美國加州檢核職前教師表現制度之研究

A Study on the System for Examining Pre-service Teachers’Performance in California

黃嘉莉
Jia-Li Huang


所屬期刊： 第8卷第1期 「教師培育與專業發展」
主編：輔仁大學師資培育中心教授
張德銳
系統編號： vol028_04
主題： 師資培育
出版年份： 2012
作者： 黃嘉莉
作者(英文)： Jia-Li Huang
論文名稱： 美國加州檢核職前教師表現制度之研究
論文名稱(英文)： A Study on the System for Examining Pre-service Teachers’Performance in California
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別：
論文頁數： 32
中文關鍵字： 檢核職前教師表現制度;表現本位;教學表現期待;加州教學專業標準
英文關鍵字： examining pre-service teachers’ performance;performance-based assessment;Teaching Performance Expectancies;California Standards for the Teaching Profession
服務單位： 國立臺灣師範大學師資培育與就業輔導處副教授
稿件字數： 19910
作者專長： 教師專業社會學、師資培育、師資培育認證制度、教師素質、教師證照制度
投稿日期： 2011/11/23
論文下載： pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文)： 本文蒐集美國加州官方文件和相關研究文獻，並以King主張比較之研究架構，先描述後詮釋的階段分析，用以了解美國加州檢核職前教師表現制度之情形，以及可為臺灣師資培育啟發之處。首先，本文分析美國強調教師素質與標準本位師資培育政策的脈絡下，加州檢核制度係以《教學專業標準》為核心文件，據以發展職前階段《教學表現期待》表現指標，以引導檢核職前教師表現活動之進行。其次，本文分析現行檢核加州表現評量三種模
式，加州教學表現評量、加州教師表現評量、Fresno實習學生表現評量之內涵。復次，本文評析加州檢核職前教師表現制度七項議題，包括凝聚標準的共識以達目的、傳統評估教師候選人方式之困境、具效度且反映出教師在教學脈絡的複雜能力、展現多元證據的思維、以學習者為中心的評量方式、統整師資培育課程與學習經驗、實施問題等等。最後本文提供九點加州檢核職前教師表現制度之經驗，提供臺灣現行師資培育制度之參考。
摘要(英文)： The trend of innovation of teacher quality since 1980s in the United States has been to assess teacher education accountability by performance-based evidence. This article aims to understand the system of examining pre-service teachers’ performance in California,
as well as the three models of examining pre-service teachers’ performance and relative issues for performance assessment. King’s comparative method is used to describe and interpret by documents review and relative studies analysis to achieve the above mentioned
aims. Secondly, due to three models of examining pre-service teachers’ performance, seven issues including reaching consensus to standards, dilemma of traditional test, presentation of the complex competence in teaching context, showing evidences from multiple ways,
assessment of the teacher candidate in center, integration of teacher education curriculum teaching and learning, and the problem of practice are analyzed to better understand the performance assessment. Finally, this paper provides 9 results and discussions of
performance assessment for reference in teacher education policy in Taiwan.
參考文獻： 岳修平（2000）。學習歷程檔案評量法於教師專業發展之應用研究（一）：職前教師養成教育。行政院國科會專題研究成果報告（編號：NSC89-2511-S-002-009），取自http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/17079/1/892511S002009.pdf。
岳修平（2003）。學習歷程檔案評量法：評量策略與合適性研究（1/3）。行政院國科會期中進度報告（編號：NSC91-2511-S-002-003），取自http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/19534/1/912511S002003.pdf
洪志成（2005）。教師檢定測驗不是教師專業最後防線。現代教育論壇，12，462-477。
張美玉、羅美惠（2000）。國小實習教師歷程檔案評量工具發展之研究。科學教育學刊，8（3），225-249。
張德銳（2000）。教學檔案在國小師資培育教育實習課程應用之初探。初等教育學刊，8，219-240。
黃嘉莉（2009）。加州初任教師支持與評量系統之研究。教育研究與發展，5（1），130-163。
葉連祺（2004）。中小學教師檢定方法相關課題之分析。載於國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所（主編），教師檢定之理論與實務會議論文集（頁29-43）。臺北：國立教育資料館。
葉興華（2002）。談教學檔案的製作與應用。課程與教學通訊，9，14-19。
鄭宇樑（2000）。國小教師建立教學檔案經驗之個案研究。國民教育研究集刊，6，185-225。
Apple, M. W. (2001). Markets, standards, teaching and teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(3), 182-196.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing & California Department of Education (1997). California standards for the teaching profession. Retrieved from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/reports/cstpreport.pdf.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2001). Standards of quality and effective for teacher preparation programs. Retrieved from http,://www.csupomona.edu/~ls/Adopted%20Preparation%20Standards.pdf
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2006a). Summary of commission responsibilities for major provisions of SB 1209. Retrieved from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/SB1209/PDF/update-2006-11-26.pdf.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2006b). Assessment design standards. Retrieved from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/TPA-files/TPA-Assessment-Design-Standards.doc.
