台北縣國民中學實施教師教學評鑑制度可行性研究

A Study on the Feasibility of the Practice of Teacher Performance Evaluation of the Junior High Schools in Taipei County

黃耀輝(Yaw-Huei Huang)

指導教授 ： 單文經

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育學系在職進修碩士班/碩士(2001年)

摘要

本研究旨在探討台北縣國民中學學校教育人員知覺教學評鑑指標的重要程度，以及實施教師教學評鑑制度的人員、評鑑結果的運用、評鑑的時機、評鑑的方式等可行性意見，以為規劃建立教師教學評鑑制度之參考。
為達成以上目的，本研究首先以教師教學評鑑(teacher performance evaluation)作為關鍵字，搜集國內外相關文獻，深入探討並設計調查的概念架構，其次依循研究目的與待答問題編製「台北縣國民中學教師教學評鑑制度調查問卷」乙份作為調查工具，並以台北縣國民中學學校教育人員為施測對象，抽取有效樣本604人進行實證調查，調查所得資料，經臨界比、皮爾生積差相關係數、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、斯皮爾曼等級相關、肯德爾和諧係數、薛費事後比較等統計方法加以分析處理。
最後根據實際調查結果，歸納以下的結論：
一、教師教學評鑑指標的建構方面：本研究根據文獻分析、專家意見及預試信度、效度考驗所建構發展的六項評鑑類別：（一）教學規劃與準備；（二）教學實施與策略的運用；（三）班級經營與學習氣氛；（四）教師進修與專業成長；（五）溝通與合作；（六）教學評量與回饋等39項具體評鑑項目之教師教學評鑑指標調查問卷，是一信度佳、效度佳及因素分析佳的測量工具。
二、評鑑人員之意見方面：（一）評鑑制度參與制定的人員：教師教學評鑑制度的決定者，應為受評教師以及評鑑人員（主要為學科教師及學校行政人員）共同參與制訂，而在制訂過程中教育專業團體及學者專家亦可提供專業知識的諮詢建議；（二）實施教學評鑑制度的評鑑人員：教師教學評鑑人員應包括「內部評鑑」與「外部評鑑」的人員，並重視學生家長以及學生的參與評鑑過程；（三）評鑑人員的產生方式：由校內成員及教師同儕擔任評鑑人員，藉以建立以學校為本位之教師教學評鑑機制較具可
行性且易於推動實施。
三、評鑑結果的運用方面：以「協助教師了解，改進自身的教學，以提升教學績效」及「發現優良教師並予以獎勵」等二種評鑑結果的運用方式，較具可行性。
四、評鑑的時機方面：以每學年實施一次教學評鑑較可行。
五、評鑑的方式方面：應採行之行政程序為擬訂評鑑計劃、召開說明會、應告知受評者之評鑑結果、對評鑑者施予專業訓練、與受評者及相關人員共同研擬評鑑表等項；以教室觀察、訪談、教學檔案、問卷等方法蒐集評鑑資料；將課程的計畫、師生的互動情形、教學目標及教學理念之陳述、作業的樣本、教學效果的評估、自我專業成長上的記錄、重要他人的回饋及建議等項作為教學檔案評鑑資料的內容。
綜合上述研究結論，盱衡現行教師教學評鑑制度實施現況，本研究提出以下建議：（1）運用本研究所建構發展之教師教學評鑑指標以實施教師教學評鑑或提供給學校教師自我檢核教學效能；（2）成立常設性的「教師教學專業標準委員會」系統地研發教師教學評鑑指標；（3）評鑑制度之設計與制訂應邀請受評教師與評鑑人員共同參與決定；（4）實施教師教學評鑑之人員應包括「內部評鑑」與「外部評鑑」之人員；（5）教師教學評鑑制度之規劃設計應有後設評鑑（meta evaluation）機制；（6）加強教師教學評鑑人員的專業訓練；（7）將評鑑結果之運用方式定位為自我改善教學；（8）對於評鑑結果的處理與運用，應明確的說明與規範；（9）每學年實施一次教師教學評鑑；（10）完備各項行政程序；（11）加強宣導與溝通；（12）兼顧質化與量化的原則，以多元方式蒐集評鑑資料；（13）將教學專業檔案內容列入師資養成教育之教育實習課程，並鼓勵在職教師建置教學評鑑檔案。另外，本研究並針對進一步研究的作法提出若干建議。

關鍵字

教師教學評鑑 ； 國民中學

並列摘要

A Study on the Feasibility of the Practice of Teacher Performance Evaluation of the Junior High Schools in Taipei County
Yaw-Huei Huang
Abstract
The study was mainly focused on the exploring of the opinion of the Taipei County junior high school teachers on the teacher performance evaluation. Besides, the opinions of the feasibility upon the following items and the difference among categorizations were discussed in this study. The items included: the evaluators, the use of the results, the evaluation timing on junior and senior teachers, the executive procedures, the methods of information collecting and the content of the teaching portfolios.
First of all, a literature review was made upon “teacher performance evaluation”, and a “Junior High School Teacher performance Evaluation Questionnaire” was administered. According to the valid sample of 604 respondents of the Taipei County junior high school teachers, the following results were obtained:
I.On the construction of teacher performance evaluation validity: according to the literature review, the experts’ suggestions and the reliability of the pre-test, the six categorizations of the evaluation are: (1) the plan and preparation of teaching; (2) the practice and strategy; (3) the class management and the learning atmosphere; (4) the on-job training and professional growth; (5) communication and collaboration; (6) the evaluation of teaching and feedback. The 39-item questionnaire with concrete evaluation items was proved an accountable and reliable testing method.
II.On the opinions on the evaluators:
1.The participants: the respondents consider the decision of the evaluation should be made by both evaluators and teachers who receive the evaluation. The suggestions made by professional, organizations and experts may be adopted also.
2.The evaluators to practice the evaluation: the respondents recognize the “self and peer evaluation” most while the evaluations of the school administration, the experts, the students’ parents, and the students are also recognized. The evaluation should include both “internal” and “external” members.
3.The organizing of the evaluators: the organization of the evaluators should include the administration and the teacher representatives to meet the very need of the teachers.
III.On the use of the evaluation results: “helping the teachers understand and improve their teaching to have the effectiveness enhanced”, and “discovering the well-performed teachers and have them rewarded” have more feasibility .
IV.On the timing of the evaluation: It is more practical that teachers should receive annual evaluation.
V.On the methods of evaluation:
1.The following procedures should be adopted: the planning of the evaluation, a meeting of specification, the notification of the results, the professional training for the evaluators, and an evaluation list meeting common welfare.
2.The methods of data collecting: should include: classroom observation, interview, teaching files, and questionnaires.
3.The content of teaching portfolios should included: the teaching plan, teacher-student interaction, the declaration of the teaching goals and belief, the sample of students’ assignments, the evaluation of teaching effectiveness, the record of professional growth, and the feedback and suggestions from important reviewers.
In view of current practice of teacher performance evaluation, several suggestions drawing on made as follows:
1.Apply the criteria for teacher performance evaluation constructed in this study to promote teacher performance evaluation or provide the criteria to in-service teachers as a means to self-examining instructional effectiveness.
2.Set up a regular ‘Committee of Standard Teacher Performance’ to systematically devise the criteria for teacher performance evaluation.
3.Invite evaluators and teachers who are to receive evaluation to jointly decide upon the design and formation of the evaluation system.
4.Include both ‘internal’ and ‘external’ members for the evaluation.
5.Incorporate a meta-evaluation mechanism into the design of the evaluation system
6.Enforce the training of evaluators.
7.Interpret the result of the evaluation as a means of conscious-raising to improve teaching performances.
8.Provide specific explanations and regulations for the application of the results.
9.Conduct teacher performance evaluation once every school year.
10.Make complete the administrative procedures.
11.Promote the concept and encourage communication.
12.Consider both the quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis of research data and collect information in an extensive manner.
13.Incorporate teaching portfolios into the curriculum of teacher training and encourage in-service teachers to establish portfolios for teaching evaluation.
Keywords：Teacher performance evaluation, Junior high school

並列關鍵字

Teacher performance evaluation ； Junior high school

參考文獻

郭昭佑(民88a)。學校本位評鑑的觀點及其建構。師友月刊，389期，頁40-43。

張德銳（民88）。我國中小學教師評鑑的檢討與展望。師友月刊，381期，頁5-8。

傅木龍（民88）。在文化特性中建立制度。師友月刊，381期，頁14-19。

張德銳(民81)。國民小學教師評鑑之研究。新竹市：國立新竹師範學院。

朱淑雅（民87）。國民小學教師評鑑指標之研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。