身心障礙類特殊教育教師評鑑指標意見調查及其應用之研究----以高雄縣市為例

The opinion investigation and application of evaluation index for the special education teachers –an example of Kaohsiung city and county

沈宜純(Shen-Yi Chwun)

指導教授 ： 王振德 博士

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/特殊教育學系/碩士(2006年)

摘要

本研究旨在探討身心障礙類特殊教育教師評鑑指標重要程度、適用對象、評鑑方式及應用與社會效度。
本研究共分兩階段進行，第一階段採問卷調查方式收集基料，以轉化改自編的「身心障礙類特殊教育教師評鑑指標意見調查問卷」為研究工具。研究對象為高雄縣市國民中小學身心障礙類且其特殊教育服務年資滿三年以上的合格教師，兩縣市有效樣本數共計506份，回收率為95﹪。第二階段則應用第一階段之結果進行社會效度之探討，以立意取樣方式透過訪談、MSN及E-MAIL對十位特殊教育教師收集進一步的資料。
研究結果顯示：在評鑑指標的重要程度方面，教師普遍認為這些指標都很重要。在評鑑指標的適用對象方面，精熟教師與初任教師應該要有不同的評鑑指標。在評鑑方式方面，不同的評鑑指標應有不同的評鑑方式，其中大部分評鑑指標以自我評鑑的方式來進行，再佐以訪談教師、資料檢核或實地觀察。而在第二階段的評鑑應用方面，十位教師有九位教師他評與自評的吻合度在75%以上，有九位教師認為評鑑旨在肯定及督促老師教學工作的省思與成長，且認為教師評鑑或許不是唯一達到評鑑目的的方法，但卻是最明確的方法。然而評鑑之執行需要針對多方面適當的規劃。雖然十位教師均表示他評可以獲得不同的看法、想法與意見，但卻質疑評鑑之信度與效度問題。二位對於教師基本專業能力建議應增加親職教育及自己最擅長的能力等兩個評鑑指標。對於初任教師與精熟教師評鑑指標是否該不同，教師們各有不同的意見，但覺得評鑑有助於其教學和生涯規畫。此外六位教師認為參與學校發展的事務與教學不會與教學專業相牴觸，且提及瞭解學校的發展與目的有助於當一位優質的教師，因可以運用學校的資源，也能讓特殊學生適時的參與學校活動。
最後，研究者根據研究結果與限制，除提出未來研究之建議外，並擬定縣市政府辦理身心障礙類特殊教育教師評鑑試行要點，供教育有關單位之參考。

關鍵字

評鑑指標 ； 評鑑方式 ； 評鑑應用

並列摘要

The opinion investigation and application of evaluation index for the special education teachers –an example of Kaohsiung city and county

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the evaluation of the special education teachers. The evaluation index included the important level of evaluation, the subjects of evaluation, the methods of evaluation, the application of evaluation, and the social validity of evaluation.
There were two sessions in this study. In the first session, the researcher used The Evaluation Indexes for Special Education Teachers Questionnaire to collect data. The participants who came from Kaohsiung city and county, were qualified special education teachers and had the experience of special education at least for three years. There were 506 questionnaires received and the return rate was 95%. In the second session, the main participants were 10 purposive samples, and the researcher according to the result of the first session explored the social validity of evaluation by e-mail, msn, and interviewing.
The results indicated that (a) The participants generally consider that these evaluation indexes are very important. (b) The evaluation indexes should be different between the skilled and the novel teachers. (c) The implement of evaluation should be different according to different evaluation indexes. Most evaluation indexes were suitable for self-evaluation. Some of them could also include teacher interviews, document examination or observations. On the other hand, in the second session, the results indicated that the scores of self-evaluation and other people-evaluation were matched over 75% . Nine of the ten participants thought that the purpose of evaluation should improve teachers’ teaching. Although the evaluation was not the only way to improve teachers’ teaching, it was the most accurate and concrete method. However, it should be based on various aspects to employ the appropriate evaluation plans. Though self-evaluation could receive the various opinions from other teachers, the ten special education teachers suspected the validity and reliability of it. In addition, two of the teachers suggested recruiting the indexes of parenting education and professional competence to examine teachers’ basic competence. The teachers expressed different opinions regarding if the evaluation indexes should be different between the skilled and novel teachers. Most of them thought that evaluation could improve their teaching skills and career planning. In addition, six of the ten teachers expressed that involving school affairs did not conflict their own professional performance. They thought to understand the goals of school would be helpful to become an excellent teacher, because he/she might know how to utilize the school resources to improve the participation of students with special needs.
Finally, besides according to the results and the limitations, the researcher made some suggestions to the future research, she also brought up the implementing program of evaluation for the special education teachers in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

Evaluation index ； Evaluation method ； Evaluation application

參考文獻

吳清山(1998)。學校效能研究。台北：五南。

郭昭佑(2001)。教育評鑑指標建構之研究。國教學報，13，253-277。

張德銳(1992)。國民小學教師評鑑之研究。國立新竹師範學院。

許籐繼(2000)。我國中小學組織權力重建之探究。臺灣教育，594，24-32。

朱淑雅(1998)。國民小學教師效標之研究。國立臺北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。