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2008). California’s teaching performance expectation. Retrieved http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/TPA-files/TPEs-Full-Version.pdf
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (2009). California teaching performance assessment (CalTPA) candidate handbook. Retrieved from ://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/TPA-files/CandidateHandbook.pdf.
Chung R. R. (2008). Beyond assessment: Performance assessments in teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(1), 7-28.
Clark, C. M. & Rust, R. O’C (2006). Learning-centered assessment in teacher education. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32, 73-82.
Cochram-Smith, M. (2008). The new teacher education in the United States,: Directions forward. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(4), 271-282.
Cochran-Smith, M. (2005). The new teacher education: For better or for worse? Educational Researcher, 34(7), 3-17.
College of Education & Teacher Education Program (2008/2009). Candidate handbook for the performance assessment for California teachers (PACT). College of Education. Retrieved from http://edweb.csus.edu/pact/assets/pact_handbook.pdf.
Darling-Hammond, L. & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1986). A proposal for evaluation in the teaching profession. Elementary School Journal, 86(4), 531-551.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Performance-based assessment and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 64(1), 5-30.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Changing conceptions of teaching and teacher development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 22(4), 9-26.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Reshaping teaching policy, preparation, and practice,: Influences of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. In NBPTS(Ed.), Assessing teachers for professional certification,: The first decade of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, Advanced in Program Evaluation, 11, 25-53.
Darling-Hammond, L., Hammerness, K., Grossman, P., Rust, F., & Shulman, L.(2005). The design of teacher education program. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world (pp.390-441). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Delandshere, G. & Arens, S. A. (2001). Representations of teaching and standards-based reform,: Are we closing the debate about teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 547-566.
Denner, P. R., Norman,A. D., Salzman, S. A., Pankratz, R. S.,& Evans, C. S. (2004). The Renaissance Partnership teacher work sample,: Evidence supporting score generalizability, validity, and quality of student learning assessment. In E. M. Guyton & J. R. Dangel (Eds.), Research linking teacher preparation and student performance,: Teacher education Yearbook XII (pp. 23-56). Lanham, MD,: R & L Education.
Fresno Assessment of Student Teachers (FAST)（2009）.Overview. Retrieved from http://www.ctc.ca.gov/educator-prep/TPA-files/FAST-flyer.pdf.
Guaglianone, C. L., Payne, M., Kinsey, G. W., & Chiero, R. (2009). Teaching performance assessment: A comparative study of implementation and impact amongst California State University Campuses. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(1), 129-148.
Haertel, E. H. (1991). New forms of teacher assessment. Review of Research in Education, 17, 3-29.
Hafner, A. L. & Maxie, A. (2006). Looking at answers about reform,: Findings from the SB2042 implementation study. Issues in Teacher Education, 15(1), 85-102.
Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). How teacher learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world,: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358-389). New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.
Ingvarson, L. & Rowe, K. (2008). Conceptualising and evaluating teacher quality,: Substantive and methodological issues. Australian Journal of Education, 52(1), 5-35.
Iverson, H. L., Lewis, M. A., & Talbot, R. M. III (2008). Building a framework for determining the authenticity of instructional tasks within teacher education programs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 290-302.
Jonson, K. F. & Jones, E. M. (1998). Promoting teaching excellence: A comparison of two performance-base teacher assessment frameworks. Education, 118(4), 499-514.
Kendyll, S., & Claudia, L. (1992). Assessment component of California new teacher project: Framework of knowledge, skills and abilities for beginning teachers in California. San Francisco, CA: Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
King, E. (1975). Analytical frameworks in comparative studies of education. Comparative Education, 11(1), 85-103.
Kohler, F., Henning, J. E., & Usma-Wilches, J. (2008). Preparing preservice teachers to make instructional decisions: An examination of data from the teacher work sample. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 2108-2117.
Larsen, L. R., & Calfee, R. C. (2005). Assessing teacher candidate growth over time,: Embedded signature assessment. The Clearing House, 78(4), 151-157.
