:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:臺北市國民小學試辦教師專業發展評鑑之成效分析:理論導向評鑑取徑之應用
書刊名:教育政策論壇
作者:潘慧玲 引用關係高嘉卿
作者(外文):Pan, Hui-lingKao, Jia-ching
出版日期:2012
卷期:15:3=43
頁次:頁133-166
主題關鍵詞:教師專業發展評鑑教師評鑑理論導向評鑑Teacher evaluationTeacher evaluation for professional developmentTheory-driven evaluation
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(8) 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:6
  • 共同引用共同引用:161
  • 點閱點閱:107
為確保教師專業素質、促進教師專業發展,教師評鑑是一項重要措施。台灣自2006~2009學年度開始推動中小學「教師專業發展評鑑」之試辦,鼓勵教師自願參與,並強調評鑑之目的在促進教師專業發展,不與績效掛勾,是一種形成性評鑑。為瞭解教師專業發展評鑑如何能促進教師專業發展,運用理論導向評鑑(theory-driven evaluation)是一可行之取徑(approach)。傳統以來,評鑑較重視評鑑的輸入和輸出,但忽略兩者間的運作過程,而理論導向評鑑則是藉由探究方案運作的活動及其產生的中介過程,為介入的方案為何產生成效,尋找有力的理論證據。本研究以台北市試辦教師專業發展評鑑之國民小學為研究範圍,在以文獻分析、文件分析與訪談方法建立之「試辦教師專業發展評鑑」方案改變理論(program's theory of change)架構下,以台北市參與試辦國小的教師為對象進行問卷調查,探討方案活動落實情形及方案產生之成效,並檢視哪些方案活動能顯著地解釋方案成效。研究結果發現,四類方案活動中,以教師專業成長活動落實程度最低,次低為教師實施評鑑、教師參與研討,以及評鑑說明溝通;教師對於方案成效知覺最為明顯的前兩項為教師進行教學反思、教師增加合作能力;在控制相關變項下,方案活動中的評鑑說明溝通、教師專業成長活動對於方案成效具顯著之解釋力。此發現不僅能夠提供吾人瞭解教師專業發展評鑑方案是否有其成效,更能協助瞭解該方案如欲獲得預期成果,需要掌握哪些重要方案活動之落實,故對於後續政策方案之推動,具重要之參考意義。
To assure teacher professional quality, teacher evaluation is deemed a crucial measure. From 2006 to 2009, a pilot program of teacher evaluation for teacher professional development was launched in Taiwan. Teachers' voluntary participation was encouraged. A formative evaluation was implemented to enhance teacher growth. In order to investigate how the pilot program promotes teacher professional development, theory-driven evaluation is a feasible approach. Contrary to the traditional method-driven evaluation, which focuses on input and output without noticing the linkage between the two, this approach attempts to explore how the program works to acquire the desired outcome. This study conducted a survey to examine how program activities relate to program outcomes using the sample of Taipei elementary school teachers. The findings revealed that teacher professional development activities were the lowest implemented one among the four types of program activities. Teachers' reflection was the most significant outcome found. Furthermore, teacher professional development activities significantly predicted the program's outcome. The findings enlightened how the teacher evaluation pilot program operated, which is informative for the follow-up policy.
