 347-392.
Ashton P.T. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5) , 28-32.
Bandura, A. (1977).Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84,191-215.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H.Freeman.
Bandura, A.(2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75-78.
Bandura, A.(2001).Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
Barksdale-Ladd, M. A. (1994). Teacher empowerment and literacy instruction in three professional development schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 45(2), 104-111.
Barnard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
Barner, R. (1994). Enablement: The key to empowerment. Training and Development, 48(6), 33-36.
Bassett, G. W. (1970). Innovation in primary education. London: Wiley Inter science.
Blasé, J., & Blasé, J. R. (1994). Empowering teachers: what successful principals do. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED377576)
Blase, J., & Kirby, P. C. (1992). Bringing out the best in teacher: What effective principals do. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research in education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Bohn, E., & Adams, B.(1993, March). I’d rather be dead than empowered. Executive Excellence, 16-17.
Boles, K. C. (1990). School restructuring: A case study in teacher empowerment. NCEL Occasional Paper No.4. Nashville, TN: National Center for Educational Leadership(ERIC Document Reproduction service No.332342).
Bolin, F. (1989). Empowering leadership. Teachers College Record, 91 (1) , 81-96.
Bredeson, P. V. (1989). Redefining leadership and the roles of school Principals: Responses to changes in the professional worklife of teachers. The High School Journal, 73(1), 9-20.
Browder, L. H. (1994). Exploring the meanings of teacher empowerment. International Journal of Educational Reform, 3(2), 137-153.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. New York: Norton.
Bucat, R.(2004).Pedagogical content knowledge as a way forward: Applied research in chemistry education. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice,5(3), 215-228。
Bullter, J. (1996). Professional development: Practice as text, reflection as process, and self loucs. Australian Journal of Education,11(3), 265-283.
Carol, G. R. & Arnkoff, D. (1992). Cognitive processes, anxiety, and performance on doctoral dissertation oral examinations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39(3), 382-388.
Carter, K., Cusbing, K., Sabers, D., Stein, P., & Berliner, D. (1988). Expertnovice differences in perceiving and processing visual classroom information. Journal of Tteacher Education, May-June, 25-31.
Cohen, R., & Yarden, A. (2009).Experienced junior-high-school teachers’ PCK in light of a curriculum change: The cell is to be studies longitudinally. Research in Science Education, 39(1),131-155。
Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1979). Teachers’ thinking. In P. L. Peterson & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Research on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications. Berkeley. CA: McCutchan.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471- 482.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1985). Personal practical knowledge and the modes of knowing: relevance for teaching and learning. In E. Eisner(Ed.), Learning and teaching: The ways of knowing(pp. 174-198). Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Conway, J., A. & Calzi, F. (1995). The dark side of shared decision making. Educational Leadership, 53(4), 45.
Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Cornett, J. W. (1992). Earned powerment not empowerment of teachers: The role of teachers’ systematic reflection in restrycturing schools. Social Science Record, 71-77.
Covington, M. V. (1984). The self-worth theory of achievement motivation: Findings and implications. Elementary School Learning, 85, 5-20.
Crainer, S. (1996). Key management ideas: Thinkers that changed the management world. London: Financial Time Management.
Crawford, J. R. (1999). A comparison of teacher empowerment between charter schools and non-charter schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(9), 3209. ( UMI No. 9946252)
Daft, R. L. (2001). Organizational theory and design (7th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.
Dale, E. (1969). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: Dryden Press.
Davis, J. (1994). Teacher and principal empowerment in elementary schools in Eastern Washington (Doctoral dissertation, Gonzaga University, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55(4), 0811 A.
Denham, C. H., & Michael, J. J. (1981). Teacher sense of efficacy:A definition of the construct and a model for further research.Education research Quarterly, 6(1), 39-63.
Densmore, K. (1987). Professionalism, proletarianization and teacher work. In T. S. Popkewitz (ed.) , Critical studies in teacher education. London: Falmer.
Donaldson, G. (2001). To lead a school: A collaborative leadership model for teachers and principals. New York: Teachers College Press..
Dono-Koulouris, M. J. (2003). Leadership style, teacher empowerment, and job satisfaction in selected Catholic elementary schools. (UMI ProQuest Digital Dissertations Publication Dissertation No. AAT3107132)
Duck, J. D. (1993). Managing change: The art of balance. Harvard Business Review, 71, 109-118.
