中等學校教師專業標準形成之研究： 新制度論觀點
Abstract
本研究以公共政策理論（新制度論）作為分析基礎，期望透過新制度論對於制度變遷的觀點探究教師專業標準形成之背景與歷程，嘗試勾勒整個專業標準形成之路徑，及其過程中影響教師專業標準形成之關鍵因素、不同利害關係人之立場與權力互動，最後針對歷程中所遭遇的挑戰或困境，提出可行的推行策略，作為未來教育政策正式推動時的重要參考之一。
透過不同利害關係人（包含政府機關、學者專家、校長團體、家長團體、教師會、一般教師）的訪談分析與會議紀錄整理，研究結果發現，教師專業標準制定之時空背景主要係源自於學生受教權之保障與社會公平性之考量，此兩項時空條件點燃了教師專業標準制定之引信；過程中影響教師專業標準制定之因素有三，分別為「制度效益」（教師專業標準是否帶給利害關係人更大的效益）、「社會認同」（教師專業標準是否獲得社會大眾的認可）、「文化脈絡」（考量教師傳統社會地位的因素）；不同利害關係人之立場，由於具備不同的政治圖像與目標界定（教師會與家長團體將教師專業標準定位為教師評鑑之工具，其餘團體皆定位為教育專業最高精神參照），以及不對等的權力關係（政府、校長、教師三者因為制度關係屬於上下級的關係），導致彼此的立場有同有異（圖4-9），家長團體因為要求實施教師評鑑，所以非常支持教師專業標準；政府與校長為了回應家長團體的訴求，也是偏向支持教師專業標準；一般教師則是擔心教師評鑑的副作用，因此偏向反對教師專業標準；教師會則是站在維護教師權益的立場，非常反對教師評鑑制度，因此對於教師專業標準自然極力反對；學者專家則為提供專業意見與協調衝突的中立者；面對教師專業標準推行之挑戰，首先需理解國內過去教師評鑑制度的發展脈絡，並取得教師團體與基層教師的信任、考量國內教育現場的工作實況、賦予地方學校適當的專業自主空間。
最後，透過新制度論對於制度變革的觀點，從制度的起源背景、沿革因素、協商過程，以及對未來造成的影響與可行策略加以探討，完整的囊括一套制度的過去、當下與未來，即添加了制度發展時間軸的概念，此觀點是傳統制度論（階段論與反階段論）較為缺乏的面向。且基於本研究之發現，研究者針對政府機關、學者專家、校長團體、家長團體、一般教師、教師會及未來研究方向提出建議。
In this study, the researcher used the public policy theory (New Institutionalism) as an analytical basis for that through the perspective of systems’ transforming on New Institutionalism to explore the formation of teachers' professional standards, including the background and process of formation. And try to depict the path of formation of teachers' professional standards, including the key factors which influenced the formation of teachers' professional standards and the positions and powers’ interactions of various stakeholders. At last, in accordance with the challenges or difficulties of formation to bring up the feasible strategies as an important reference for promotions of educational policy in the future. Through analysis of interviews and the records of conference from the various stakeholders (including the government agencies, academic experts, principal groups, parent groups, teachers groups, general teachers), this study found that the background of teachers’ professional standards is mainly triggered from the protection of the studnets’ educational rights and considerations of social fairness. There were three effective factors in the formation of the teachers' professional standards, namely “institutional benefit” (Did the teacher professional standards bring to stakeholders more efficiency?), “social identity” (Did the teacher professional standards get the public recognition?), “cultural context” (Did it think over the social status of teachers?). Because different stakeholders had different political images and goals (teachers’ groups and parents’ groups looked the teachers’ professional standards as the tool of teacher evaluation, but the remainder looked it as the highest professional spirit reference of education), and unequal power relations (government, principals, and teachers belonged to bureaucracy), this circumstance led to that the different stakeholders not only had the same standpoints but also the different standpoint. Because parents’ groups require the implementation of teacher evaluation, they supported teachers' professional standards very much. As a matter of course, the government and the principals’ groups in order to respond to the demands of parents, they also supported teachers' professional standards. General teachers were worried about the side effect, so they trended to oppose the teachers' professional standards. The teachers’ groups stood on the standpoint which keeping the teachers’ rights and interests, so they opposed teachers' professional standards very strongly. Scholars and experts in order to provide the professional advice and coordinated the conflicts, they were neutral. Facing the challenges of implementation of teachers’ professional standards, the first step was that understanding the context of the development of teacher evaluation system in the past, getting the trusts from the teachers’ groups and basic level teachers, considering domestic work’s field of education, and giving local school appropriate professional autonomy. Finally, through the perspective of New Institutionalism, from the origin of the system, historical factors, and process of negotiation, to the system’s impact and feasible strategies in the future, the New Institutionalism included the past, present and future of system, adding that the concept of timeline of institutional development. This point of view was ignored by the Traditional Institutionalism (Stage and Unstage theory). Based on the findings of this study, the researcher gave some recommendations to government agencies, academic experts, principals’ groups, parents’ groups, teachers’ groups, and general teachers. And the researcher also provided some directions for the future research.