期刊論文
1.Davis, D. P.、Ellett, C. D.、Annunziata, J.(2002)。Teacher evaluation, leadership and learning organizations。Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education,16(4),287-301。  new window
2.Weiss, C. H.(1997)。Theory-based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future。New Directions for Evaluation,76,68-81。  new window
3.呂仁禮(20090900)。教師專業發展評鑑試辦成效之研究--以一所國民中學為例。學校行政,63,131-153。  延伸查詢new window
4.吳麗君、楊先芝(20090800)。教師專業發展評鑑的文化故事。教育資料與研究,89,89-118。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.顏國樑、洪劭品(20070700)。國民小學教師對 "教育部試辦教師專業發展評鑑" 意見之研究--以臺北縣為例。學校行政,50,1-26。  延伸查詢new window
6.柯淑惠、林海清、黃寶圓(20090100)。臺中縣國民小學教師專業發展評鑑實施之研究。文教論壇,1,80-104。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.Rogers, P. J.、Petrosino, A.、Huebner, T. A.、Hacsi, T. A.(2000)。Program theory evaluation: Practice, promise, and problems。New Direction for Evaluation,87,5-13。  new window
8.Weiss, C. H.(1997)。How can theory-based evaluation make greater headway。Evaluation Review,21(4),501-524。  new window
9.Chen, H.-T.、Rossi, P. H.(1983)。Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach。Evaluation Review,7(3),283-302。  new window
10.馮莉雅(20101000)。教師專業發展評鑑的實施與成效:以高雄市國小為例。教育研究學報,44(2),85-109。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.Birckmayer, Johanna D.、Weiss, Carol H.(2000)。Theory-Based Evaluation in Practice: What Do We Learn?。Evaluation Review,24(4),407-431。  new window
12.鄭進丁(20070700)。應用方案理論進行評鑑之研究--以高雄市試辦教師專業發展評鑑為例。國民教育研究學報,19,29-58。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.Baron, R. M.、Kenny, D. A.(198612)。The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations。Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51(6),1173-1182。  new window
14.潘慧玲、陳文彥(20100900)。教師專業發展評鑑促進組織學習之個案研究。教育研究集刊,56(3),29-65。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.Danielson, C.(2001)。New Trends in teacher evaluation。Educational Leadership,58(5),12-15。  new window
16.張德銳、周麗華、李俊達(20090700)。國小形成性教師評鑑實施歷程與成效之個案研究。課程與教學,12(3),265-290。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.張德銳、李俊達、周麗華(20101200)。國中實施形成性教師評鑑歷程及影響因素之個案研究。教育實踐與研究,23(2),65-93。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.Davidson, E. J.(2000)。Ascertaining causality in theory-based evaluation。New Directions for Program Evaluation,87,17-26。  new window
19.張德銳(20060400)。形成性教師評鑑系統的研發、推廣、研究與實施展望。初等教育學刊,23,1-26。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.歐陽教、張德銳(19930300)。教師評鑑模式之研究。教育研究資訊,1(2),90-100。new window  延伸查詢new window
21.吳金香、陳世穎(20080100)。國小教師對試辦教師專業發展評鑑態度之調查研究--以臺中縣市為例。學校行政,53,211-253。  延伸查詢new window
22.周麗華(20101200)。臺北市國小教師專業發展評鑑實施效應之研究。市北教育學刊,37,103-125。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.馮莉雅(20071000)。教師專業發展評鑑系統試驗研究--以高雄市為例。國民教育學報,4(2),241-277。new window  延伸查詢new window
24.游象昌、陳俊龍(20100500)。教師專業發展評鑑與教師賦權增能關係之研究。學校行政,67,181-203。  延伸查詢new window
25.Bickman, L.(2000)。Summing up theory。New Direction for Evaluation,87,103-112。  new window
26.Czerniak, M. C.、Lumpe, A. T.、Haney, J. J.(1999)。Science teachers' beliefs and intentions to implement thematic units。Journal of Science Teacher Education,10(2),123-145。  new window
27.Day, C.、Gu, Q.(2007)。Variations in the conditions for teachers, professional learning and development: Sustaining commitment and effectiveness over a career。Oxford Review of Education,33(4),423-443。  new window
28.Weiss, C. H.(2000)。Which links in which theories shall we evaluation?。New Directions for Evaluation,87,35-45。  new window
會議論文
1.The Research, Development and Evaluation Commission, Executive Yuan(2001)。「二〇〇一年教育改萆檢討與改進會議」重要結論及辦理期程表。  延伸查詢new window
2.Ministry of Education(2003)。2003年全國教育發展會議實錄。台北。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.Pan, H.-L.、Wang, L.-Y.、Jhang, S.-J.、Jheng, S.-H.、Wu, J.-S.(2010)。試辦中小學教師專業發展評鑑之方案評鑑 (II)。台北。  延伸查詢new window
2.Milanowski, A.、Kimball, S.(2003)。The framework-based teacher performance assessment systems in Cincinnati and Washoe。Madison。  new window
學位論文
1.廖素梅(2009)。教師專業發展評鑑實施現況之調查研究--以臺中縣國民小學為例(碩士論文)。國立臺東大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.尤春美(2011)。高雄地區國民小學試辦教師專業發展評鑑實施成效之調查硏究(碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學,屏東市。  延伸查詢new window