Duhon, G. M. (1999). Teacher empowerment: Definitions, implementation, and stragies for personal renewal. (Report No. SP-038-745) (ERIC Documant Reproduction Service No. ED 433329)
Dunst, R. (1991). Issues in empowerment. Presentation before the annual meeting of Childrens' Mental Health and Service Policy Convention,February, 1991, Tampa, Florida.
Ebert, C. L. (1993). An assessment of perspective secondary teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge about functions and graphs.(ERIC Documant Reproduction Service, No. ED 366 580)
Edwards, J. L., Green, K. E., & Lyons, C. A. (2002). Personal Empowerment, Efficacy, and Environment Characteristics. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(1), 67-86.
Engel, G. V. (1970). Professional autonomy and bureaucratic organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 15 (1), 12-21.
Empower (2010). In Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary (11th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empower
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New York:MacMillian.
Estep, T. A. (2000). A study of the relationships between transformational leadership, transactional leadership and specified demographic factors as enablers of teacher empowerment in rural Pennsylvania school districts in Appalachia Intermediate Unit 8. (Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(1), 38.
Falk-Rafatel, A. R. (2001). Empowerment as a process of evolving consciousness: A model of empowered caring. Advances in Nursing Science, 24(1), 1-16.
Foy, N. (1994). Empowering people at work. London : Gower.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London : Penguin.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical counsciousness. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power, and liberation (D. Macedo, trans.). Massachusetts: Bergin & Garvey.
Fullan, M. (1992). Successful school improvement: The implementation perspective and beyond.Buckingham. MK: Open University Press.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.
Gamoran, A., & Porter, A. C. (1994). Teacher empowerment: Can it help teaching and learning ? Washington, DC: Office of Educafonal Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No.372031)
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gay, L. R. (1992). Educational research competencies for analysis and application. New York: Macmillan.
Gibbs, G. R. (2007). Analyzing Qualitative Data. London: Sage.
Giroux, H. A. & McLaren, P. L. (ed.) (1989). Critical pedagogy, the state, and cultural struggle. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Giroux, H. A. (1988). Teachers as Intellectuals: Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Grandy, MA: Bergin & Garvey.
Giroux, H. A. (1999). Rethinking cultural politics and radical pedagogy in the work of antonio gramsci. Education Theory, 49 (1), 1-19.
Goddard, R. D., & Goddard, Y. L. (2001). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between teacher and collective efficacy in urban schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 807–818.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and effect on student achievement. American Education Research Journal, 37(2), 479-507.
Goetz , J. P., &LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press.
Goodnough, K., & Nolan, B. (2008). Engaging elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge: Adopting problem-based learning in the context of science teaching and learning. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 8(3), 197-216.
Goyne, J., Padgett, D., Rowicki, M., & Priplitt, T. (1999). The journey to teacher empowerment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434384)
Guba, E. G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology, 29(2), 79-91.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gunst, G. A. (2004). A study of multiple intelligences among teachers in Catholic elementary schools in the Archdiocese of Detroit (Michigan)(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Wayne State University, Detroit,MI.
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol.1). Boston: Reason.
Hardin(2010).A study of social cognitive theory: The relationship between professional learning communities and collective teacher efficacy in international school settings. (Doctoral dissertation) Available from ProQuest Dissertation and theses database. (UMI No. 3408478)
Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (1996). Teachers' professional lives: Aspirations and actualities. In I. F. Goodson & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers' professional lives. London: Falmer Press.
Harpell, J. V., & Andrews, J. J. W. (2010). Administrative leadership in the age of inclusion: Promoting best practices and teacher empowerment. Journal of Educational Thought, 44(2), 189-210.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (2000, August). Learner centered professional development. Phi Delta Kappa Research Bulletin, 27, 7-10.
Heathfield, S. M. (2007). Top ten ways to make employee empowerment fail. Retrieved from
http:// humanresources.about.com/ od/ managementandleadership/tp/ empowerment.htm
Heller, G. S. (1993). Teacher empowerment-Sharing the challenge: A guide to implementation and success. NASSP Bulletin, 77(550), 94-103.
Henderson, J. G., & Hawthorne, R. D. (1995). Transformative curriculum leadership. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. New York: World.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Hixson, J. (1990). Restructuring schools: Exploring school-based management and empowerment issues: A national perspective. North Central Regional Educational Lab, Oak Brook. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No.369157)
Howe, K. R., & Eisenhart, M. (1990). Standards for Qualitative (and Quantitative) Research:A Prolegomenon. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2-9.
