平衡計分卡觀念應用於臺北縣國小特教班教師評鑑指標之建構

Applicaton of Balance Scorecard Concepts on Construction of Evaluation Indicators of Special Classroom Teachers in Elementary Schools in Taipei County

莊世清(Shih-Ching Chuang)

指導教授 ： 王天苗

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/特殊教育學系/碩士(2010年)

摘要

摘要
本研究旨在以台北縣國小特教班教師為對象，利用平衡計分卡觀念導入教師評鑑指標之建構。此觀念和過去教師評鑑方式不同的是，透過平衡計分卡的財務、顧客、內部流程、學習與成長四個構面適當轉化，以較全面的觀點進行績效評估，更企圖透過教師的視角探討教師評鑑指標的內涵，並加入學校本位的考量，發展一組能為教師所信任且可行性高的教師評鑑指標。
本研究採專家座談、德懷術和階層分析法，進行三階段的探究。以立意取樣方式，選取各階段之參與者：第一階段專家座談，共有九名臺北縣國小特教班教師和行政人員參與座談；第二階段德懷術調查，包括七名專家學者、六名行政人員、四名輔導團成員和六名特教班教師，共23名專家參與；第三階段階層分析，以一所北縣國小為例，該校特教班所有教師共四名參與。
由結果發現，由第一階段及第二階段建構而來的臺北縣國小特教班教師評鑑指標，包括「教師教學」、「教師專業成長」、「教育成本與資源」及「學生學習成果」等四個構面。其中，「教師教學」構面可分為「評量」、「課程規劃」、「教學實施」、「班級經營」及「學生輔導」等五向度；「教師專業成長」構面可分為「敬業精神與態度」、「專業知能」、「溝通與合作」及「研究與進修」等四向度；「教育成本與資源」構面可分為「時間安排」及「資源運用」兩向度；「學生學習成果」則分為「學生學習參與及成果」及「家長認同度」兩向度。綜上所述，合計四個構面、13個向度，並細分出76個指標。
第三階段以一所學校為單位探究臺北縣國小特教班教師評鑑指標體系的相對權重，發現各構面以「教師教學」權重最高，依次為「學生學習成果」、「教師專業成長」、「教育成本與資源」。就不同向度的重要性而言，以「學生學習參與及成果」權重最高，依次為「教學實施」、「家長認同度」、「課程規劃」、「專業知能」、「班級經營」等向度。
由於學校在透過評鑑指標引導教師專業發展時，不可能將所有指標同時展開，就必須在向度及指標上所取捨，一旦確認重點方向及關鍵指標後，應可協助教師釐清不同面向的重要性，藉此成為教師進行專業成長的目標。
最後根據研究結果，提出對臺北縣國小特教班教師評鑑指標運用與後續研究的建議，以供後續研究者及學校教師參考。

關鍵字

平衡計分卡 ； 教師評鑑 ； 評鑑指標 ； 特教班教師 ； 德懷術 ； 階層分析法

並列摘要

Abstract
The purpose of the research is to use Balanced Scorecards and incorporate it into the structure of Special Classroom Teachers’ Evaluation Indicators in Taipei County. The concept of the incorporation is different from the conventional ways of Teacher’s Evaluations. The difference is that it evaluates performances with the appropriately transformed perspectives of finance, customer, internal process and learning in a thorough way. It also intends to discuss the content of the Indicators through teachers’ eye views with the addition of schools’ perspectives, and therefore it would be able to build and develop a set of believable and workable Indicators.

The research was conducted with experts’ talks, Delphi, and AHP in three stages. By means of Purposive Sampling, participants were selected for each stage of research. Stage one with experts’ talks, there were total nine Special Classroom Teachers and administration staff from an elementary school in Taipei County participating. Stage two with Delphi, it included seven scholars, six administration faculties, four members of consultant team, and six Special Classroom Teachers that totaled twenty-three participants. Stage three with AHP, four teachers an elementary school in Taipei County participated.

From the research I found the details can be summarized into four perspectives, thirteen ways, and seventy-six indicators. Stages one and two, done with Special Classroom Teachers’ Evaluation Indicators in the elementary school in Taipei County, include Teachers’ Teaching Performances, Teachers’ Professional Growth, Basic Costs of Education and its Resources, and Students’ Growth of Learning. Teachers’ Teaching Performances can be evaluated in five ways, which are Evaluations, Courses Planning, Teaching Executions, Classroom Management, and Consulting Services. Teachers’ Professional Growth can be evaluated in four ways, which are Work Professionalism and Attitude, Professional Knowledge and Senses, Communication and Cooperation, and Further Education and Study. Basic Costs of Education and its Resources can be done in the ways of Time Management and Resource Uses. Students’ Growth of Learning are then able to be done with Students’ Learning to Participate and Finding the Results as well as Parents’ Recognitions.

On the third stage while looking into Special Classroom Teachers’ System of Evaluation Indicators in the school in a relative way, I discovered that among all perspectives, first is Teachers’ Teaching Performances and next Students’ Growth of Learning, Teachers’ Professional Growth, and last Basic Costs of Education and its Resources. But as far as importance of ways of evaluations is concerned, Students’ Learning to Participate and Finding the Results is first, Teaching Executions second and then Parents’ Recognitions, Courses Planning, Professional Knowledge and Senses, and finally Classroom Management.

With all the perspectives, ways, and indicators, however, schools might not be able to apply them all at once and thus would have to pick and give up. To help teachers pick and give up, knowing and confirming directions and key concepts would be helpful in deciding what is important and what is not and then become teachers’ aim to proceed to growth and strength.

Finally based on the result of the research, a proposal on the use of Teachers’ Evaluation Indicators by Special Classroom Teachers in elementary schools in Taipei County was made in order to provide future researchers and teachers for further research.

並列關鍵字

Balanced Scorecard ； Teacher Evaluation ； Evaluation Indicators ； Special Classroom Teachers ； Delphi Technique ； Analytic Hierarchy Process

參考文獻

蕭金土、陳瑋婷（2007）：啟智學校教師對「特殊教育教師專業標準」意見之調查研究。東臺灣特殊教育學報，9，219-236。

孫志麟（2008）：學校本位教師評鑑的實踐與反思。教育實踐與研究，21(2)，63-94。

方又圓、唐福瑩（2006）：臨床護理師專業態度。志為護理，5(4)，73-79。

陳麗如、陳清溪、鐘梅菁、江麗莉（2006）：高中職教育階段特殊教育教師專業評鑑意見之研究。國立台南大學特殊教育學系特殊教育與復建學報，16，25-44。

張德銳（2003）：我國中小學教師評鑑的規劃與推動策略。教育資料與研究，53，1-12。