3.鄭翠蓉(2010)。臺中縣市國民小學參與教師專業發展評鑑教師工作壓力與專業承諾之研究(碩士論文)。中臺科技大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Stronge, J. H.(1997)。Improving schools through teacher evaluation。Evaluation teaching a guide to current thinking and best practice。Thousand Oaks, California:Crowin Press, Inc.。  new window
2.台北市政府教育局(2002)。台北市立高級中等以下學校教學輔導教師設置試辦方案。台北市:台北市政府教育局。  延伸查詢new window
3.台北縣政府教育局(2006)。教學精進、專業昇華--台北縣試辦教師專業發展評鑑實施計畫。台北縣:台北縣政府教育局。  延伸查詢new window
4.教育部(2009)。教育部補助辦理教師專業發展評鑑實施要點。台北市:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
5.Schön, Donald A.、夏林清、鄭村棋(2004)。反映的實踐者:專業工作者如何在行動中思考。台北:遠流。  延伸查詢new window
6.Chen, Huey-Tsyn(1990)。Theory-Driven Evaluation。Newbury Park, CA:London:Sage Publications。  new window
7.Danielson, C.、McGreal, T. L.(2000)。Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice。Alexandria, Virginia:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)。  new window
8.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:行政院教育改革審議委員會。  延伸查詢new window
9.Schön, Donald A.(1987)。Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Towards a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions。San Francisco, California:Jossey-Bass Inc.。  new window
10.教育部(2007)。教育部補助試辦教師專業發展評鑑實施計畫。臺北:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
11.Weiss, Carol H.(1998)。Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programs and Policies。Prentice Hall。  new window
12.McGreal, T. L.(1988)。Evaluation for enhancing instruction: Linking teacher evaluation and staff development。Teacher evaluation: Six prescriptions for success \\ S. J. Stanley ; W. J. Popham (Eds.)。Alexandra, VA。  new window
13.Rossi, P. H.、Freeman, H. E.、Lipsey, M. W.(1999)。Evaluation: A system approach。London, England。  new window
14.Tucker, P. D.、Kindred, K. P.(1997)。Legal consideration in designing teacher evaluation systems。Evaluating teaching: A guide to current thinking and best practice \\ J. H. Stronge (Ed.)。Thousand Oaks, CA。  new window
15.Wise, A. E.、Darling-Hammond, L.、Mclaughling, M. W.、Berstein, H. T.(1984)。Teacher evaluation: A case study of effective practices: A case study of effective practices。Santa Monica, CA。  new window
其他
1.教育部(2008)。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。  延伸查詢new window
2.民生國小(2008)。96學年度試辦教師專業發展評鑑計畫成果報告,http://140.111.34.34/docdb/files/dma7fffffff030.pdf。  延伸查詢new window
3.Wang, L.-W.,Chang, D.-R.,Rau, J.-W.(2007)。規劃教師專業成長方案,台北。  延伸查詢new window
4.Kaohsiung Municipal Bureau of Education(2000)。高雄市立高級中等以下學校教師專業評鑑試行要點,高雄。  延伸查詢new window
5.Ministry of Education(2002)。建立學生輔導新體制:教學、訓導、輔導三合一整合實驗方案。  延伸查詢new window
6.Isoré, M.(2009)。Teacher evaluation: Current practices in OECD countries and a literature review。  new window
圖書論文
1.王麗雲、候崇博(2005)。應用方案理論進行評鑑:以嘉義縣市國小週三進修方案為例。教育評鑑的回顧與展望。台北:心理。  延伸查詢new window
2.Annunziata, J.(1997)。Linking teacher evaluation and professional development。Evaluating teaching: A guide to current thinking and best practice。Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press。  new window
3.Wheeler, P. H.、Scriven, M.(2006)。Building the foundation: Teacher roles and responsibilities。Evaluating teaching: A guide to current thinking and best practice。Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press。  new window
4.Chen, H. T.(2004)。The roots of theory-driven evaluation: Current views and origins。Evaluation roots: Tracing theorists, views and influences。SAGE Publications。  new window
5.Airasian, B.、Gullickson, A. R.(1997)。Teacher self-evaluation。Evaluating teaching: A guide to current thinking and best practice。Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin。  new window
6.Iwanicki, E. F.(1990)。Teacher evaluation for school improvement。The new handbook of teacher evaluation: Assessing elementary and secondary school teachers。Newbury Park, California:Sage Publications。  new window
7.Duke, D. L.、Stiggins, R. J.(1990)。Beyond minimum competence: Evaluation for professional development。The New Handbook of Teacher Evaluation--Assessing elementary and。Newbury Park, CA:Sage。  new window
8.Donaldson, S. I.(2003)。Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium。Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium。Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
9.潘慧玲(2005)。邁向下一代的教育評鑑:回顧與前瞻。教育評鑑的回顧與展望。臺北市:心理。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE