大學教師教學專業發展策略之研究

A Study on the Teaching Professional Development Strategies for the University Faculty

陳琦媛;蘇錦麗
Chi-Yuan Chen;Jin-Li Su

Doi:10.3966/181665042013120904006


所屬期刊: 第9卷第4期 「測驗與評量」
主編:國立臺灣師範大學教育學系名譽教授
簡茂發
系統編號: vol035_06
主題: 測驗與評量
出版年份: 2013
作者: 陳琦媛;蘇錦麗
作者(英文): Chi-Yuan Chen;Jin-Li Su
論文名稱: 大學教師教學專業發展策略之研究
論文名稱(英文): A Study on the Teaching Professional Development Strategies for the University Faculty
共同作者:
最高學歷:
校院名稱:
系所名稱:
語文別:
論文頁數: 28
中文關鍵字: 大學教師專業發展;教學專業發展策略;高等教育
英文關鍵字: faculty professional development;teaching professional development strategies;higher education
服務單位: 中國文化大學師資培育中心助理教授;國立新竹教育大學教育與學習科技學系教授
稿件字數: 20000
作者專長: 教育評鑑、高等教育、教育行政、學校建築
投稿日期: 2013/6/21
論文下載: pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文): 本研究旨在探討國內外主要大學教師教學專業發展策略之內涵與實務,並分析國內外實務做法之異同。本研究採用文件分析法,以世界大學排名系統為基礎,選取北美洲、歐洲及亞太地區前百大的大學,以及我國受頂尖大學計畫及教學卓越計畫補助的大學各15所,共60所國內外大學為樣本。研究發現工作坊與研討會的辦理、教學專業資訊的提供為各大學最普遍採用的教學專業發展策略。北美洲的大學較重視個別教師諮詢服務與教學研究經費;歐洲的大學首重教學專業課程;亞太地區較重視教學優良教師的獎勵與教學專業課程;國內大學最常採用教學優良教師的獎勵,以及人力、技術及經費支援兩類策略,較偏重於單次、短期的團體共同參與方式,且設置教學成長團體的比率高於其他國家,但在教學專業課程與教學研究經費兩類策略的採用比率低於其他國家。最後提出若干建議供我國大學未來發展教學專業發展策略方向之參考。
摘要(英文): The purpose of this study was to explore the theory and practice of teaching professional development strategies of universities around the world. To achieve this purpose, this study adopted the document analysis method and sampled universities based on the Times Higher Education world university rankings. Each of the top fifteen universities of North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific were selected as the international sample universities; a total of sixty subject universities. Fifteen universities in Taiwan were also selected as the national sample universities. The main findings of the study include: (1) The most prevalent strategies that the universities used were “teaching and learning information”and “workshop and seminar”; (2) The universities in North America placed an emphasis on “teaching consultation”and”grant and founding”; (3) The universities in Europe preferred the teaching development certification programs; (4) The universities in Asia-Pacific put more effort on “teaching excellence award” and “teaching development programs”; and (5) The most prevalent strategies that the universities in Taiwan used were “teaching excellence award” and “manpower, technology, and finance”. When comparing with other universities around the world, the teaching research grant and teaching development certification programs were not sufficient for Taiwanese universities, but more Taiwanese universities adopted teaching development group as the teaching development strategies than the ones in other countries.
參考文獻: 王令宜(2004)。大學教師教學專業發展理論與實務。教育研究月刊,126,61-72。
史美瑤(譯)(2012)。開創教師發展新紀元:學習過去,了解當下(原作者:. M. D. Sorcinelli, A. E. Austin, P. L. Eddy & A. L. Beach)。臺北市:高等教育。(原著出版年:2006)
吳清山(2011)。我國高等教育革新的重要課題與未來發展之分析。長庚人文社會學報,4(2),241-280。
吳筱莉(2010)。教師學習社群與教師專業發展關係之研究-以國立臺灣海洋大學為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣海洋大學,基隆市。
張媛甯、郭重明(2009)。教與學的學術研究-教師專業發展的新取徑。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊,2(2),21-38。
張媛甯、郭重明(2011)。大學教師專業發展之初探。學校行政雙月刊,71, 194-213。
陳琦媛(2012)。澳洲與紐西蘭高等教育教學認證課程之研究。教育研究與發展期刊,8(1),31-62。
陳碧祥(2001)。我國大學教師升等制度與教師專業成長及學校發展定位關係之探究。國立臺北師範學院學報,14,163-208。
葉蕙蘭(1999)。淡江大學教師教學專業成長之需求評估研究(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學,臺北縣。
蔡雅文(2009)。私立大學院校實施教師專業發展機制之個案研究(未出版之碩士論文)。輔仁大學,臺北市。
鄭博真(2012)。我國大學教師專業發展之現況、困境與展望。教育研究與發展期刊,8(1),61-92。
蘇錦麗(2010,6 月)。高等教育學生學習成果評估面面觀:重要利害關係人的作為。論文發表於財團法人高等教育評鑑中心基金會主辦之「評鑑與教育品質保證:利害關係人,您關心什麼?」研討會,臺北市。
蘇錦麗、浮絲曼(2010)。學習成效評估的另類方法:教師合作分析學生作業。評鑑雙月刊,27,55-58。
Crow, M. K. , Milton, O., Moomaw, W. E. , & O’Connell, W. R. (1976). Faculty development centers in southern universities. Altanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED129132).
Ferman, T. (2002). Academic professional development practice: What lecturers find valuable. International Journal for Academic Development, 7(2), 146-158.
Gillespie, K. J., Robertson, D. L., Bergquist, W. H., & Gillespie, K. H. (2010). A guide to faculty development. San Francison, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Ho, A., Watkins, D., & Kelly, M. (2001). The conceptual change approach to improving teaching and learning: An evaluation of a Hong Kong staff development programme. Higher Education, 42, 143-169.
Light, G., Calkins, S., Luna, M., & Drane, D. (2009). Assessing the impact of a year-long faculty development program on faculty approaches to teaching. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 168-181.
McGriff, S. J. (2001). Leadership in higher education: Instructional designers in faculty development programs. Retrieved from ERIC database (ED470160).
Prebble, T., Hargraves, H., Leach, L., Naidoo, K., Suddaby, G., & Zepke, N. (2005). Impact of student support services and academic development programmes on student outcomes in undergraduate tertiary study: A synthesis of the research. Report to the Ministry of Education, New Zealand.
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). London, England: Routledge Falmer.
Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. San Francison, CA: Jossey-Bass.
The Times Higher Education world university rankings (2011). The Times Higher Education world university rankings 2010-2011. Retrieved from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-11/world-ranking.
Wolff, R. A. (2010). Key trends for quality assurance in the US today. Evaluation in Higher Education, 4(2), 55-87.