Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
A Comparative Study of Primary and Junior High School Principal Preparation Systems in Taiwan, the UK, and Australia
primary and junior high school
principal preparation system
五、權責單位：英國依地區分布，由 NCTL 授權給 28 個公私機構負責培訓；澳大 利亞由各州遴選優質公私立機構負責培訓；台灣校長培育的權責單位為縣市政府，亦可委託國家教育研究院或大學院校辦理。
This research aims to probe into the primary and junior high school principal preparation systems in Taiwan, the UK, and Australia. Dimensions such as principal professional standard, principal certification, applicant qualification, principal preparation authority, principal preparation model, curriculum design, length of principal preparation, and principal internship, and mentor principal system are generalized in order to further compare and analyze the characteristics and differences of the primary and junior high school principal preparation systems. Finally, suggestions are proposed for improvement and further research of principal preparation. The conclusions are as follows: I. Principal professional standard: The principal professional standards in the UK and Australia are founded on a principal’s roles and missions, which has definite functions of guidance. As for Taiwan, there is a shortage of principal preparation standards for us to follow. II. Principal certification: The UK implements the principal licensure and license renewal system, while Australia is still developing the principal licensure system and programs. As far as Taiwan is concerned, there is no practice here so far. III. Principal preparation model: The UK adopts "training before selection" model; Australia prefers "professional learning" model; in Taiwan, principle preparation belongs to local matters, so each county/city takes charge of it on its own or entrusts it to the National Academy for Educational Research, mostly applying "selection before training" model. IV. Applicant qualification: It is mainly based on document review in UK with open qualification, which offers non-educational personnel to apply for. In each state of Australia, there are different selection standards regulated by the state itself. In Taiwan, we have clear and detailed principal qualification regulation. V. Principal preparation authority: In the UK, a total of 28 public and private sectors are authorized by NCTL to take charge of principal preparation. In Australia, the education administration department in each state takes responsibility for establishing the content and method of principal professional training. The authorities concerned in Taiwan come to the county/city governments. VI. Curriculum design: The principal preparation programs in the UK are developed on the base of unified fundamental abilities, which are flexible and focuse on individual differences. Each state in Australia designs the programs that meet the needs of specific regions and individual principals. In Taiwan, the principal preparation programs vary according to different local governments, and they tended to be trifle and lack of depth. VII. Length of principal preparation: The UK applies a long-term, flexible, and distributed time frame, while the public and private preparation sectors have divergent preparation periods in Australia. As for Taiwan, it is put into practice by short-term and compact mode that basically last 8 to 10 weeks. VII. Principal internship: UK emphasizes the practical learning in a trainee’s working school and intern school; Australia has shadowing programs for the trainees to experience the expert principals' ethos of a school; the internship programs in Taiwan are limited to school visiting. VIII. Mentor principal system: The UK sets up mentor-principal system and promotes leadership programs in local schools. Australia values the mentoring pairing in different territories to enhance the efficacy of mentoring that makes the best use of one's abilities and is the most suitable for one's nature. Currently, there is a shortage of complete mentoring programs in Taiwan. Based on the above conclusions, for the authorities concerned, the researcher suggests that: 1. The principal preparation systems in the UK and Australia are worthy of learning in planning our own principal preparation system. 2. The Ministry of Education should make laws and regulations to serve as the legal basis of the principal preparation system. 3. The government should establish a national institute to take responsibility for coordinating and tackling with principal preparation and evaluation mechanism. 4. The government should set up our own principal professional standards to serve as the cornerstone of principals’ professional development. 5. The principal certificate system should be built up in order to raise principals’ professional image. 6. It is better for the principal preparation system to combine the three-dimensional model and therefore make the system sound and complete. 7. The content of principal preparation programs should focus on leadership that can improve students' learning outcomes. 8. Principals’ professional growth network system should be set up to bring the energy of learning communities to a full play
|Appears in Collections:||學位論文|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.