Hung, Cheng-Jen.(2005) A correlational study between junior high school teacher empowerment and job satisfaction in Kaohsiung area of Taiwan (Doctoral Dissertations). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and theses database. (UMI No. 3193359)
Hur, M, H. (2006). Empowerment in terms of theoretical perspectives: Exploring a typology of the process and components across disciplines. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(5), 523-540.
Hynes, J. (2004). The relationship between the dimensions of teacher empowerment and principal's job satisfaction in elementary accelerated schools ( Doctoral Dissertations). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305125613?accountid=8094.
Imber, M., Neidt, W. A., & Reyes, P. (1990). Factors contributing to teacher satisfaction with participative decision making. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 23(4), 216-225.
Irwin, J. W. (1996). Empowering ourselves and transforming schools: Educators making a difference. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Jessup, D. K. (1985). Teachers, unions, and change: A comparative study. New York: Praeger.
Jones, R. E. (1997). Teacher participation in decision making--Its relationship to staff morale and student achievement. Education, 118(1), 76-83.
Jordan, L. E. (1994). The principal's role in supporting global educational programs: The principal as the enabler of teacher empowerment via the vehicle of the global perspective. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. 382498)
Katz, R. (1984). Empowerment and Synergy: Expanding the community's healing resources. Prevention in Human Services, 3, 201-226.
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. L. ( 1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Klakovich, M. (1995). Development and psychometric evaluation of the reciprocal empowerment scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 3(2), 127-143.
Klecker, B. M., & Loadman, W. E. (1996a). Dimensions of teacher empowerment: Identifying new roles for classroom teachers in restructuring schools.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 405304).
Klecker, B. J., & Loadman, W. E. (1996b). A study of teacher empowerment in 180 restructuring schools: Leadership implications. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED393823).
Klecker, B. J., & Loadman, W. E. (1998). Defining and meaning the dimensions of teacher empowerment in restructuring public schools. Education, 118(3), 358-370.
Klein, M. F. (1991). A conceptual framework for curriculum decision making. In M. F. Klein (Ed.), The politics of curriculum decision-making: Issues in centralizing the curriculum (pp.24-41). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Kondrat, M. E. (1999). Who is "the self" in self-aware: Professional self awareness from a critical theory perspective. The Social Service Review. 73(4), 451-477.
Kreisberg, S. (1992). Transforming power: Domination, empowerment, and education. Albany, NY : State University of New York Press.
LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31-60.
Levine, D. U. & Lezotte, L. W.(1990). Unusually effective schools:A review and analysis of research and practice. Madison, WI: National Center for Effective Schools Research and Development(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 330032)
Liberman, A. E. (1990). School as collaborative culture: Creating the future now. ERIC No. ED 333064.
Lichtenstein, G.., McLaughlin, M., & Knudsen, J. (1991). Teacher empowerment and professional knowledge. CPRE Research Report series. New Brunswick, NJ: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1990). Restructuring schools: What matters and what works. Phi Delta Kappan, 71(10), 759-764.
Lightfoot, S. L. (1986). On goodness of schools: Themes of empowerment. Peabody Journal of Education, 63(3), 9-28.
Lincoln,Y. S. (1990).The Making of a Constructivist. In E. G. Guba(Ed.), The paradigm dialog. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lincoln,Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. CA: Sage.
Maeroff, G. I. (1988). A blueprint for empowering teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 69 (71), 472-477
Maher, M. C. (2000). A model for understanding the influence of principal leadership upon teacher empowerment as mediated by school culture. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, 2000). Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(05), 1697.
Mantei, J. & Kervin, L. (2011) . Turning into Teachers before Our Eyes: The Development of Professional Identity through Professional Dialogue. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, v36 n1 p1-17
Marks, H. M., & Louis, K. S. (1997). Does Teacher empowerment affect the classroom? The implications of teacher empowerment for Instructional practice and student academic performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 245-275
Martin, O. L. (1990). Instructional leadership behaviors that empower teacher effectiveness. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. ED 350252).
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality(2nd ed.). New York:Harper & Row.
McGregor, D. M. ( 1957). The humanside of enterprise. Management Review, 46(11), 77-89.
McLaren, P. L. (1998). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education.(3rd ed) New York: Longman.
McMaster, R. O. (2004). Collaborating for curricular change in English:Playing with ideas through arts-based assessments to interpret literature (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
Melenyzer, B. J. (1990). Teacher empowerment: The discourse, meanings, and social actions of teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the National Council of States on Inservice Education, Orlando, FL.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education:A qualitative approach.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & R. S. Caffarella, (1999). Learning in adulthood (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M.(1994). Qualitative data analysis:An expanded sourcebook(2nd ed.). California:Sage.
Miller, H. J. (1978). Behavior in organization: The new science of managing people at work. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Mojkowski, C., & Fleming, D. (1988). School-site management: Concepts and approaches. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 307660)
Mondros, J. B. & Wilson, S. M. (1994). Organizing for power and empowerment. Columbia University Press.
Moore, W. P., & Esselman, M. E. (1992). Teacher efficacy, empowerment, and a focused instructional climate: Does student achievement benefit ? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco.
Morris, V. G., & Nunnery, J. A. (1993). Teacher empowerment in a professional decelopment school collaborative: Pilot assessment. Memphis State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. ED 368678)
Mulholland, J. & Wallace, J. (2001). Teacher induction and elementary science teaching:enhancing self-sfficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 243-261.
Mutchler, S. E., & Duttweiler, P. C. (1990). Implementing shared decision making in school based management: Barriers to changing traditional behavior. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.
Neufeld, J. A., & McGowan, T. M. (1993). Professional development schools: A witness to teacher empowerment. Contemporary Education, 64(4), 249-251.
Ostorga, A. N. (2002). Relationships between epistemology and reflective thinking of instructional paraprofessionals in an elementary teacher education program. Unpublished doctoral dissertatuion, Fordham University.
Page, N., & Czuba, C.E. (1999). Empowerment: What Is It? The Journal of Extension, 37(5), 24-32.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Peterson, B.(1997). We need a new vision of teacher unionism. Rethinking Schools, 11(4).
Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Prasad, P., & Caproni, P. J. (1997). Critical theory in the management classroom: Engaging power, ideology, and praxis. Journal of Management Education, 21(3), 284-292.
Prawat, R. S. (1991). Conversations with self and settings: A framework for thinking about teacher empowerment. American Educational Research Journal , 28(4), 737-757.
Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15 ( 2 ) , 121-148.
Rebeca, G. (2000, April). Is it a dream? Critical pedagogy in bilingual, elementary classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Reep, B. B., & Grier, T. B. (1992). Teacher empowerment: Strategies for success. NASSP Bulletin, 76(546), 90-96.
Reitzug, U. C. (1994). A case study of empowering principal behavior. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 283-307.
Rice, E. M., & Schneider, G. T. (1994). A decade of teacher empowerment: An empirical analysis of teacher involvement in decision making, 1980-1991. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(1), 43-58.
Rinehart, J. S., & Short, P. M. (1993). Job satisfaction and empowerment among teacher leaders, reading recovery teachers, and regular classroom teachers. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. 362940).
Rinehart, J. S.、Short, P. M.、Johnson, P. E. (1997)。Empowerment and conflict at school-based and non-school-based sites in the United States.International Studies in Educational Administration,25,77-87.
Rinehart, J. S., Short, P. M., Short, R. J., & Eckley, M. (1998). Teacher empowerment and principal leadership: Understanding the influence process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 630-649.
Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organization behavior (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Rothstein, L. R. (1995). The empowerment effort that came undone. Harvard Business Review, 73 (1), 20-31.
Rotter, J. B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1–28.
Ruscoe, G. C., Whitford, B. L., Eggington, W., & Esselman, M. (1989). Quantitative and qualitative perspectives on teacher attitudes in professional developrnent schools. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No. 310068)
Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change( 2th ed.). Boston: Alyn and Bacon.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner:How professionals think in action. U. S: Basic Books.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social science. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Shavelson, R. (1976). Teacher decision makinh. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Psychology of teaching methods:1976 yearbook of national society for the study of education, Part 1. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Short, P. M. (1994). Defining Teacher Empowerment. Education, 114(4), 488-492.
Short, P. M., & Greer, J. T. (2002). Leadership in empowered schools: Themes from innovative efforts (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Short, P. M., & Johnson, P. E. (1993). Exploring the links among teacher empowerment, leaderpower, and conflict. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No.372044)
Short, P. M., & Rinehart. J. S. (1992a). School participant empowerment scale: Assessment of level of empowerment within the school environment. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52(4), 951-960.
Short, P. M., & Rinehart, J. S. (1992b). Teacher empowerment and School Climate. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No.347678)
Short, P. M., Greer, J. T. & Melvin, W. M. (1994). Creating empowered schools: Lessons in change. Journal of Educational Administration, 32(4), 38-25.
