國民中小學校園民主化指標建構與應用之研究

Construction and Application of Campus Democratic Indicators for Primary and Secondary Schools

盧秋菊(Chiu-Chu Lu)

指導教授 ： 張鈿富 教授

國立暨南國際大學/教育學院/教育政策與行政學系/碩士(2011年)

https://doi.org/10.6837/NCNU.2011.00189

摘要

Dewey說：「民主即生活」，國民中小學場域中，學生從課堂中習得的民主知識，透過校園生活，給學生民主價值的體驗，因此，學校有責任提供適合的「民主化」環境，以薰陶學生民主法治素養，成為真正具有民主概念的世界公民。基於前述，本研究旨在探討我國實施近十年的民主公民素養教育相關政策，教育場域中的教育人員是否已產生認同感，願意積極營造校園民主文化？本研究希望建構一套校園民主化指標體系，來瞭解國民中小學民主化之程度，以監控及檢視學校「校園民主化」的品質。
本研究採用模糊德懷術法( Fuzzy Delphi Technique )建構校園民主化指標，透過三角模糊數及解模糊化法，以每個指標的三角模糊數總值≧ 門檻值α(0.6)保留該指標，來進行指標篩選。接著，進行本研究指標體系之應用，以直轄市臺中市的中小學教育人員為母群體，採用問卷調查法進行分層隨機抽樣調查，抽取臺中市總學校數10%計31所學校，共494名現職公私立國民中小學教育人員，有效樣本為408份，有效回收率為83%，採用描述性、相依樣本變異數分析；最後，參考「自由之家」(Freedom House)民主評量架構模式，轉化為本研究校園民主化評量列等之依據。

根據研究結果，歸納出以下結論：
一、國民中小學校園民主化指標可包括「競爭參與」、「自由法治」二大層面。
二、國民中小學校園民主化指標之內涵根據二大層面，共涵蓋四十九項指標。
三、國民中小學校園民主化指標之項目，以「維護學生的隱私權」共識度最高。
四、國民中小學校園民主化指標，專家一致認為有關擇優遴選方式之指標較不重要。
五、國民中小學教育人員對校園民主化知覺傾向於正向高度認同。
六、國民中小學教育人員對校園民主化知覺，項目內涵有「學生代表」之認同度最低。
七、大臺中直轄市在國民中小學校園民主化程度上是歸類為「自由的」。

綜合上述研究結論，本研究提出下列建議供參考：
一、對教育行政機關之建議
(一) 將推動校園民主化納入國民中小學校務評鑑指標。
(二) 運用本指標以網路問卷隨機抽樣方式，檢核國民中小學校園民主化成效。
(三) 宣導國民中小學教育人員重視「學生代表可參與校務決策」之民主作為。

二、對國民中小學教育人員之建議
(一) 運用校園民主化指標進行校務推動(學校行政、班級經營)之自我評鑑。
(二) 依據本研究指標內涵，設計教師進修課程及宣導。

三、對後續研究者之建議
(一) 蒐集更多樣本進行跨樣本分析驗證。
(二) 進行指標的質性驗證。
(三) 探討教育現場中，影響校園民主化之困境與限制。

關鍵字

模糊德懷術 ； 民主公民素養教育 ； 校園民主化 ； 校園民主化指標

並列摘要

Dewey once said,“democracy is life”. For primary and junior high school students, they learn the knowledge of democracy and experience the real value of democracy through school life. Therefore, school has the responsiblity to provide students the democratic environment to foster their democratic concept as well as to become world citizens with democratic value and culture. Based on the foregoing, this study is to investigate the implementation of nearly a decade of education for democratic citizenship policies whether the educators in educational field identify with the concept of campus democracy. The purpose of the study is to build a democratic index system to understand the degree of democratization in the primary and secondary schools, as well as to monitor and view the quality of “campus democracy”.
In this study, Fuzzy Delphi Technique constructed on campus democratic index, through the triangular fuzzy number and the defuzzification method selected indicators, each indicator value of the triangular fuzzy number represents the consensus of Members of the Fuzzy Delphi Panel, and the threshold value is ≧ 0.6 to keep the indicators, and then the research for the applications of index system to teachers at primary and junior high school in Taichung city. the questionnaire was conducted by stratified random sampling survey, taken in this study about 10% of the total number of 304 schools in Taichung City, sampled 31 schools and served 494 educators of public and private primary and secondary schools, 408 valid samples, the effective rate was 83%, using descriptive, paired analysis of variance; Finally, the reference to "Freedom House" democracy assessment framework model to evaluate on campus democratization.

The major findings of this study were listed as follows.
1. The campus democratic indicators in the primary and secondary schools include both aspects of “the competition participation” and “the free government by law”.
2. The two aspects of campus democratic index contain 49 indicators.
3. The top priority of the project of the campus democratic indicators is to maintain the privacy of students.
4. The Fuzzy Delphi experts agreed on that the campus democratic indicators related to choose excellence are less important.
5. Primary and secondary school teachers have a tendency of highly positive recognition and awareness towards campus democratization.
6. In the awareness of all the teachers, they have the lowest recognition of “student representatives” above all the index items.
7. The democratization in primary and secondary schools in Taichung city can be categorized as “free”.

Some suggestions based on the study are listed as belows:
1. Suggestions for the education administrative organizations
1) Put campus democratization into one of the indexes for school affair evaluation.
2) Using these indicators, to check the effectiveness of campus democratization at primary and secondary schools.
3) To promote the importance of the participation of student representitives in school decision-making.

2. Suggestions for the teachers in primary and junior high school
1) Promote self-evaluation of school administration and classroom discipline with campus democratization.
2) Arrange and promote on-the-job-training courses for teachers along with the content of the index.

3. Suggestions for the successive researchers
1) Collect more samples to do cross-sample analysis.
2) Carry out nature confirmation of the index.
3) Explore the difficulties and limitation of campus democratization in the authentic education sites.

並列關鍵字

Fuzzy Delphi Technique ； Education for Democratic Citizenship ； Campus Democratization ； Campus Democratic Indicators

參考文獻

壹、中文部份

王友聖 (2008)。國民中學教育國際化指標建構之研究—以桃園縣為例。國立政治大學教育行政與政策研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。

王文科 (1999)。教育研究法。台北：五南。

王文科和王智弘 (2004)。教育研究法 (八版)。台北：五南。

王玉麟 (2008)。邁向全球化頂尖大學政策規劃指標建構之研究。臺北市立教育大學教育學系博士班博士論文，未出版，台北。