Linn, R. L., Baker, E. L., & Dunbar, S. B. (1991). Complex, performance-based assessment: Expectations and validation criteria. Educational Researcher, 20(8), 15-21.
Maxie, A. (2001). Developing early field experiences in a blended teacher education program: From policy to practice. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(1), 115-131.
Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational Researcher, 23(2), 13-23.
Miller, M. (2009). Teaching for a new world: Preparing high school educators to deliver college-and career-ready instruction. Alliance for Excellent Education Policy Brief. Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/files/TeachingForANewWorld.pdf
National Commission on Teaching & America’s Future (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. New York, NY: Author.
Okhremtchouk, I., Seiki, S., Gilliland, B., Ateh, C., Wallace, M., & Kato, A. (2009). Voices of pre-service teachers: Perspectives on the performance assessment for California Teachers (PACT). Issues in Teacher Education, 18(1), 39-62.
Pecheone, R. L. & Chung R. R. (2006). Evidence in teacher education: The performance assessment for California teacher (PACT). Journal of Teacher Education, 57(1), 22-36.
Pecheone. R. L., Pigg, M. J., Chung, R. R., & Souviney, R. J. (2005). Performance assessment and electronic portfolios,: Their effect on teacher learning and education. The Clearing House, 78(4), 164-176.
Russell, S. E. (2006). Reforming urban teacher education: SB 2042 implementation five years later. Issues in Teacher Education, 15(1), 37-51.
Selvester, P. M., Summers, D. & Williams, E. F. (2006). Costs and benefits of accountability: A case study of credential candidate’s performance assessment. Issues in Teacher Education, 15(1), 21-36.
Shields, P. M., Humphrey, D. C., Wechsler, M. E., Riehl, L. M., Tiffany-Morales, J., Woodworth, K., Young, V. M., & Price, T. (2001). The status of the teaching profession 2001. Santa Cruz, CA: The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.
SRI International (2002). California’s teaching force: Key issues and trends 2002. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 477174.
Swanson, D. B., Norman, G. R., & Linn, R. L. (1995). Performance-based assessment,: Lessons from the health professions. Educational Researcher, 24(5), 5-11,35.
Sykes, G., & Plastrik, P. (1993). Standard setting as educational reform: trends and issues paper No. 8. Washington, D. C. : ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education and American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
Tellez, K. (1996). Authentic assessment. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp.704-721) (2nd ed). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Torgerson, C. W., Macy, S. R., Beare, P., & Tanner, D. E. (2009). Fresno assessment of student teachers: A teacher performance assessment that informs practice. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(1), 63-82.
U.S. Department of Education (2001). No child left behind Act. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf.
Valli, L., & Rennert-Ariev, P. (2002). New standards and assessments? Curriculum transformation in teacher education. Curriculum Studies, 34(2), 201-225.
Walsh, K. (2004). A candidate-centered model for teacher preparation and licensure. In F. M. Hess, Rotherham, A. J., & Walsh, K. (Eds.), A qualified teacher in every classroom? Appraising old answers and new ideas (pp. 223-253). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Wechsler, M. E. & Shields, P. M. (2008). Teaching quality in California: A new perspective to guide policy. Santa Cruz, CA: the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.
Wexler, E., Izu, J., Carlos, L., Fuller, B., Hayward, G., & Kirst, M. (1998). Class size reduction: Implications for equity practice & implementation. Retrieved from http://gse.berkeley.edu/research/pace/reports/Ca_Class_Size_Reduction.pdf.
Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2002). Teacher preparation research: An insider’s view from the outside. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 190-204.
Wittaker, A., Snyder, J., & Freeman, S. (2001). Restoring balance: A chronology of the development and uses of the California Standards for the Teaching Profession. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(1), 85-107.
Yinger, R. J. & Hendricks-Lee, M. S. (2000). The language of standards and teacher education reform. Educational Policy, 14(1), 94-106.
Yinger, R. J. (1987). Learning the language of practice. Curriculum Inquiry, 17, 293-318.
Young, M. (1998). Rethinking teacher education for a global future: Lessons from the English. Journal of Education for Teaching, 24(1), 51-62.

本研究係為國立臺灣師範大學補助新進教師進行專題研究「教育實習表現本位評量標準與工具之建構」（99031002）及國科會補助「檢核實習學生教師專業知能與態度系統之建構與試驗」（NSC100-2410-H-003-062-MY2）之部分研究成果，特此申表謝忱。