第一期卓越師資培育獎學金學生教學準備度之研究

A Study on the Teaching Preparedness of Students Funded by Project for Excellent Teacher Education Scholarship (the First Phase)

黃嘉莉
Jia-Li Huang

Doi：10.3966/181665042016031201001


所屬期刊： 第12卷第1期 「教師培育與專業發展」
主編：國立臺灣師範大學講座教授
楊深坑
系統編號： vol044_01
主題： 師資培育
出版年份： 2016
作者： 黃嘉莉
作者(英文)： Jia-Li Huang
論文名稱： 第一期卓越師資培育獎學金學生教學準備度之研究
論文名稱(英文)： A Study on the Teaching Preparedness of Students Funded by Project for Excellent Teacher Education Scholarship (the First Phase)
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別： 中文
論文頁數： 38
中文關鍵字： 教學準備度、卓越師資培育獎學金計畫、效能期待、卓獎教師
英文關鍵字： teaching preparedness, Project for Excellent Teacher Education Scholarship (PETES), effi cacy expectation, Excellent Project teachers (EPTs)
服務單位： 國立臺灣師範大學師資培育與就業輔導處
稿件字數： 22931
作者專長： 師資培育、課程與教學、教育社會學、西洋教育史
投稿日期： 2016/1/11
論文下載： pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文)： 為了解卓越師資培育獎學金計畫受領學生教學準備度及其任教表現，進而分
析制度成效，本研究以源自Bandura 效能期望概念的教學準備度，即教師評量自
己教學能力的心理預期程度，調查2006-2009 學年度（即第一期）畢業受領學生且
擔任教師者（即卓獎教師）之教學準備度，並檢視制度成效。本研究共發出「卓
獎教師教學準備度調查問卷」263 份問卷，有效問卷141 份，回收率為53.61%；
「卓獎教師工作之雇主滿意度調查問卷」共發出153 份，回收有效問卷為144 份，
回收率為94.11%。本研究運用描述統計、差異分析、Pearson 積差相關與迴歸分析
後，獲致結論如下：
一、卓獎教師在自我工作表現上，工作責任、團隊合作、人際關係能力獲得
高度肯定。惟行政執行、處事應變、溝通協調能力有待強化。
二、卓獎教師在教學準備度上持高度自信，且學校雇主也持相同知覺。惟跨
其他領域教學、自覺影響力、差異教學與班級經營都是可以強化的項目。
三、卓獎教師工作表現能有效預測教學準備度，使得培養卓獎生的實務經驗，
增進教學自信顯得重要。
四、卓獎制度中義務課業輔導與教學實務研習是可繼續規範的條件。惟服務
學習與史懷哲計畫對卓獎教師教學準備度之影響不明確。
五、從卓獎教師教學準備度的調查結果可知，越關注社會認知歷程的設計，
越有助於提高教學準備度。
摘要(英文)： This study aimed to explore the teaching preparedness of students receiving funding
from the Project for Excellent Teacher Education Scholarship (PETES) and to analyze
the effects of the PETES. The subject of the questionnaire was teaching preparedness
as defined by Bandura’s efficacy expectation where it is an assessment of teacher’s
ability to accomplish a certain level of teaching performance. The subjects of this survey
were teachers (specifically Excellent Project teachers, EPTs) graduated between the
2006 and 2009 and the opinions to EPTs from schools. A total of 141 samples of EPTs
were obtained in this study, and the effective response rate was 53.61%. Moreover, 144
samples from school staff were collected, with an effective response rate of 94.11%.
Descriptive statistics, t test, Pearson correlation coeffi cient, and regression analysis were
applied to obtain the following fi ndings:
1. In the dimension of self-working performance, EPTs have high confidence in
their work responsibility, teamwork, and personal relationships but low confidence in
their administrative ability, skill adaptability, and communicative and coordinative skills.
2. In the teaching preparedness dimension, EPTs and school staff have high
confidence in their professional teaching competence but low confidence in their
trans-subject teaching ability, self-influence, distinctive teaching style, and classroom
management.
3. The self-working performance of EPTs can effectively predict their teaching
preparedness.
4. The conditions for requesting free course counseling and a teaching practice
seminar can be maintained continuously. However, the effects of service learning and the
Schweitzer Educational Service Program on EPT teaching preparedness are unclear.
5. Greater emphasis on social cognition processes indicates that more assistance is
needed in promoting EPT teaching preparedness.
參考文獻： 吳璧如（2002）。教師效能感之理論分析。教育研究資訊，10（2），45-64。
孫志麟（2001）。教師自我效能與教學行為的關係：實徵取向的分析。國立臺北
師範學院學報，14，109-140。
孫志麟（2003）。教師自我效能的概念與測量。教育心理學報，34（2），139-
156。
孫志麟（2009）。建立信心：教師自我效能七部曲。臺北市：學富。
教育部（2007）。教育部核發卓越儲備教師證書作業規範。取自http://r7.ntue.edu.
tw/r7/pages/9_scholarship/document/%E8%AA%B2%E5%8B%99%E7%B5%84/
%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E9%83%A8%E6%A0%B8%E7%99%BC%E5%8D
%93%E8%B6%8A%E5%84%B2%E5%82%99%E6%95%99%E5%B8%AB%E8
%AD%89%E6%98%8E%E6%9B%B8%E4%BD%9C%E6%A5%AD%E8%A6%8
F%E7%AF%84.pdf.
許育齡（2006）。教師效能感研究的取向及限制：邁向變動教師效能感的探究。
慈濟大學教育研究學刊，2，109-137。
陳木金（1997）。國民小學教師教學效能評鑑量表編製之研究。藝術學報，61，
221-251。
黃嘉莉、武佳瀅（2015）。我國教育實習學生知覺教師專業知能習得、運用與重
要之研究。教育科學研究期刊，60（2），1-32。
謝寶梅（1995）。國小教師自我效能感之調查研究。教育理論與實踐學刊，3，79-
96。
Albion, P. R. (1999, Feb). Self-effi cacy belief as an indicator of teachers’ preparedness
for teaching with technology. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference
of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education (SITE 1999). San
Antonio, TX. Retrieved from https://eprints.usq.edu.au/6973/.
Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference. New York, NY: Longman.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-effi cacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T.
Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307-337). Scottsdalem AZ:
Information Age.
Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S., & Ball, D. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 1-24.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matter. Journal of Teacher
Education, 51(3), 166-173.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st century teacher education. Journal of
Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314.
Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R., & Frelow, F. (2002). Variation in teacher preparation:
How well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach? Journal of Teacher
Education, 53, 286-302.
Friedman, I. A., & Kass, E. (2002). Teacher self-efficacy: A classroom-organization
conceptualization. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 675-686.
Ghaith, G., & Yaghi, H. (1997). Relationship among experience, teacher efficacy, and
attitudes towards the implementation of instructional innovateon. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 13, 451-458.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher effi cacy: A construct validation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569-582.
Guskey, T. R., & Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher effi cacy: A study of construct dimensions.
American Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 627-643.
Hollins, E. R. (2011). Teacher preparation for quality teaching. Journal of Teacher
Education, 62(4), 395-407.
Housego, B. (1990). Student teachers’ feelings of preparedness to teach. Canadian
Journal of Education, 15(1), 37-56.
Housego, B. (2006). Monitoring student teachers’ feelings of preparedness to teach
and teacher efficacy in a new elementary teacher education program. Journal of
Education for Teaching: International research and pedagogy, 18(3), 259-272.
Hoy, A. W. (2000). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of
teaching. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anita_Hoy/
publication/237218148_Changes_in_Teacher_Efficacy_During_the_Early_Years_
of_Teaching/links/00463528a2036cfb4a000000.pdf
Labone, E. (2004). Teacher efficacy: Maturing the construct through research in
alternative paradigms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(4), 341-359.
Lewis, L., Parsad, B., Carey, N., Bartfai, N., & Farris, E. (1999). Teacher quality: A
report on the preparation and qualifi cations of public school teachers. Washington,
DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Malinen, O., Sacolainen, H., Engelbrecht, P., Xu, J., Nel, M., Nel, M., & Tlale, D. (2013).
Exploring teacher self-efficacy for inclusive practices in three diverse countries.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 33, 34-44.
Martins, M., Costa, J., & Onofre, M. (2015). Practicum experiences as sources of preservice
teachers’ self-effi cacy. European Journal of Teacher Education, 38(2), 263-
279.
Nie, Y., Tan, G. H., Liau, A. K., Lau, S., & Chua, B. L. (2012). The role of teacher
efficacy in instructional innovation: Its predictive relations to constructivist and
didactic instruction. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 21(1), 67-77.
Siwatu, K. O. & Chesnut, S. R. (2014). The career development of preservice an
inservice teachers: Why teachers’ self-effi cacy beliefs matter. In H. Fives, & M. G.
Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 212-229).
New York, NY: Routledge.
Siwatu, K. O. (2011). Preservice teachers’ sense of preparedness and self-efficacy to
teach in America’s urban and suburban schools: Does context matter? Teaching and
Teacher Education, 27, 357-365.
Soodak, L. C., & Podell, D. M. (1996). Teacher effi cacy: Toward the understanding of a
multi-faceted construct. Teaching & Teacher Education, 12(4), 401-411.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive
construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 783-805.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher effi cacy: Its meaning
and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(1), 202-248.
Webster, N. L., & Valeo, A. (2011). Teacher preparedness for a changing demographic of
language learners. TESL Canada Journal, 28(23), 105-128.
Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J. , & Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on
learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review
of Educational Research, 68(2), 130-178.
Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of effi cacy and beliefs
about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 81-91. New York, NY:
Guilford.
Zientek, L. R. (2006). Do teachers differ by certifi cation route? Novice teachers’ sense
of self-effi cacy, commitment to teaching, and preparedness to teach. (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). Texas A & M University, Texas.