In this study, the researcher used the public policy theory (New Institutionalism) as an analytical basis for that through the perspective of systems’ transforming on New Institutionalism to explore the formation of teachers' professional standards, including the background and process of formation. And try to depict the path of formation of teachers' professional standards, including the key factors which influenced the formation of teachers' professional standards and the positions and powers’ interactions of various stakeholders. At last, in accordance with the challenges or difficulties of formation to bring up the feasible strategies as an important reference for promotions of educational policy in the future. Through analysis of interviews and the records of conference from the various stakeholders (including the government agencies, academic experts, principal groups, parent groups, teachers groups, general teachers), this study found that the background of teachers’ professional standards is mainly triggered from the protection of the studnets’ educational rights and considerations of social fairness. There were three effective factors in the formation of the teachers' professional standards, namely “institutional benefit” (Did the teacher professional standards bring to stakeholders more efficiency?), “social identity” (Did the teacher professional standards get the public recognition?), “cultural context” (Did it think over the social status of teachers?). Because different stakeholders had different political images and goals (teachers’ groups and parents’ groups looked the teachers’ professional standards as the tool of teacher evaluation, but the remainder looked it as the highest professional spirit reference of education), and unequal power relations (government, principals, and teachers belonged to bureaucracy), this circumstance led to that the different stakeholders not only had the same standpoints but also the different standpoint. Because parents’ groups require the implementation of teacher evaluation, they supported teachers' professional standards very much. As a matter of course, the government and the principals’ groups in order to respond to the demands of parents, they also supported teachers' professional standards. General teachers were worried about the side effect, so they trended to oppose the teachers' professional standards. The teachers’ groups stood on the standpoint which keeping the teachers’ rights and interests, so they opposed teachers' professional standards very strongly. Scholars and experts in order to provide the professional advice and coordinated the conflicts, they were neutral. Facing the challenges of implementation of teachers’ professional standards, the first step was that understanding the context of the development of teacher evaluation system in the past, getting the trusts from the teachers’ groups and basic level teachers, considering domestic work’s field of education, and giving local school appropriate professional autonomy. Finally, through the perspective of New Institutionalism, from the origin of the system, historical factors, and process of negotiation, to the system’s impact and feasible strategies in the future, the New Institutionalism included the past, present and future of system, adding that the concept of timeline of institutional development. This point of view was ignored by the Traditional Institutionalism (Stage and Unstage theory). Based on the findings of this study, the researcher gave some recommendations to government agencies, academic experts, principals’ groups, parents’ groups, teachers’ groups, and general teachers. And the researcher also provided some directions for the future research.
Description
Keywords
中等學校教師專業標準, 新制度論, 政策形成, professional standards for secondary school teachers, New Institutionalism, policy formation