Short, P. M., Rinehart, J. S., & Eckley, M. (1999). The relationship of teacher empowerment and principal leadership orientation. Educational Research Quarterly, 22(4), 45-52.
Shulman, J. H. (1992). Revealing the mysteries of teacher-written cases:Opening the black box. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(4), 250-262.
Smith, A. G., & Robbins, A. E. (1984). Multimethod policy research: A case study of structure and flexibility. In D. M. Fetterman (Ed.), Ethnography in educational evaluation (pp.115-132). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Smith, J. M., & Lotven, B. A. (1993). Teacher empowerment in a rural setting:Fact versus fantasy. Education, 113, 488-493.
Sprague, J. (1992). Critical perspectives on teacher empowerment. Communication Education, 41(2), 181-203.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Empowering leadership in management team︰Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of Management Journal,49(6),1239-1251.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (2007). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Suh, Y. (2005). Pedagogical content knowledge development in teaching science: A case study of an elementary school teacher in an urban classroom (Unpubliished doctoral dissertation). Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Sumsion, J. (1994). Empowering beginning student teachers: Implications for teacher education. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Teacher Education Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction service No.ED 376139)
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An interpretive model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666-681.
Thornburg, D. G., & Mungai, A. (2011). Teacher empowerment and school reform. Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 5, 205-217.
Troen, V. & Boles, K. (1988). The teaching project: A model for teacher empowerment. Language Arts, 65 (7),688-692.
Tugel. J. (2004). Teacher quality. Science and children 41. 22-25.
Vasumathi, T. (2010). A design for professional development of teachers-need for new policy framework. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED512828)
Vygosky, L. S., & Kozulin, A. (1986).Thought and language. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
Von Glasersfeld, E.(1995).Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning.Washington, D.C:London:The Falmer Press。
Wan, E. (2005). Teacher Empowerment as Perceived by Teachers in Hong Kong. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED492639)
Wall, R., & Rinehart, J. S. (1998)。School-based decision making and the empowerment of school teachers. Journal of School Leaderships,8,49-64。
Watts, D. M. (2008). Enabling school structure, mindfulness, and teacher empowerment: Test of a theory. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and theses database.(UMI No. 3390602)
Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Hamalainen, S., Sarja, A., Kimonen E., & Nevalainen, R. (2004). A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in England and Finland. Comparative Education, 40(1), 83-107.
Weiler, K. (1988). Women teaching for change: Gender, class & power. New York: Bergin & Garvey.
Weiss, C. H. (1992). Shared decision making about what? A comparison of school with and without teacher participation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED350689)
Wellins, R. S., Byham, W. C., & Wilson, J. M. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work groups that improve quality, productivity, and participation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Whitaker, K. S., & Moses, M. C. (1990). Teacher empowerment: A key to restructuring. The Clearing House, 64(2), 127-130.
White, P. A. (1992). Teacher empowerment under “ideal” school-site autonomy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(1), 69-82.
Wiles, J., & Bondi, J. (2002). Curriculum Development: A guide to practice. NJ.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Williams, D. D. (1986). Naturalistic evaluation: Potential conflicts between evaluation standards and criteria for conducting naturalistic inquiry. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 8 (1), 87-99.
Wilson, S. M., & Coolican, M. J. (1996). How high and low self-empowered teachers work with colleagues and school principals. Journal of Educational Thought,30(2), 99-117.
Wise, A. E. (1990). Six steps to teacher professionalism. Educational Leadership, 47(7),57-60.
Wolcott, H. (2005). The Art of Fieldwork. Oxford: Altamira Press.
Wren, D. (2009). Joseph N. Scanlon: the man and the plan. Journal of Management History, 15, 20–37.
Wren, D. A. (1979). The Evolution of Management Thought. N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yonemura, M. (1986). Reflections on teacher empowerment and teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, 56 ( 4 ), 473-480.
Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zeichner, K. M. (1991). Contradictions and tension in the professsionalization of teaching and the democratization of schools. Teachers College Record, 92(3), 362-379.
Zembylas, M., & Papanastasiou, E. C. (2005). Modeling teacher empowerment: The role of job satisfaction. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11(5) ,433 -459.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581-599.
Zimmerman, M. A., & Rappaport, J. (1988). Citizen participation, Perceived control, and psychological empowexment. American Journal of Community Psychology,16(5), 725-750.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE