新北市國中教師人權教育素養與權力運用類型之相關研究

The Study on the Correlation between the Literacy of Human Rights Education and the Type of Power for Junior High School Teachers in New Taipei City

何佳蓉(Chia-Jung Ho)

指導教授 ： 曾永清

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/公民教育與活動領導學系在職進修碩士班/碩士(2013年)

摘要

本研究旨在瞭解新北市國民中學教師人權教育素養與權力運用類型之現況，探討教師人權教育素養與權力運用類型之關係。本研究採調查研究法，根據文獻探討及相關實證之研究結果設計問卷，以新北市公立國中現職教師為研究對象，進行問卷調查，共獲得有效問卷 639份，最後將調查結果以描述統計、t檢定、單因子變異數分析與事後多重比較、斯皮爾曼相關、卡方檢定與事後多重比較、多元羅吉特迴歸分析等方式進行統計分析與討論。
本研究結果主要如下所示：
一、新北市國中教師人權教育素養現況整體良好，其中以「人權教育態度」層面表現最佳。
二、新北市國中教師權力運用類型以規範型為主，其次是強制型權力，最少使用的是利酬型。
三、國中教師人權教育素養依其背景變項不同之差異性分析上，不同「年齡」、「服務年資」、「擔任職務」、「專業背景」、「人權教育相關知能」、「學校所在地區」與「學校規模」等變項在教師人權教育素養各層面有顯著差異存在。
四、國中教師權力運用類型依其背景變項不同之差異性分析上，不同「服務年資」、「專業背景」與「學校所在地區」等變項在教師權力運用類型上有顯著差異存在。
五、國中教師人權教育素養各層面有顯著相關，「人權教育認知」與「人權教育態度」呈正相關；「人權教育認知」與「人權教育技能」呈正相關。
六、根據多元羅吉特迴歸分析得知，國中教師人權教育素養對教師權力運用類型具有足夠的解釋力，其中以「人權教育技能」層面為區別「強制型」與「規範型」之顯著影響變項，「人權教育認知」層面為區別「利酬型」與「規範型」之顯著影響變項。

關鍵字

人權教育素養 ； 權力運用類型

並列摘要

The purposes of this study were aimed to understand and analyze the current literacy of human rights education and the type of power for junior high school teachers in New Taipei City, and to examine the relationship between the literacy of human rights education and the type of power. The study is conducted with questionnaires based on literature review and related empirical studies. The questionnaires were distributed to the junior high school teachers in New Taipei City, and 639 valid questionnaires. According to the answers given by the respondents, data were analyzed by methods of descriptive statistic, t-test, one-way ANOVA, spearman correlation, chi-square test, multi-nominal logistic regression. Then the collected data were analyzed and discussed.
The major findings of this study were summarized as follows:
1.The junior high school teachers in New Taipei City show good literacy of human rights education with the highest satisfaction in “human rights education attitude”.
2.The power type most frequently used by junior high school teachers in New Taipei City is normative power type, followed by coercive power type, and the remunerative power type is the least.
3.The variance analysis of teachers’ literacy of human rights education shows that variables such as “age”, “working years”, “job title”, “professional field”, “ability of human right education”, “location of school”, “size of school”, have significant differences in teachers’ literacy of human rights education.
4.The variance analysis of the type of teachers’ power shows that variables such as “gender”, “professional field”, “location of school”, have significant differences in the type of teachers’ power.
5.There is a significant correlation between the aspects of teachers’ human rights education literacy. The correlation between teachers’ “human rights education cognition” and ” human rights education attitude” is positive, and the correlation between teachers’ “human rights education cognition” and “human rights education skills” is positive.
6.Multi-nominal logistic regression model analysis indicates that the teachers’ human rights education literacy has ample explanation to the type of teachers’ power. Teachers’ “human rights education cognition” can differentiate ‘‘remunerative power type’’ from ‘‘normative power type’’. Teachers’ ” human rights education skills” can differentiate ‘‘remunerative power type’’ from ‘‘normative power type’’.

並列關鍵字

literacy of human rights education ； type of teachers' power

參考文獻

洪如玉（2006）。人權教育的理論與實踐。臺北市：五南。

Molnar, A. (1986). We hold these truths to be self-evident: Human right as an

徐宗林（1995）。人權與教育研究。國立台灣大學教育研究所集刊，36，19-51。

人本教育基金會（2009）。「為學生爭取正常教育」—2009年國中現況調查記

黃劍華（2008）。國小階段人權教育之理念與落實—以融入自然與生活科技領域